Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- File Type
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Popular Constitutionalism, Judicial Supremacy, And The Complete Lincoln-Douglas Debates, Mark A. Graber
Popular Constitutionalism, Judicial Supremacy, And The Complete Lincoln-Douglas Debates, Mark A. Graber
Mark Graber
No abstract provided.
Enumeration And Other Constitutional Strategies For Protecting Rights: The View From 1787/1791, Mark A. Graber
Enumeration And Other Constitutional Strategies For Protecting Rights: The View From 1787/1791, Mark A. Graber
Mark Graber
This paper interprets the constitution of 1791 in light of the constitution of 1787. The persons responsible for the original constitution thought they had secured fundamental rights by a combination of representation, the separation of powers, and the extended republic. The Bill of Rights, in their view, was a minor supplement to the strategies previously employed for preventing abusive government practices. Proposed amendments were less a list of fundamental freedoms than an enumeration of those rights likely to appease moderate anti-Federalists. That many vaguely phrased rights lacked clear legal meaning was of little concern to their Federalist sponsors, who trusted …
False Modesty: Felix Frankfurter And The Tradition Of Judicial Restraint, Mark A. Graber
False Modesty: Felix Frankfurter And The Tradition Of Judicial Restraint, Mark A. Graber
Mark Graber
Professor Jeffrey Rosen is the leading champion of judicial modesty among legal academics and public philosophers. Throughout his career, Professor Rosen has vigorously condemned justices “when they have tried to impose intensely contested visions of the Constitution on a divided nation.” This commentary on his Foulston lecture at Washburn Law School suggests that proponents of judicial restraint must avoid traps of false modesty which ensnared Justice Felix Frankfurter. The constitutional politics responsible for Poe v. Ullman and Barnette v. West Virginia State Board of Education challenge the too simple understanding of judicial unilateralism that Frankfurter advanced in his opinions in …
Foreword: Making Sense Of An Eighteenth-Century Constitution In A Twenty-First-Century World, Mark A. Graber
Foreword: Making Sense Of An Eighteenth-Century Constitution In A Twenty-First-Century World, Mark A. Graber
Mark Graber
The Maryland Constitutional Law Schmooze, "An Eighteenth-Century Constitution in a Twenty-First-Century World" explores the interpretive and political challenges inherent in recourse to an ancient text for resolving political questions. Although no Essay cites Quentin Skinner, the debates between participants in the Schmooze and this Symposium mirror the debates between Skinner and his critics. Some participants insist that crucial aspects of an eighteenth-century text remain vibrant at present, that contemporary political life would be improved by more careful study of the Constitution. Others blame crucial pathologies of American politics on a combination of too careful study of and too uncritical veneration …
Desperately Ducking Slavery: Dred Scott And Contemporary Constitutional Theory, Mark A. Graber
Desperately Ducking Slavery: Dred Scott And Contemporary Constitutional Theory, Mark A. Graber
Mark Graber
No abstract provided.
Settling The West: The Annexation Of Texas, The Louisiana Purchase, And Bush V. Gore, Mark Graber
Settling The West: The Annexation Of Texas, The Louisiana Purchase, And Bush V. Gore, Mark Graber
Mark Graber
No abstract provided.
Looking Off The Ball: Constitutional Law And American Politics, Mark A. Graber
Looking Off The Ball: Constitutional Law And American Politics, Mark A. Graber
Mark Graber
“Looking Off the Ball” details how and why constitutional law influences both judicial and public decision making. Treating justices as free to express their partisan commitments may seem to explain Bush v. Gore*, but not the judicial failure to intervene in the other numerous presidential elections in which the candidate favored by most members of the Supreme Court lost. Constitutional norms and standards generate legal agreements among persons who dispute the underlying merits of particular policies under constitutional attack. The norms and standards explain constitutional criticism, why only a small proportion of the political questions that occupy Americans are normally …
Does It Really Matter? Conservative Courts In A Conservative Era, Mark A. Graber
Does It Really Matter? Conservative Courts In A Conservative Era, Mark A. Graber
Mark Graber
This essay explores the likelihood that conservative federal courts in the near future will be agents of conservative social change. In particular, the paper assesses whether conservative justices on some issues will support more conservative policies than conservative elected officials are presently willing to enact and whether such judicial decisions will influence public policy. My primary conclusion is that, as long as conservatives remain politically ascendant in the elected branches of government, the Roberts Court is likely to influence American politics at the margins. The new conservative judicial majority is likely to be more libertarian than conservative majorities in the …
Naked Land Transfers And American Constitutional Development, Mark Graber
Naked Land Transfers And American Constitutional Development, Mark Graber
Mark Graber
The constitutional prohibition on naked land transfers, laws granting to B property that belonged to A, played a far greater role in American constitutional development than is generally realized. The Marshall and Taney Courts heard numerous cases in which government officials were accused of expropriating private property, typically by legislative oversight rather than by deliberate intent. When resolving these cases, antebellum justices relied heavily on “certain great principles of justice” rather than on specific constitutional provisions. Supreme Court majorities on several occasions probably exercised the judicial power to declare federal laws unconstitutional. More frequently, Marshall and Taney Court decisions in …
Old Wine In New Bottles: The Constitutional Status Of Unconstitutional Speech, Mark A. Graber
Old Wine In New Bottles: The Constitutional Status Of Unconstitutional Speech, Mark A. Graber
Mark Graber
This Article explores whether contemporary advocates of restrictions on bigoted expression have more in common with contemporary advocates of broad First Amendment rights or with past censors. The critical theorists who would ban some hate speech rely heavily on the equal citizenship principles that radical civil libertarians believe justify almost absolute speech rights. The First Amendment, past and present censors argue, does not fully protect speech inconsistent with what they believe are basic constitutional values. This claim repudiates a basic principle of American constitutionalism, the faith that "self-evident" constitutional values will triumph in the constitutional marketplace of ideas. The ideological …
Thick And Thin: Interdisciplinary Conversations On Populism, Law, Political Science, And Constitutional Change, Mark A. Graber
Thick And Thin: Interdisciplinary Conversations On Populism, Law, Political Science, And Constitutional Change, Mark A. Graber
Mark Graber
No abstract provided.