SECTION A (Short Points): AI Summary for How Judges Judge_ Theories on Judicial Decision

Making.pdf

1. The provided text mainly focuses on the article "How Judges Judge: Theories on Judicial Decision
Making" by Timothy J.
2. Capurso, which discusses the different theories surrounding how judges come to their decisions.
3. Capurso argues that prevalent theories tend to overlook the uniqueness of judges and the cases they
decide.
4. He believes in enhancing practical knowledge on this topic to gain a better understanding of the
judicial system.
5. The Realist perspective on judicial decision-making is that a judge's life experiences and unconscious
biases heavily influence their decisions, rather than solely the facts and law of a case.
6. Written opinions are believed to perpetuate the myth of impartiality, as they exclude these
preconceptions intentionally or unintentionally.
7. The text also discusses the theories of Realism and Formalism in relation to the decision-making
processes of judges in the US legal system.
8. The article argues that neither Realism nor Formalism can fully explain the decision-making
processes of judges as different judges may utilize different theories depending on the situation.
9. Additionally, external factors such as political ideology and biases may influence judicial decisions.
10. In conclusion, the text provides valuable insights into the opinions of Timothy J.
11. Capurso on judicial determinism and the different theories surrounding how judges come to their
decisions.
12. It also provides a means for University of Baltimore law alumni to get involved in the school's
community.
 SECTION B (Detailed Points): AI Summary for How Judges Judge_ Theories on Judicial Decision
Making.pdf

1. The article "How Judges Judge: Theories on Judicial Decision Making" by Timothy J.
2. Capurso explores the different theories surrounding how judges come to their decisions.
3. One such theory is the Realist view, which posits that judges decide the outcome of a lawsuit before
considering precedent and statutory law.
4. Realists reject the idea that a judge begins with a rule or principle of law and applies it to the facts,
instead suggesting that judges pursue a suitable foundation for a written opinion after reaching a
conclusion.
5. This conclusion is often based on the judge's intuitive sense of what is right or wrong in the particular
case, known as the "judicial hunch." Judges then employ every means available to justify their decision
within their own minds and withstand criticism from peers.
6. The factors influencing a judge's hunch include direct and indirect influences such as legal and
political experiences, political affiliations, and personal traits.
7. Judges' predispositions, with varying degrees of significance, unconsciously attach themselves to the
consideration of every problem the judge confronts.
8. The provided text consists of an article written by Timothy J.
9. Capurso discussing his views on judicial determinism.
10. Capurso argues that prevalent theories on this topic tend to overlook the uniqueness of judges and
the cases they decide.
11. He believes in enhancing practical knowledge on this topic to gain a better understanding of the
judicial system.
12. Aside from the article, the text also includes a form for the University of Baltimore's Law Alumni
Resource Directory.
13. The form allows alumni to express their interest in mentoring first-year law students, speaking to a
class about their practice specialty, judging advocacy programs, participating in the EXPLOR program,
serving on the Alumni Association's Law Liaison Committee, reunion committee, and fundraising
activities.
14. In conclusion, the text provides insights into the opinions of Timothy J.
15. The article discusses the various ways judges make decisions, including formalism and realism, and
how these theories are incomplete.
16. Attorney A is cited as saying that while most judges are fair and impartial, there are some who are
result-oriented and do not base their decisions on the law.
17. Attorney A also notes that different judges may arrive at different decisions even when presented
with essentially the same facts.
18. The article proposes a hybrid approach that takes into account both formalism and realism, as well
as practical experience in dealing with individual judges.
19. It suggests that predictability may be achieved by learning judges' individual personalities and how
they approach certain cases.
20. The Realist perspective on judicial decision-making is that a judge's life experiences and
unconscious biases heavily influence their decisions, rather than solely the facts and law of a case.
21. These hidden biases are instilled in a judge's intellect throughout their life, forming the basis of their
judicial hunch.
22. Written opinions are believed to perpetuate the myth of impartiality, as they exclude these
preconceptions intentionally or unintentionally.
23. The Realists see earlier theories, such as Blackstone's divine mandate, as nonsensical as they
disregard the human creation of law and individual personalities of judges.
24. The Formalists maintain that every judicial opinion can be broken down into an equation of the rule
of law and the facts of the case, resulting in a predictable decision, while Realists argue that this
approach is incapable of accounting for judicial imperfections and unique factual scenarios.
25. This text discusses the theories of Realism and Formalism in relation to the decision-making
processes of judges in the US legal system.
26. The Realists argue that judges' decisions are influenced by their personal biases and perceptions of
the facts, while the Formalists believe that judges base their decisions solely on legal precedent and the
facts presented in the case.
27. Two judges were interviewed to explore how they think they make decisions.
28. One judge identified as a Formalist and emphasized the importance of facts and the law in decision-
making, while the other judge identified as a Formalist but acknowledged the possibility of personal
biases affecting decision-making.
29. The article argues that neither Realism nor Formalism can fully explain the decision-making
processes of judges as different judges may utilize different theories depending on the situation.
30. Additionally, external factors such as political ideology and biases may influence judicial decisions.
31. The interviews revealed that judges strive to follow the letter of the law and make decisions based
on the facts of the case, but may feel pressure to depart from the law in the interest of equity or public
policy.
32. The article emphasizes the importance of lawyers presenting well-prepared arguments and instilling
confidence in judges, as well as the need for judges to remain impartial and act in the interest of justice.