Works published by Center staff and affiliates:
- “The Making of the Supreme Court Rules,” 90 George Washington Law Review 866 (2022)
- “Personal Jurisdiction, Comparativism, and Ford,” 51 Stetson Law Review 187 (2022)
- “Article III and the Political-Question Doctrine,” 116 Northwestern University Law Review 681 (2021)
- “Cooperativism in the American Adversarial Tradition,” 40 Civil Justice Quarterly 283 (2021)
- “Videoconferencing and Legal Doctrine,” 51 Southwestern Law Review 9 (2021)
- “Texas v. Pennsylvania and the Political-Question Doctrine,” 2021 University of Illinois Law Review Online 141
Current works in progress include:
- An empirical study of the reasons why in-state plaintiffs invoke diversity jurisdiction in federal court. Evidence suggests that these kinds of cases are a healthy percentage–25%-50%–of the total diversity caseload in federal courts. Yet these are exactly the kinds of cases that run contrary to the out-of-state bias rationale of diversity jurisdiction. What’s going on? And might a better understanding of what’s going on help Congress consider reforms to Sec. 1332 to better align diversity jurisdiction with its rationale and with the interests of the federal courts? This survey study aims to shed light on the answers to those questions.
- Two works on comparative jurisdiction and venue around the globe. One work will detail how countries allocate cases in their constitutions, focusing on roughly a dozen illustrative nations. The other will detail how countries allocate cases in constitutions, statutes, rules, and judge-made law, with special focus on the differences between common-law and civil-law traditions.