Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional law (73)
- First Amendment (56)
- Constitution (37)
- Supreme Court (32)
- United States Supreme Court (25)
-
- Federalism (24)
- Constitutional Law (23)
- California (21)
- Religion (20)
- Due process (19)
- Privacy (18)
- Separation of powers (17)
- Abortion (16)
- Equal protection (16)
- Evidence (15)
- Fourth Amendment (14)
- Congress (13)
- Due process of law (13)
- Fourteenth Amendment (13)
- Right to counsel (13)
- United States (13)
- Fifth Amendment (12)
- Due Process (10)
- Eminent domain (10)
- Freedom of speech (10)
- Legislation (10)
- Speech (10)
- Criminal procedure (9)
- Government (9)
- Litigation (9)
- Publication Year
Articles 361 - 388 of 388
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Is A Written Constitution Necessary?, Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain
Is A Written Constitution Necessary?, Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Sell V. United States: Is The Supreme Court Giving A Dose Of Bad Medicine?: The Constitutionality Of The Right To Forcibly Medicate Mentally Ill Defendants For Purposes Of Trial Competence, Dina E. Klepner
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Ewing V. California: Upholding California's Three Strikes Law, Robert Clinton Peck
Ewing V. California: Upholding California's Three Strikes Law, Robert Clinton Peck
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Public Use Clause: Constitutional Mandate Or "Hortatory Fluff"?, Gideon Kanner
The Public Use Clause: Constitutional Mandate Or "Hortatory Fluff"?, Gideon Kanner
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Preemption And Regulatory Failure, David C. Vladeck
Preemption And Regulatory Failure, David C. Vladeck
Pepperdine Law Review
Daily front-page stories recounting the failure of defibrillators, pacemakers, heart stents and infusion pumps have raised questions about the adequacy of FDA regulation of medical devices. At the same time, lower courts are struggling to apply the Supreme Court's ruling in Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr to determine the preemptive reach of the Medical Device Amendments ("MDA"). This article explores the repercussions of Medtronic and argues that Congress' use of words like "requirements" in regulatory statutes should be seen as references to positive state law only, and should not be read, absent an explicit command by Congress, to subsume state law …
Empowering States: A Rebuttal To Dr. Greve, Erwin Chemerinsky
Empowering States: A Rebuttal To Dr. Greve, Erwin Chemerinsky
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Federal Preemption: James Madison, Call Your Office, Michael S. Greve
Federal Preemption: James Madison, Call Your Office, Michael S. Greve
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Empowering States: The Need To Limit Federal Preemption, Erwin Chemerinsky
Empowering States: The Need To Limit Federal Preemption, Erwin Chemerinsky
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Congress's Power To Preempt The States, Stephen Gardbaum
Congress's Power To Preempt The States, Stephen Gardbaum
Pepperdine Law Review
In this Article, part of a symposium on federal preemption of state tort law, I build upon my earlier work on the nature of preemption to try and deepen the conceptual and constitutional foundations of the subject. I argue that this neglected dimension must be moved to center stage if preemption doctrine is to have a coherent and principled framework. In particular, the key issues are the nature, source, and limits of Congress's power to preempt the states. The result is that preemption should be understood as a discretionary power of Congress the source of which lies in the Necessary …
The Problem Of Federal Preemption: Reformulating The Black Letter Rules, Robert R. Gasaway
The Problem Of Federal Preemption: Reformulating The Black Letter Rules, Robert R. Gasaway
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Building A Nation From Thirteen States: The Constitutional Convention And Preemption, Edward J. Larson
Building A Nation From Thirteen States: The Constitutional Convention And Preemption, Edward J. Larson
Pepperdine Law Review
This article is adapted from a talk Professor Larson gave at Pepperdine’s symposium on federal preemption of state tort law - the problem of medical drugs and devices. Professor Larson begins with a discussion of the Constitutional Convention and James Madison’s role in the creation of the U.S. Constitution. He relates how fifteen resolutions, developed by Madison and the other Virginia delegates, became known as the Virginia Plan, and served as the foundation for the Constitution. Professor Larson continues by examining Madison’s notes of the Convention. Specifically he shares what the notes relate about the deliberations at the Convention regarding …
Reflections On Hines V. Davidowitz: The Future Of Obstacle Preemption, Kenneth W. Starr
Reflections On Hines V. Davidowitz: The Future Of Obstacle Preemption, Kenneth W. Starr
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Confirmation Of Punitive Awards In Arbitration: Did Due Process Disappear?, Stuart M. Boyarsky
The Confirmation Of Punitive Awards In Arbitration: Did Due Process Disappear?, Stuart M. Boyarsky
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
Part I of this article provides a brief overview of the reasoning behind the limited judicial review of an arbitral award. Part II describes the state action doctrine and explains how several courts have used the doctrine in order to apply due process protection to proceedings involving private actors. In particular, this section discusses several significant decisions that involve the issue of whether a court's confirmation of an arbitrator's award of punitive damages creates state action and requires the application of constitutional protections such as due process. This Note concludes that due to a leading decision by the Eleventh Circuit, …
Intermittent State Constitutionalism, Justin Long
Intermittent State Constitutionalism, Justin Long
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Back To The Basics: Looking Again To State Constitutions For Guidance On Forming A More Perfect Vice Presidency, Jamin Soderstrom
Back To The Basics: Looking Again To State Constitutions For Guidance On Forming A More Perfect Vice Presidency, Jamin Soderstrom
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
What Federalism & Why? Science Versus Doctrine, Stephen E. Gottlieb
What Federalism & Why? Science Versus Doctrine, Stephen E. Gottlieb
Pepperdine Law Review
The Constitution does not use the words federal or federalism. It gives Congress a set of powers and prohibits the national government, the states or both from doing some things. The Court has inferred principles of federalism from those provisions. The political science community has treated the advantages of federalism as contingent on whether federalism deepens or diffuses conflict or opens competition for power. The United States Supreme Court's approach does neither; it has been trying to clarify and police a very different boundary. Even on its own terms, however, the Court's justifications do not work - a problem made …
The T-Rex Without Teeth: Evolving Strickland V. Washington And The Test For Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel, Robert R. Rigg
The T-Rex Without Teeth: Evolving Strickland V. Washington And The Test For Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel, Robert R. Rigg
Pepperdine Law Review
In Strickland v. Washington the United States Supreme Court formulated the test for determining whether counsel in a criminal case is ineffective. When the Court decided Strickland it created a doctrine of enormous proportions, but with little impact--a legal tyrannosaurus rex without teeth. In the last decade, by using American Bar Association (“ABA”) standards to evaluate counsel's performance, the Court has given the T-Rex some sizable incisors. The purposes of this article are to: (1) determine how frequently the United States Supreme Court uses ABA standards in its decisions and describe briefly for what purposes the Court uses those standards; …
The Muted Rise Of The Silent Witness Rule In National Security Litigation: The Eastern District Of Virginia's Answer To The Fight Over Classified Information At Trial, Jonathan M. Lamb
Pepperdine Law Review
The state secrets problem is emblematic of a judicial issue which is not confined to the civil cases in which the privilege is asserted - the tension between the government's interest in protecting classified information and society's interest in justice by resolution on the merits. The United States must be allowed to prosecute terrorists, conspirators, and enemies by using classified information as evidence; but how may the government act as a civil defendant without invoking the state secrets privilege to dismiss actions before trial (or pre-discovery)? The answer might be a little known evidentiary doctrine called the silent witness rule. …
Are Bills Of Attainder The New Currency? Challenging The Constitutionality Of Sex Offender Regulations That Inflict Punishment Without The "Safeguard Of A Judicial Trial", Joel A. Sherwin
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Congress's Power To Regulate The Federal Judiciary: What The First Congress And The First Federal Courts Can Teach Today's Congress And Courts , Paul Taylor
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Some Too (Or Blessedly) Short Responses To Five Thoughtful Readers, Sanford Levinson
Some Too (Or Blessedly) Short Responses To Five Thoughtful Readers, Sanford Levinson
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Levinson Is To Mr. Justice "Isaiah" As St. Paul Was To The Prophet Isaiah, Richard H. Weisberg
Levinson Is To Mr. Justice "Isaiah" As St. Paul Was To The Prophet Isaiah, Richard H. Weisberg
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Variable Morality Of Constitutional (And Other) Compromises: A Comment On Sanford Levinson's Compromise And Constitutionalism, Carrie Menkel-Meadow
The Variable Morality Of Constitutional (And Other) Compromises: A Comment On Sanford Levinson's Compromise And Constitutionalism, Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Pepperdine Law Review
This comment to Sanford Levinson's Brandeis lecture at Pepperdine focuses on the role and types of compromises made during several stages of constitutional processes, formative and constitutive, interpretive and on-going, as negotiated by Constitutional meaning makers (drafters and Supreme Court 'deciders'), and post hoc justifications. This essay discusses recent work on compromise as institutional design, pragmatic or principled, and regime defining and sustaining. Both the pejorative (compromise is unprincipled) and more positive (compromise accounts for the 'reality' and moral existence of different sides of an issue or polity) understandings of compromise are reviewed, in light of Professor Levinson's scholarship on …
Lessons From Lincoln: A Comment On Levinson, Steven D. Smith
Lessons From Lincoln: A Comment On Levinson, Steven D. Smith
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Democracy, Human Dignity, And Entrenched Evil, Mark A. Graber
Constitutional Democracy, Human Dignity, And Entrenched Evil, Mark A. Graber
Pepperdine Law Review
The following essay pays tribute to Sandy Levinson's thoughts on constitutional compromises by paying tribute to the thoughts on constitutional compromises by our common mentor, Walter Murphy. Rather than directly engage in a dialogue with Compromise and Constitutionalism, the analysis below joins the preexisting dialogue between Professors Levinson and Murphy on how to construct a decent polity among people who have deep disputes over what constitutes political decency. Walter Murphy is unfortunately largely known to legal audiences only through the work of such outstanding mentees as Sandy Levinson, Jim Fleming, Christopher Eisgruber, Andrew Koppelman, Jennifer Nedelsky, and Robert George. Walter …
Compromise And Constitutionalism, Sanford Levinson
Compromise And Constitutionalism, Sanford Levinson
Pepperdine Law Review
Professor Levinson explores compromises (1) that went into the making of the United States Constitution, and (2) that have occurred in the Supreme Court's constitutional interpretation. He explores these compromises in light of Israeli philosopher Avishai Margalit's distinction between bad compromises and rotten compromises. "Rotten compromises" are indefensible except, perhaps, in the most exceptional of conditions. A "rotten political compromise" is one that agrees "to establish or maintain an inhuman regime, a regime of cruelty and humiliation, that is, a regime that does not treat humans as humans." Under this standard, Levinson identifies as rotten compromises the Constitution's protection of …
The Cost Of Compromise And The Covenant With Death, Paul Finkelman
The Cost Of Compromise And The Covenant With Death, Paul Finkelman
Pepperdine Law Review
This article is a rebuttal to the writings of those advocating the view that America was formed through compromise and that compromise in modern constitutional law is, therefore, necessary and beneficial. A recount of the “compromises” at the Constitutional Conventional that eventually led to the approval and protection of slavery begins the analysis establishing the danger of Americans compromising over constitutional protections. The article continues on, discussing the Compromise of 1850 and its drafters whom others have considered “passionately devoted to the Union”, like John Calhoun, who would later assert that the Constitution was expendable. The Compromise of 1850 did …
Introduction: Blessed Are The Compromisers?, Robert F. Cochran Jr.
Introduction: Blessed Are The Compromisers?, Robert F. Cochran Jr.
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.