Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Alan E Garfield (11)
- Shubhankar Dam (8)
- Mark Graber (6)
- Peter J. Aschenbrenner (5)
- Josh Chafetz (4)
-
- Martin A. Schwartz (4)
- Samuel J. Levine (4)
- Daniel A Farber (3)
- John L. Gedid (3)
- Richard W Garnett (3)
- Robert L Tsai (3)
- Robert L. Tsai (3)
- Rod Smolla (3)
- Anthony J. Bellia (2)
- David S. Bogen (2)
- Eileen Kaufman (2)
- Erwin Chemerinsky (2)
- Gerard V. Bradley (2)
- John F. Stinneford (2)
- M. C. Mirow (2)
- Maria L. Ontiveros (2)
- Stephen M. Feldman (2)
- Thomas A. Schweitzer (2)
- Akram Faizer (1)
- Albert E Poirier Jr. (1)
- Allison Connelly (1)
- Amanda Sholtis (1)
- Anil Kalhan (1)
- Charles J. Russo (1)
- Craig M. Scott (1)
- File Type
Articles 31 - 60 of 120
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Democracy Means That The People Make The Law, Gerald Torres
Democracy Means That The People Make The Law, Gerald Torres
Gerald Torres
Gerald Torres delivered the Robert C. Wood lecture at the McCormack Graduate School of Policy Studies at University of Massachusetts Boston in 2006. This is his talk.
Death Penalty Jurisprudence By Tallying State Legislative Enactments: Harmonizing The Eighth And Tenth Amendments, Akram Faizer, Charles E. Maclean
Death Penalty Jurisprudence By Tallying State Legislative Enactments: Harmonizing The Eighth And Tenth Amendments, Akram Faizer, Charles E. Maclean
Akram Faizer
Is The Filibuster Constitutional?, Josh Chafetz, Michael J. Gerhardt
Is The Filibuster Constitutional?, Josh Chafetz, Michael J. Gerhardt
Josh Chafetz
With the help of the President, Democrats in Congress were able to pass historic healthcare-reform legislation in spite of - and thanks to - the significant structural obstacles presented by the Senate’s arcane parliamentary rules. After the passage of the bill, the current political climate appears to require sixty votes for the passage of any major legislation, a practice which many argue is unsustainable. In this Debate, Professors Josh Chafetz and Michael Gerhardt debate the constitutionality of the Senate’s cloture rules by looking to the history of those rules in the United States and elsewhere. Professor Chafetz argues that the …
The Unconstitutionality Of The Filibuster, Josh Chafetz
The Unconstitutionality Of The Filibuster, Josh Chafetz
Josh Chafetz
This Article, written for the Connecticut Law Review's 2010 "Is Our Constitutional Order Broken?" symposium, argues that the filibuster, as currently practiced, is unconstitutional.
After a brief introduction in Part I, Part II describes the current operation of the filibuster. Although the filibuster is often discussed in terms of "unlimited debate," this Part argues that its current operation is best understood in terms of a sixty-vote requirement to pass most bills and other measures through the Senate.
Part III presents a structural argument that this supermajority requirement for most Senate business is unconstitutional. This Part argues that the words "passed" …
Impeachment And Assassination, Josh Chafetz
Impeachment And Assassination, Josh Chafetz
Josh Chafetz
In 1998, the conservative provocateur Ann Coulter made waves when she wrote that President Clinton should be either impeached or assassinated. Coulter was roundly - and rightly - condemned for suggesting that the murder of the President might be justified, but her conceptual linking of presidential impeachment and assassination was not entirely unfounded. Indeed, Benjamin Franklin had made the same linkage over two hundred years earlier, when he noted at the Constitutional Convention that, historically, the removal of “obnoxious” chief executives had been accomplished by assassination. Franklin suggested that a proceduralized mechanism for removal - impeachment - would be preferable. …
Executive Branch Contempt Of Congress, Josh Chafetz
Executive Branch Contempt Of Congress, Josh Chafetz
Josh Chafetz
After former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten refused to comply with subpoenas issued by a congressional committee investigating the firing of a number of United States Attorneys, the House of Representatives voted in 2008 to hold them in contempt. The House then chose a curious method of enforcing its contempt citation: it filed a federal lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment that Miers and Bolten were in contempt of Congress and an injunction ordering them to comply with the subpoenas. The district court ruled for the House, although that ruling was subsequently stayed …
The Illusory Eighth Amendment, John F. Stinneford
The Illusory Eighth Amendment, John F. Stinneford
John F. Stinneford
Although there is no obvious doctrinal connection between the Supreme Court’s Miranda jurisprudence and its Eighth Amendment excessive punishments jurisprudence, the two are deeply connected at the level of methodology. In both areas, the Supreme Court has been criticized for creating “prophylactic” rules that invalidate government actions because they create a mere risk of constitutional violation. In reality, however, both sets of rules deny constitutional protection to a far greater number of individuals with plausible claims of unconstitutional treatment than they protect. This dysfunctional combination of over- and underprotection arises from the Supreme Court’s use of implementation rules as a …
Punishment Without Culpability, John F. Stinneford
Punishment Without Culpability, John F. Stinneford
John F. Stinneford
For more than half a century, academic commentators have criticized the Supreme Court for failing to articulate a substantive constitutional conception of criminal law. Although the Court enforces various procedural protections that the Constitution provides for criminal defendants, it has left the question of what a crime is purely to the discretion of the legislature. This failure has permitted legislatures to evade the Constitution’s procedural protections by reclassifying crimes as civil causes of action, eliminating key elements (such as mens rea) or reclassifying them as defenses or sentencing factors, and authorizing severe punishments for crimes traditionally considered relatively minor. The …
The Constitution According To Justices Scalia And Thomas: Alive And Kickin', Eric J. Segall
The Constitution According To Justices Scalia And Thomas: Alive And Kickin', Eric J. Segall
Eric J. Segall
No abstract provided.
Politics And Public Sector Employees: What's Gone Wrong With The Relationship Between Ministers And Public Servants - Why It Matters, And What Needs To Be Done To Fix It, Matthew S. R. Palmer Qc
Politics And Public Sector Employees: What's Gone Wrong With The Relationship Between Ministers And Public Servants - Why It Matters, And What Needs To Be Done To Fix It, Matthew S. R. Palmer Qc
The Hon Justice Matthew Palmer
Who Speaks For The ‘People’ On Policy?, Alan E. Garfield
Who Speaks For The ‘People’ On Policy?, Alan E. Garfield
Alan E Garfield
No abstract provided.
Are ‘We The People’ Meeting Our Responsibilities?, Alan E. Garfield
Are ‘We The People’ Meeting Our Responsibilities?, Alan E. Garfield
Alan E Garfield
No abstract provided.
Belling The Partisan Cats: Preliminary Thoughts On Identifying And Mending A Dysfunctional Constitutional Order, Mark Graber
Belling The Partisan Cats: Preliminary Thoughts On Identifying And Mending A Dysfunctional Constitutional Order, Mark Graber
Mark Graber
This paper sharpens debates over whether the Constitution of the United States and the American constitutional order are presently dysfunctional, the nature of any dysfunctions, and how underlying regime flaws are likely to be corrected. Rather than focusing primarily on constitutional text, this Article explores the dynamic ways in which constitutional processes have influenced and been influenced by the structure of constitutional politics. Constitutional dysfunction is best conceptualized as the failure of a constitutional order rather than as a consequence of a flawed constitutional text, and dysfunction typically occurs when a regime is unable to transition from a dysfunctional constitutional …
Section 1983 Civil Rights Litigation In The October 2005 Term, Martin Schwartz
Section 1983 Civil Rights Litigation In The October 2005 Term, Martin Schwartz
Martin A. Schwartz
No abstract provided.
Table Annexed To Article: Hamilton And Madison Deploy ‘System’ In Works Dated To 1787/88, 1790/91, 1793 And Post-Retirement Works, Peter J. Aschenbrenner
Table Annexed To Article: Hamilton And Madison Deploy ‘System’ In Works Dated To 1787/88, 1790/91, 1793 And Post-Retirement Works, Peter J. Aschenbrenner
Peter J. Aschenbrenner
The deployment of the word ‘system’ is surveyed, beginning with The Federalist essays, the focus being on the works of Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. In the second tranche of works, their efforts – now as opponents – in the bank bill debate are examined along with the appearance of ‘system’ in the Neutrality Proclamation debates; in the third tranche, Hamilton’s public letters (from his retirement as Secretary of the Treasury to his death in 1804) are surveyed; the fourth consists of Madison’s works included in Farrand’s volume 3 of his Records of the Federal Convention.
Nonprofits, Speech, And Unconstitutional Conditions, Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer
Nonprofits, Speech, And Unconstitutional Conditions, Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer
Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer
This Article proposes a new constitutional framework for approaching the issue of speech-related conditions on government funding accepted by nonprofits and demonstrates its application by reviewing the Court’s landmark decisions in this area. It argues that speech rights are generally inalienable as against the government under the First Amendment, and therefore any abridgement of such rights by the government—whether direct or indirect—is subject to strict scrutiny. As a result, the government is not permitted to buy an organization’s speech absent a compelling governmental interest in doing so and then only if the purchase is done in a manner that is …
The Interpretation Of Constitutional History, Or Charles Beard Becomes A Fortuneteller (With An Emphasis On Free Expression), Stephen M. Feldman
The Interpretation Of Constitutional History, Or Charles Beard Becomes A Fortuneteller (With An Emphasis On Free Expression), Stephen M. Feldman
Stephen M. Feldman
In "An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States", Charles A. Beard argued that the framers advocated for and defended the Constitution because of their personal economic interest, that the pursuit of common good was not so much a motive as a veneer. The current historical consensus is that Beard's thrust is incorrect. In this essay, I largely agree with this assessment, but his economic approach can add an important element to the discussion of constitutional history. And though his economic depiction does not closely fit the framing of the Constitution, it uncannily fits the Roberts Court's current …
Table Annexed To Article: Madison Deploys 'Constitution' (After March, 1817), Peter J. Aschenbrenner
Table Annexed To Article: Madison Deploys 'Constitution' (After March, 1817), Peter J. Aschenbrenner
Peter J. Aschenbrenner
The third volume of Farrand’s Records of the Federal Convention contains 58 entries written by James Madison after March 3, 1817, almost entirely of public correspondence; OCL adds his Detached Memoranda (his second political testament) to these post-retirement writings. OCL spreads Madison’s deployment of ‘constitution’ through an expanded 11 way grid of the possible semantic values.
Presidential Legislation In India: The Law And Practice Of Ordinances, Shubhankar Dam
Presidential Legislation In India: The Law And Practice Of Ordinances, Shubhankar Dam
Shubhankar Dam
India has a parliamentary system. Yet the president has authority to occasionally enact legislation (or ordinances) without involving parliament. This book is a study of ordinances at the national level in India, centred around three themes. First, it tells the story of how an artefact of British constitutional history, over time, became part of India’s legislative system. Second, it offers an empirical account of the ways in which presidents have resorted to ordinances in post-independence India. Third, the book analyses a range of ordinance-related questions, including some that are yet to be judicially adjudicated. In the process, the book explains …
Respecting Democratic Constitutional Change, Craig M. Scott
Respecting Democratic Constitutional Change, Craig M. Scott
Craig M. Scott
On Checking The Artifacts Of Canaan: A Comment On Levinson's "Confrontation", Thomas L. Shaffer
On Checking The Artifacts Of Canaan: A Comment On Levinson's "Confrontation", Thomas L. Shaffer
Thomas L. Shaffer
No abstract provided.
Board Meeting Prayer Bound For Supreme Court In Church-State Case, Richard Garnett
Board Meeting Prayer Bound For Supreme Court In Church-State Case, Richard Garnett
Richard W Garnett
ABC News quoted Rick Garnett in the article by Ariane de Vogue. Richard Garnett, an expert on church-state issues at the Notre Dame Law School says, “At the heart of this new case is whether the court should stick with a relatively bright-line rule that treats legislative prayers as presumptively permissible, given their long use in our country, or whether the court should move to more of an all-things-considered inquiry that treats such prayers like Christmas displays and the like.”
Avoiding Constitutional Questions As A Three-Branch Problem, William K. Kelley
Avoiding Constitutional Questions As A Three-Branch Problem, William K. Kelley
William K. Kelley
This article criticizes the cardinal rule of statutory construction known as the avoidance canon - that statutes must be interpreted to avoid raising serious constitutional questions - as failing to respect the proper constitutional roles of both Congress and the Executive. It argues that the avoidance canon in practice cannot be grounded in legislative supremacy, which is the common justification for it offered by the Supreme Court, because it assumes without foundation that Congress would always prefer not to come close to the constitutional line in enacting statutes. Instead, the avoidance canon creates pressure for courts to adopt statutory meanings …
The New Federalism, The Spending Power, And Federal Criminal Law, Richard W. Garnett
The New Federalism, The Spending Power, And Federal Criminal Law, Richard W. Garnett
Richard W Garnett
It is difficult in constitutional-law circles to avoid the observation that we are living through a revival of federalism. Certainly, the Rehnquist Court has brought back to the public-law table the notion that the Constitution is a charter for a government of limited and enumerated powers, one that is constrained both by that charter's text and by the structure of the government it creates. This allegedly revolutionary Court seems little inclined, however, to revise or revisit its Spending Power doctrine, and it remains settled law that Congress may disburse funds in pursuit of ends not authorized explicitly in Article I …
Chief Justice Rehnquist's Enduring Democratic Constitution, Richard W. Garnett
Chief Justice Rehnquist's Enduring Democratic Constitution, Richard W. Garnett
Richard W Garnett
William H. Rehnquist's essay, The Notion of a Living Constitution, was delivered as the Will E. Orgain Lecture and then published thirty years ago, back when Rehnquist was still a relatively junior Associate Justice. The piece provides a clear and coherent statement of Rehnquist's judicial philosophy, and the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy and the Texas Law Review deserve thanks for their initiative and generosity in reproducing it, in memory of his life and work.
This introduction to Rehnquist's essay highlights his view that the Notion of a Living Constitution was to be resisted, not out of pious …
Severability, John C. Nagle
Severability, John C. Nagle
John Copeland Nagle
When a court holds a provision of a statute unconstitutional, a question remains regarding the validity of the remainder of the statute. The court may find that the unconstitutional provision may be severed from the statute and leave the remainder of the statute in effect. Alternatively, the court may hold that the unconstitutional provision cannot be severed and invalidate the entire statute. This article argues that the jurisprudence surrounding the issue of severability is confusing and inconsistent. After explaining the concept of severability and its ramifications for statutes, I trace the development of the current judicial test for determining when …
The Constitutional Theory Of The Fourth Amendment, Gerard V. Bradley
The Constitutional Theory Of The Fourth Amendment, Gerard V. Bradley
Gerard V. Bradley
No abstract provided.
Beguiled: Free Exercise Exemptions And The Siren Song Of Liberalism, Gerard V. Bradley
Beguiled: Free Exercise Exemptions And The Siren Song Of Liberalism, Gerard V. Bradley
Gerard V. Bradley
No abstract provided.
The Fourth Amendment Status Of Stored E-Mail: The Law Professors' Brief In Warshak V. United States, Susan Freiwald, Patricia L. Bellia
The Fourth Amendment Status Of Stored E-Mail: The Law Professors' Brief In Warshak V. United States, Susan Freiwald, Patricia L. Bellia
Patricia L. Bellia
This paper contains the law professors' brief in the landmark case of Warshak v. United States, the first federal appellate case to recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy in electronic mail stored with an Internet Service Provider (ISP). While the 6th circuit's opinion was subsequently vacated and reheard en banc, the panel decision will remain extremely significant for its requirement that law enforcement agents must generally acquire a warrant before compelling an ISP to disclose its subscriber's stored e-mails. The law professors' brief, co-authored by Susan Freiwald (University of San Francisco) and Patricia L. Bellia (Notre Dame) and signed by …
The Law Of Nations As Constitutional Law, Anthony J. Bellia, Bradford R. Clark
The Law Of Nations As Constitutional Law, Anthony J. Bellia, Bradford R. Clark
Anthony J. Bellia
Courts and scholars continue to debate the status of customary international law in U.S. courts, but have paid insufficient attention to the role that such law plays in interpreting and upholding several specific provisions of the Constitution. The modern position argues that courts should treat customary international law as federal common law. The revisionist position contends that customary international law applies only to the extent that positive federal or state law has adopted it. Neither approach adequately takes account of the Constitution’s allocation of powers to the federal political branches in Articles I and II or the effect of these …