“全域数字法院”的构建与实现

近年来中国互联网司法发展取得了显著成效,为建设一种全新的法院样态——"全域数字法院"提供了可能。与既往的法院信息化建设不同,"全域数字法院"是一场重塑性的制度革命,它以线上线下深度融合、内网外网共享协同、有线无线互联互通为基本要求,更加注重系统集成与数字赋能,更加注重流程再造与制度重塑,更加注重全面数字化与高度智能化,运用"技术+制度"为实现更高水平的公平正义注入新效能。建设"全域数字法院",主要路径是通过"平台化建设""无纸化转型""智能化赋能"三阶段,打造全生命周期的司法平台,提供全时空在线的司法服务,构建全流域智能的司法模式,驱动司法制度的全方位变革,并最终实现司法领域从数字赋能到制度重塑的革命性变革。     

Perspectives on Therapeutic Jurisprudence in Dependency Court in Cases Involving Battered Mothers

A qualitative study was conducted involving clients, victim advocates, and judges participating in one of Miami‐Dade County's (Florida) “therapeutic” juvenile court based programs, the Dependency Court Intervention Program for Family Violence (DCIPFV). The primary objective of this study was to assess how battered mothers’ perceptions of the dependency court judges’ actions impacted the women's motivation to take appropriate actions to promote their own, and their child(ren)'s safety.     

Another permanency perspective:Family Drug Court

Because a staggering percentage of criminal court caseloads are intrinsically related to drug or alcohol abuse, general jurisdiction courts with rehabilitative “Drug Court” programs have experienced notable success. A similarly large number of juvenile and family court cases also involve substance abuse. The establishment of a “Family Drug Court” is allowing parents involved in abuse and neglect litigation to benefit from the juvenile justice system's social service mode of rehabilitation.     

Lawyers' Perceptions of the U.S. Supreme Court: Is the Court a “Political” Institution?

Do legal elites—lawyers admitted to federal appellate bars—perceive the Supreme Court as a “political” institution? Legal elites differentiate themselves from the mass public in the amount and sources of information about the Court. They also hold near‐universal perceptions of Court legitimacy, a result we use to derive competing theoretical expectations regarding the impact of ideological disagreement on various Court perceptions. Survey data show that many legal elites perceive the Court as political in its decision making, while a minority perceive the Court as activist and influenced by external political forces. Ideological disagreement with the Court's outputs significantly elevates political perceptions of decision making, while it exhibits a null and moderate impact on perceptions of activism and external political influence, respectively. To justify negative affect derived from ideological disagreement, elites highlight the political aspects of the Court's decision making rather than engage in “global delegitimization” of the institution itself.     

Appellate Court Supervision in the Federal Judiciary: A Hierarchical Perspective

In this article, we examine factors that influence appellate supervision in the lower tiers of the federal judicial hierarchy. Drawing on the insights of agency theory, we develop a framework to assess the determinants of circuit panel decisions to affirm or reverse federal district court rulings. Our analysis of U.S. Courts of Appeals' published civil rights decisions over a 29-year period (1971–1999) offers support for several hypothesized relationships. As expected, the outcome of appellate review varied with the level of agreement between the preferences of the circuit (as principal) and the policy position of the trial court (as agent). In addition, we found that circuits were more likely to affirm trial court decisions that were contrary to the preferences of the federal district court judge, suggesting that circuit judges may rely on ideological signals when evaluating appeals before them. We also hypothesized that the monitoring activities of circuits would be influenced by individual circuits' relationship with their principal, the Supreme Court. Consistent with these expectations, panels were more likely to reverse district court rulings that were incongruous with the policy predisposition of the High Court. In addition, as Supreme Court scrutiny of a circuit increased, the likelihood of a circuit panel subsequently reversing a district court also increased. Although further inquiry is necessary to clarify the interpretation of this result, the finding does suggest that district courts are more likely to engage in decision making that deviates from circuit preferences when that circuit faces more intense supervision from the Supreme Court.     

经济法规的合宪性审查标准——基于对美国联邦最高法院判例的考察

对法律文件的违宪审查是我国合宪性审查体系的重要组成部分。在美国的违宪审查实践中,针对法律所涉及的内容,分别存在着合理审查、中等审查和严格审查等不同的审查标准。对于经济领域的法律,一般采用合理审查标准,但近年来在涉及言论自由的经济领域,其审查标准往往会提高。在我国的合宪性审查制度中,如果法院在个案审判中发现法律存在违宪嫌疑时,可以建立向最高人民法院移送的机制,并通过听证程序进行充分论证以决定是否向全国人大常委会提出合宪性审查请求。在审查中,对于我国的经济法律不宜直接采用合理审查标准,而应提高审查标准。     

人格混同与法人独立地位之否认*--评最高人民法院指导案例15号

15号指导案例反映了最高人民法院"慎重适用"、"从严掌握"法人独立地位否认的立场,但存在三点不足:一是偏重"人格混同"之构成的论述,而对"人格混同"为何"严重损害"债权人缺乏说明和论证。由此可能产生鼓励法院轻易否认法人独立地位的负面效果。二是"参照"适用《公司法》第20条第3款不符合类推适用的要求。三是将"关联公司"作为认定"横向人格混同"进而否认法人独立地位的约束条件,合理性和可操作性不足。     

Affirmed: A Study of Criminal Appeals and Decision-Making Norms in a California Court of Appeal

The work of state intermediate appellate courts is often described as “correcting legal errors” and “supervising” trial courts. But what do these labels mean in practice? This article explores the intermediate appellate process through a study of criminal appeals in a California Court of Appeal. Part I describes the characteristics and dispositions of criminal appeals. Contrary to popular impression, a conviction was reversed in only about 5 percent of these appeals. To explain the low reversal rate, part II draws upon interviews with justices of the Court of Appeal to examine the institutional norms and perspectives guiding the court's decisions. The basic decision norms described by the justices are norms of affirmance: for example, the harmless error rule and the substantial evidence rule incline the court to affirm despite certain legal errors or factual questions. Moreover, the particularistic approach the court typically takes in its decision making apparently sensitizes it to the substantive characteristics prevailing in criminal appeals: the crimes are serious and there is little doubt about factual guilt. The low reversal rate and the analysis of the court's norms suggest that intermediate appellate review of criminal convictions is narrower and more constrained than the “error correction” and “supervision” labels imply. Part III explores the implications of the case study for appellate policy.     

CERCLA Arranger Liability: Town of Islip v. Datre: What Intent is Required?

In Town of Islip v. Datre, the court dismissed a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) claim based on failure to allege that the defendant knew that the waste it disposed of was hazardous. The court based its decision on language in the Supreme Court's decision in Burlington Northern that indicated that to be liable under CERCLA as one who arranged for disposal, there is a knowledge or intent element. This article questions the Datre decision and argues that the “knowledge” required by the Burlington Northern Court is knowledge that the transaction is a disposal, not knowledge that the waste disposed of is hazardous.     

REFLECTIONS ON A STUDY OF JUVENILE PERCEPTIONS

This is a report on a study of perceptions of juvenile offenders who were processed through the juvenile court. A total of 265 boys were interviewed before and after their court hearing. They were randomly chosen from the court dockets of three midwestern cities. The interview guide was composed of twelve semantic differential scales which sought to measure perceptions of the juvenile and judge on the factors of “potency” and “evaluation”; in addition, a number of open-ended questions were asked which covered a number of possible dimensions of effects of the court experience upon the juvenile. Responses to the semantic differential scales are related to such variables as age, socio-economic class, composition of household and recidivism. The results of this study are of two types: findings based upon response data, and speculations where the data do not offer significant substantiation.     

Manners of Imagining the real

What counts as evidence? What is accepted as true in court given the evidence admitted? How are subordinated peoples further oppressed in courts because they cannot demonstrate that their experience is fact? Drawing on the confirmation brings for Clarence Thomas as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court and the testimony of Anita Hill in those hearings, the author explores the ways in which representations of sexual violence against women can be seen as not “real.”     

Actual Malice in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights decided four cases in recent years that represent a positive step for freedom of expression in nations that belong to the Organization of American States. In 2004 and again in 2008, the court stopped short of adopting a standard that would require proof of actual malice in criminal defamation cases brought by public officials. In 2009, however, the court seemed to adopt the actual malice rule without calling it that. The court's progress toward actual malice is chronicled in this article. The article concludes that the court's decision not to explicitly use the phrase “actual malice” may be a positive development for freedom of expression in the Americas.     

Mt. Laurel: A View from the Bridge

Across the Delaware River from the “region” which the New Jersey Supreme court appears to suggest should be the planning base for Mt. Laurel Township's land use decisions lies the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania which has been having some severe land use pangs of its own. Long before even the initiation of the Mt. Laurel litigation, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had begun to decide “exclusionary zoning” cases. And it has continued, intermittently, ever since its National Land ¹ decision in 1965 to admonish municipalities that they must not commit exclusionary² zoning. Thus, the court held a 4 acre minimum lot size exclusionary and then, five years later, held a 2 acre minimum lot size similarily invalid³.     

Expertise,Experience, and Ideology on Specialized Courts: The Case of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

What roles do prior expertise and accumulated experience play in shaping ideologically consistent voting on a specialized court? Using a dataset of obviousness patent cases from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit spanning 1997–2007, we show that prior expertise enhances the influence of ideology on judicial decisionmaking, but that accumulated experience does not. In addition, we build on previous work and show that ideology is a factor in decisionmaking in technical areas of law, contrary to the received wisdom on patent cases.     

Constitutional Competition Between the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal and the Chinese National People's Congress Standing Committee: A Game Theory Perspective

The competition between the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, a cosmopolitan common law supreme court, and the Chinese National People's Congress Standing Committee, a Leninist parliamentary body, over the “proper meaning” of the Hong Kong Basic Law constituted a very important facet of the territory's constitutional history since the end of British rule in 1997. This article applies the insights of game theory to explain why constitutional stability, in the sense that the two players have never entered into an open collision with each other despite the ambiguity of the Basic Law and the “One Country, Two Systems” formula, endured until the present day. It is argued that successful coordination between the two resulted from the strong aversion of the Court and the Standing Committee to constitutional crises, as well as from the fact that neither entity was capable of credibly signaling its commitment to an aggressive strategy all the time.     

Rating the intrusiveness of law enforcement searches and seizures

This article presents the results of a survey that asked 217 subjects to rate the “intrusiveness” of 50 different types of law enforcement investigative techniques, taken primarily from U.S. Supreme Court cases. Respondents disagreed strongly with many of the assumptions the Court makes about privacy and autonomy. Additionally, three theories are developed to help explain perceptions of intrusiveness.     

From Helping Court to Community‐Based Services: The 30‐Year Evolution of Australia's Family Relationship Centres

As a centrepiece of Australia's 2006 family law reforms, the community‐based Family Relationship Centres (FRCs) represented a major development in the Government's commitment to incorporate family relationship services into its family law system. This paper sees FRCs as a logical development of the original conceptualising the Family Court of Australia as a “helping court”. The paper suggests that the aspiration to create a helping court was partially achieved in 1976 via the creation of an in‐house family court counselling service, which was primarily focused not on law and legal principles, but on supporting the ways in which family members were managing the task of redefining relationships. While generally valued by judges and others, this service nonetheless found itself in tension with the Family Court's continued primary commitment to legally informed and adversarially driven negotiation and decision‐making processes. Since 2006, the creation of FRCs has spearheaded a family law system that provides relationship‐focused interventions away from the courts as the default option for most parenting disputes. Consistent with this aim, there is evidence of a diminished percentage of cases now requiring judicial intervention. The 2006 legislation also provides for courts to conduct “less adversarial trials.” Paradoxically, this has occurred alongside unequivocal evidence from the Australian Institute of Family Studies’ evaluation data that judicial officers are dealing mainly with families displaying seriously dysfunctional attitudes and behaviours. The legal challenge in dealing with these cases is for courts to provide child focused, fair and non‐destructive internal processes. In addition, however, it is increasingly clear that to support and help facilitate their decisions, courts also need good working relationships with FRCs and other community based services. FRCs and the 2006 reforms offer the possibility of moving beyond the ideal of a “helping court” to the broader concept of helping family law system.     

Correcting Community Service: From Work Crews to Community Work in a Juvenile Court

In 2001, the Clark County Juvenile Court in Washington State implemented the use of “restorative community service” (RCS) as part of its larger adoption of a restorative justice framework. This paper explores the court’s implementation and use of RCS, including: (1) the types of institutional changes made by the court in its development of RCS, (2) the types and qualities of social interactions observed by the researcher through participant observation at several RCS sites, (3) the practical implications of these findings for proponents of restorative justice in the use of community service in youth settings, and (4) the theoretical implications of these findings for sociological and criminological research on community service.     

Clashing conceptions of press duties: Public journalists and the courts

This article bridges the growing, but controversial, public journalism movement with First Amendment jurisprudence and libel law. It examines whether the movement finds support in laws that affect the press and, in particular, in court‐created defenses and privileges that protect journalists in modern defamation law. Do defenses that safeguard journalists in their traditional routines as fact gatherers and reporters also protect them in the kinds of roles and duties envisioned by public journalism advocates? Furthermore, has the United States Supreme Court, in non‐defamation cases involving the First Amendment, expressed concern for protecting what might be called the “public journalism functions” of the press? Does the Court create a different image for the press than the one envisioned by public journalism advocates? This article addresses these questions. It ultimately concludes that public journalists and courts have two very different conceptions about the role that journalists play in a democracy.     

Copyright in Inanimate Characters: The Disturbing Proliferation of Microworks and the Negative Effects on Copyright and Free Expression

In its September 2015 decision in DC Comics v. Towle, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recognized the existence of a copyright for inanimate characters. The court held that the Batmobile – a fictional car driven by a fictional superhero – was an independently copyrightable work. This article explores the problems with the Ninth Circuit's analysis and argues that increasing copyright protection for what the authors call “microworks” is misguided and harms First Amendment interests.