Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Ambiguity (1)
- Anti-tax (1)
- Appropriation (1)
- Budget (1)
- Cognitive theory (1)
-
- Commercial speech (1)
- Conservative (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutional duty (1)
- Constitutional provisions (1)
- Corporate speech (1)
- Corporation is a person (1)
- Crisis (1)
- Double jeopardy (1)
- Due process (1)
- Editorial (1)
- Educational (1)
- Elected (1)
- Election (1)
- Electorate (1)
- Federal (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Fiscal (1)
- Fundamental (1)
- Funding (1)
- Governor (1)
- Impasse (1)
- Indian (1)
- Initiative (1)
- Initiative process (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
What Is The Sound Of A Corporation Speaking? How The Cognitive Theory Of Metaphor Can Help Lawyers Shape The Law, Linda L. Berger
What Is The Sound Of A Corporation Speaking? How The Cognitive Theory Of Metaphor Can Help Lawyers Shape The Law, Linda L. Berger
Scholarly Works
This article argues that better understanding of metaphor's cognitive role can help lawyers shape judicial decision-making. As a way of exploring metaphor's contribution to shaping the law, the article focuses on how a particular lawsuit was influenced by metaphor, in particular, by the primary metaphor that a corporation is a person within the more complex metaphorical system suggested by the marketplace of ideas model for First Amendment protection. After describing the cognitive theory of metaphor and examining the metaphors underlying First Amendment protection for corporate speech, the article analyzes the use of metaphor in the briefs filed in the U.S. …
Courts Over Constitutions Revisited: Unwritten Constitutionalism In The States, Thomas B. Mcaffee, Nathan N. Frost, Rachel Beth Klein-Levine
Courts Over Constitutions Revisited: Unwritten Constitutionalism In The States, Thomas B. Mcaffee, Nathan N. Frost, Rachel Beth Klein-Levine
Scholarly Works
A good deal of modern debate in constitutional law has concerned the appropriate methods for construing constitutional rights. But the focus on “individual rights” has sometimes prompted us to pay too little attention to the “right” deemed most fundamental by those who brought us the state and federal constitutions: the right of the people collectively to make determinations about how they should be governed. The author demonstrates that the key to understanding the development of the power of judicial review, both by the United States Supreme Court and by the highest courts of the states, is to perceive courts as …
The Most Rational Branch: Guinn V. Legislature And The Judiciary's Role As Helpful Arbiter Of Conflict, Jeffrey W. Stempel
The Most Rational Branch: Guinn V. Legislature And The Judiciary's Role As Helpful Arbiter Of Conflict, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
When the Nevada Supreme Court decided Guinn v. Legislature, one would have thought from reading the popular press accounts that the court had forcibly displaced the State legislature by means of a violent coup d'etat. Newspaper accounts of the decision referred to it as a usurpation of power in violation of clear constitutional language, belittling the court in language sometimes more appropriate to the baseball bleachers than to serious editorial commentary. Following suit, politicized elements of the citizenry began a recall effort (seemingly unsuccessful as of this writing) directed at the court as well as joining the chorus of criticisms. …
Double Jeopardy And Nonmember Indians In Indian Country, Terrill Pollman
Double Jeopardy And Nonmember Indians In Indian Country, Terrill Pollman
Scholarly Works
The ambivalence of the federal government to the sovereignty of native tribes is ordinarily a quiet fact of life in this country. Now, the federal circuits have disturbed that quiet by rendering opposing rulings on the question whether the Double Jeopardy Clause bars successive tribal/federal prosecution of nonmember Indians in Indian Country. The Ninth Circuit has held the Double Jeopardy Clause does not present a bar to successive tribal/federal prosecutions. In contrast, the Eighth Circuit has held that the Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits subsequent prosecution because the source of the tribe's jurisdiction, if it has jurisdictional power, is the same …