• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship
    • Faculty Scholarship Series
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship
    • Faculty Scholarship Series
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of openYLSCommunitiesPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    Courts: In and Out of Sight, Site, and Cite

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    Courts___In_and_Out_of_Sight__ ...
    Size:
    2.697Mb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Author
    Resnik, Judith
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/5073
    Abstract
    On several occasions during the fall of 2007, groups gathered to address "'judicial transparency"—the question that animates this symposium. In addition to conferences convened by RAND's Institute for Civil Justice and UCLA Law School in Los Angeles by Villanova University outside of Philadelphia, and at Birkbeck College of the University of London, federal legislators turned their attention to what proponents called "sunshine." Two bills—one aimed at expanding judicial authority and the other at constraining it—were introduced in Congress. One proposal (the "Sunshine in the Courtroom Act of 2007") would authorize federal appellate and trial judges to permit the photographing and the televising of proceedings under certain circumstances. Another initiative (the "Sunshine in Litigation Act of 2007") would limit the power of federal judges to permit parties to seal settlements or to promise confidentiality of discovery materials in civil cases. Why has the topic of judicial transparency garnered this attention? The high visibility end of the litigation docket provides one reason. In the wake of 9/11, both civil and criminal cases have raised issues about access to information, government surveillance, and open decision-making. Citing national security, the United States government has repeatedly argued that it should not have to reveal information to federal judges charged with reviewing the lawfulness of classifications of individuals as "enemy combatants." The federal government has also sought and succeeded in obtaining dismissals—on the basis of "state's secrets"—of cases claiming that persons under its charge have been sent to countries where they have been tortured or abused.
    Collections
    Faculty Scholarship Series

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.