Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Constitutional Law

PDF

University of Baltimore Law

Congress

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

Interpretation: Article I, Section 5, Ronald Weich, Martin B. Gold Jan 2016

Interpretation: Article I, Section 5, Ronald Weich, Martin B. Gold

All Faculty Scholarship

In Article I of the Constitution, the Framers vest the legislative authority of the United States government in a bicameral Congress, and over the ten sections of the Article they systematically flesh out the structure, duties, and powers of that Congress. In the early sections of Article I they describe the membership of each House, giving life to the “Great Compromise” of the Constitutional Convention under which each state has equal representation in the Senate but population-based representation in the House of Representatives. In Section 5, they grant Congress the power to govern itself.

Section 5 consists of four separate …


Defining Lawmaking Power, Kimberly L. Wehle Jan 2016

Defining Lawmaking Power, Kimberly L. Wehle

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article teases apart the various permutations of what the federal lawmaking power means, canvases the Court's historical treatment of that question, and describes its practical implications as a matter of both constitutional and administrative law. It proposes a taxonomy of lawmaking in an effort to bring coherence to the task of defining the lawmaking power as well as Congress's prerogative to exercise it.


Federalism And Phantom Economic Rights In Nfib V. Sibelius, Matthew Lindsay Apr 2014

Federalism And Phantom Economic Rights In Nfib V. Sibelius, Matthew Lindsay

All Faculty Scholarship

Few predicted that the constitutional fate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act would turn on Congress’ power to lay and collect taxes. Yet in NFIB v. Sebelius, the Supreme Court upheld the centerpiece of the Act — the minimum coverage provision (MCP), commonly known as the “individual mandate” — as a tax. The unexpected basis of the Court’s holding has deflected attention from what may prove to be the decision’s more constitutionally consequential feature: that a majority of the Court agreed that Congress lacked authority under the Commerce Clause to penalize people who decline to purchase health insurance. …


Citizen Mccain, Michael I. Meyerson Jul 2008

Citizen Mccain, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.