In one sense of the word proceduralist—a person with expertise in procedure—Judge Jack Weinstein is among the leading proceduralists on the federal bench. But in another sense of the word proceduralist—an adherent of proceduralism, or faithfulness to established procedures—he falls at a different end of the spectrum. Looking at four examples of Judge Weinstein’s work in mass litigation, this Article considers what it means to be an antiproceduralist, someone unwilling to let procedural niceties stand in the way of substantive justice. The allure of antiproceduralism is that it eschews technicalities in favor of substantive justice, but technicalities are in the eye of the beholder, and this Article asks what is lost when a judge steers around procedural constraints.
Howard M. Erichson,
Judge Jack Weinstein and the Allure of Antiproceduralism,
DePaul L. Rev.
Available at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review/vol64/iss2/8