Problem-solving courts require judges to abandon the traditional neutral adjudicator role

Evidence

According to Judge Peggy Hora of the Hayward (California) drug court, “We are the judges that get to color outside the lines. The way we relate to the people in drug court is totally different from the traditional jurisprudential role.” A few snapshots of what transpires in drug courts shows the difference: = Judge Hora presenting a drug court participant with a graduation balloon to celebrate the participant passing her GED test. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1965

Categorization

• DEFINE: Names the therapeutic/community-court conception of the judicial role, contrasted with traditional jurisprudence — core vocabulary for the criminal-justice portion of the course.
• XREF: Connects to the earlier discussion of courts as policymaking institutions and to the judicial-role debates in the opening chapters. — connects to: Judicial rulings often fail to secure compliance or resolve conflict — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 211; Judges must abandon adversarial advocacy for impartial detachment — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 555; Ad hoc adjudication breaks litigant participation and undermines its legitimacy — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 3312 (+12 more)

Broader Connections

• Judges must abandon adversarial advocacy for impartial detachment #expands (1.00) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 555
• Judicial rulings often fail to secure compliance or resolve conflict #complicates (0.95) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 211
• Ad hoc adjudication breaks litigant participation and undermines its legitimacy #complicates (0.85) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 3312
• Judges create the rules they apply rather than applying preexisting rules. #complicates (0.85) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2526
• Courts make law only as a byproduct of their adjudicative function #complicates (0.80) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 15
• Conceptual puzzles about ‘the law’ and ‘legal obligation’ become acute when a court is confronted with a problem like this. #complicates (0.80)
• Courts reason that binding successors harms the public by blocking adaptive response to change #complicates (0.80) — Daryl Levinson and Benjamin I. Sachs, Political Entrenchment and Public Law, 132
• Courts share an obligation to modernize outdated common-law rules #complicates (0.80) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 2367
• Stability is sometimes unwisely chosen over progress in judicial lawmaking #complicates (0.80) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 2557
• A judge’s self-interest in avoiding admitted error shapes legal rulings #complicates (0.80) — Jonathan Harr, A Civil Action, 2732
• Court structure reforms can alter courts’ role in governing unexpectedly #complicates (0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 351
• Pragmatic law judges rules by their consequences, not their origins. #complicates (0.75) — Richard A. Posner, What Has Pragmatism to Offer Law?, 38
• Judges create and reshape legal rules by reasoning analogically across cases, not by deduction #complicates (0.75) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2542
• Adjudication imposes solutions and is not the same as mediation #complicates (0.75) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 3294
• Norms of proper judicial conduct vary across courts and over time #complicates (0.70) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2610