Shadow Judges: Staff Attorney Adjudication of Prisoner Claims
| dc.contributor.author | Macfarlane, Katherine A. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-03-30T21:14:04Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-03-30T21:14:04Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2017-03-30 | |
| dc.description | 44 pages | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | This Article is the first to investigate the scope of the delegation to pro se staff and to consider corresponding separation of powers concerns. Local procedure that delegates this deciding judicial power to pro se staff has gone too far. Local procedure crafts rules for prisoner litigation that conflict with federal law, effectively denying access to an Article III judge. When federal courts overreach in this manner, their rulemaking exceeds the limited rulemaking authority Congress has delegated to the judiciary. This local procedure also violates federal policy, which generally disfavors allowing nonjudicial actors to perform judicial tasks. This Article concludes with recommendations about how to solve the delegation problem. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | 95 OR. L. REV. 97 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0196-2043 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/1794/22249 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
| dc.publisher | University of Oregon School of Law | en_US |
| dc.rights | All Rights Reserved. | en_US |
| dc.subject | Prisoner rights | en_US |
| dc.subject | Habeas corpus | en_US |
| dc.subject | Pro se staff | en_US |
| dc.title | Shadow Judges: Staff Attorney Adjudication of Prisoner Claims | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | en_US |