National Forum On Judicial Accountability
Zena D. Crenshaw-Logal has not received any gifts yet
The Rodney A. Logal Center for Justice
Opening Fall 2017
Like us @ https://www.facebook.com/RLC4J/
The Law Project was co-founded by the late Mr. Rodney A. Logal, his widow Ms. Zena D. Crenshaw-Logal, and their colleague Dr. Andrew D. Jackson.
Learn More: CLICK HERE
Grassroots advocates, public interest attorneys, and legal scholars gathered in October 2011 at the University of Baltimore for the debut symposium of "The Matthew Fogg Symposia On The Vitality of Stare Decisis In America." Convening such a broad and in many ways diverse audience, required the program series to be worthwhile academically, yet have populist appeal. Towards that end, the event website explains: "It is both scholarly and practical to examine the current vitality of stare decisis as a legal doctrine in America."
That we use Latin to describe the concept suggests it is complex, mysterious, and beyond the cares of most Americans. Yet stare decisis, sometimes called the "doctrine of precedent", arguably preserves what is among their most valued treasures, the legitimacy of America’s judiciary. Presumably our administration of justice remains stable, predictable, efficient, and welfare-enhancing by requiring courts to follow earlier resolutions of cases with comparable facts, circumstances, and/or law known as precedent.
The Fogg symposia combine panels of public interest attorneys and law professors to consider whether compliance with stare decisis is reasonably assured in America given certain prescribed factors. In gathering, we not only witness their analyses in the context of stare decisis, but observe how the overall exchange impacts the analysis of each participant. Zena's book is a report on the effort, touted as the most inclusive, important examination of American courts.
Through explicit case law (as opposed to questionable case dispositions) America’s federal judiciary and state judiciaries have made it pretty impossible to allege a viable cause of action based on any form of unlawful judicial bias, EVEN IF complainants were otherwise free to sue judges. I set out the circumstances in my law review article published by the prestigious "American Journal of Trial Advocacy". The article is “The Official End of Judicial Accountability Through Federal Rights Litigation: Ashcroft v. Iqbal”, 35 Am. J. Trial Advoc. 125 (Summer 2011).