Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Emoluments, Zones Of Interests, And Political Questions: A Cautionary Tale, Jed Handelsman Shugerman, Gautham Rao
Emoluments, Zones Of Interests, And Political Questions: A Cautionary Tale, Jed Handelsman Shugerman, Gautham Rao
Faculty Scholarship
The “political question” doctrine is hotly contested in 2018, and perhaps on the verge of its biggest reversal since the Baker v. Carr revolution. Later this year, we will learn if the Supreme Court in Whitford v. Gill will regard extreme partisan gerrymandering as a violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments, rather than as a nonjusticiable political question.1 It turns out that another high-profile case in the lower courts illuminates the use and misuse of the political question doctrine. The Emoluments cases, and in particular, the Southern District of New York’s dismissal of CREW v. Trump, 2 …
Federalism All The Way Up: State Standing And "The New Process Federalism", Jessica Bulman-Pozen
Federalism All The Way Up: State Standing And "The New Process Federalism", Jessica Bulman-Pozen
Faculty Scholarship
This commentary considers what federalism all the way up means for Gerken’s proposed new process federalism. The state-federal integration she documents underscores why judicial policing of “conditions for federal-state bargaining” cannot be limited to state-federal relations in the traditional sense. It must extend to state challenges to the allocation and exercise of authority within the federal government. The new process federalism would therefore do well to address when states will have standing to bring such cases in federal court. After Part I describes contemporary federalism-all-the-way-up litigation, Part II suggests that Gerken’s “Federalism 3.0” complicates both traditional parens patriae and sovereignty …
De Facto Class Actions: Plaintiff-And Defendant-Oriented Injunctions In Voting Rights, Election Law, And Other Constitutional Cases, Michael T. Morley
De Facto Class Actions: Plaintiff-And Defendant-Oriented Injunctions In Voting Rights, Election Law, And Other Constitutional Cases, Michael T. Morley
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Private Parties, Legislators, And The Government's Mantle: On Intervention And Article Iii Standing, Suzanne B. Goldberg
Private Parties, Legislators, And The Government's Mantle: On Intervention And Article Iii Standing, Suzanne B. Goldberg
Faculty Scholarship
This essay takes up questions regarding whether initiative proponents and legislators can defend a law in federal court when the government declines to defend. Looking first at intervention under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, I argue that neither has the cognizable interest needed to enter an ongoing lawsuit as a party. Yet even if they are allowed to intervene, these would-be defenders of state or federal law cannot take on the government’s mantle to satisfy Article III because the government’s standing derives from the risk to its enforcement powers, which is an interest that cannot be delegated to others. …
Standing At The Crossroads: The Roberts Court In Historical Perspective, Maxwell L. Stearns
Standing At The Crossroads: The Roberts Court In Historical Perspective, Maxwell L. Stearns
Faculty Scholarship
After eleven years, the longest period in Supreme Court history with no change in membership, the Roberts Court commenced in the year 2005 with two new justices. John Roberts replaced William Rehnquist as the seventeenth Chief Justice and Samuel Alito replaced Sandra Day O’Connor as Associate Justice. The conventional wisdom suggests that on the nine-justice Supreme Court, these two appointments have produced a single-increment move, ideologically, to the right. The two Chief Justices occupy roughly the same ideological position. In contrast, whereas O’Connor was generally viewed as occupying the Court’s centrist, or median, position, Alito has instead continued to embrace …