Author: Jules Epstein

Temple Law at Bar-Ilan University: Teaching There, Looking Back Here

Tuesday, December 27, 2022, I taught my last of 8 classes in Problems in American Criminal Law. My location? Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan, Israel, a suburb of Tel Aviv. This culminated a two-year journey, one interrupted by COVID and fraught with concerns about the world I would be entering, the tolerance I was hoping for, and a goal of supporting the bridge between our two law schools. The beginning of this story is simple. Bar-Ilan and Temple Law are collaborating, and as part of that process I was asked to create a course for an intersession program Bar-Ilan offers, 1- and 2-credit English-language courses for students nearing the end of the formal law school education (followed, unlike in the U.S., by a required internship before sitting for the Bar). Problems in criminal law were the focus, using the successes, failures, and dilemmas of the U.S. system as a tool to offer a comparative perspective and engender discussions about topics that know no boundaries – guns, capital punishment, race and class, the allocation of power …

Dobbs, The Supreme Court, And the Sins of Omission

In Catholicism, the sin of omission occurs when a person ignores doing that which is good, needed and expected. In judicial decision-making, the sin of omission occurs when judges ignore inconvenient truths, facts beyond dispute. The Dobbs decision overruling Roe v. Wade warrants condemnation on many grounds – the end of the 14th Amendment as a source of individual liberty, the reliance on incorrect history, the freezing of rights as of 150 years ago. But also worthy of condemnation is the repeated act of omission. First to be omitted are two words – rape and slavery. Nowhere does the majority even say the word “rape.” Nowhere does it explain how Due Process permits a state to force a rape victim to bear a child. To the majority, rape does not exist. And the relevance of “slavery?” For a majority claiming to use history as a guide to what liberties are protected, the 13th Amendment banning slavery and “involuntary servitude” must be considered. A horrific and recurring act of slavery was forced childbearing. Essential history, ignored. …

Why Was He Kneeling At My Front Door, Hands Raised?

It was 4:55 a.m. when the door bell rang. Who could it be at this hour?  I looked out and saw him – crying, shivering in 20 degree cold, he waited.  And when I opened the inner door he backed away, raised his hands in the air, and kneeled down.  To tell me he was lost and needed directions.  That he approached my home because the living room light was on and the computer screen, with me at it, visible.  Kneeling, like a soldier surrendering to their captors. Growing up in the era of Ozzie and Harriet, Leave it to Beaver, and My Three Sons, this was not the image of how someone sought help.  The goofy or errant teenager could still turn to a neighbor, not fearing violence but perhaps expecting a stern headshake, and then having an arm put around his shoulders and taken to the kitchen for a warm drink, some fatherly advice, and a ride home. That is what my son could expect, even decades later.  A neighbor – even a …

Can we make ‘Sense’ of the Kyle Rittenhouse Acquittal?

It is no surprise that many feel dismay over the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse and see the verdict as resulting from the American tolerance of gun culture; a nearly all-white jury favoring a white defendant; a baby-faced [in the jurors’ eyes] teen who did not match a stereotype of a ‘gun-toting’ marauder; and a reaction against the purported violence of racial justice protests. But those views impose social concerns on what is ultimately a trial, a process where a jury must confront two competing narratives.  Sorting out the possible social and cognitive contributing factors cannot be done with precision and in fact such an exercise may be fruitless.  But self-defense law Wisconsin style and the conduct of Rittenhouse’s trial offer easy explanations of how a ‘not guilty’ verdict was reached either because jurors simply followed the law or made the defense story fit with their implicit (or express) biases. What were the stories?  The prosecution’s was simple, laid out in the opening statement: [T]he defendant Kyle Rittenhouse, who was 17-years-old at the time, had armed …