Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Congress (4)
- United States Supreme Court (4)
- Administrative Procedure Act (3)
- Constitutionality (3)
- Federal agencies (3)
-
- Judicial review (3)
- Racial discrimination (3)
- Statutory interpretation (3)
- Authority (2)
- Discrimination (2)
- History (2)
- Jurisprudence (2)
- Legislative intent (2)
- Minorities (2)
- Presumptions (2)
- Regulation (2)
- Rulemaking (2)
- State courts (2)
- Textualism (2)
- Access to the courts (1)
- African Americans (1)
- And Regions; Jewish Law (1)
- Antitrust law (1)
- Appellate Body (1)
- Appellate Review; Courts; Sentencing and Punishment; Penology; Jurisprudence (1)
- Arbitrariness (1)
- Arbitrary and capricious (1)
- Areas (1)
- Bias (1)
- Bush v. Schiavo (1)
Articles 1 - 16 of 16
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Antitrust Antitextualism, Daniel A. Crane
Antitrust Antitextualism, Daniel A. Crane
Articles
Judges and scholars frequently describe antitrust as a common-law system predicated on open-textured statutes, but that description fails to capture a historically persistent phenomenon:judicial disregard of the plain meaning of the statutory texts and manifest purposes of Congress. This pattern of judicial nullification is not evenly distributed: when the courts have deviated from the plain meaning or congressional purpose, they have uniformly done so to limit the reach of antitrust liability or curtail the labor exemption to the benefit of industrial interests. This phenomenon cannot be explained solely or even primarily as a tug-of-war between a progressive Congress and conservative …
The Cost Of The Text, Richard A. Primus
The Cost Of The Text, Richard A. Primus
Articles
Christopher Serkin and Nelson Tebbe's Is the Constitution Special?explores many facets of constitutional interpretation. I will focus here on their observation that constitutional interpretation is "less textual" than statutory interpretation. I place the expression "less textual" in quotation marks because "textual" could mean many things, such that it would often be problematic to characterize one interpretive exercise as more or less textual than another. In Serkin and Tebbe's view, as I understand it, mainstream constitutional interpretation is "less textual " than statutory decisionmaking in that it is less constrained by the words of particular enacted clauses. As a convenient …
Remedial Restraint In Administrative Law, Nicholas Bagley
Remedial Restraint In Administrative Law, Nicholas Bagley
Articles
When a court determines that an agency action violates the Administrative Procedure Act, the conventional remedy is to invalidate the action and remand to the agency. Only rarely do the courts entertain the possibility of holding agency errors harmless. The courts’ strict approach to error holds some appeal: Better a hard rule that encourages procedural fastidiousness than a remedial standard that might tempt agencies to cut corners. But the benefits of this rule-bound approach are more elusive, and the costs much larger, than is commonly assumed. Across a wide range of cases, the reflexive invalidation of agency action appears wildly …
Jewish Honor Courts: Revenge, Retribution, And Reconciliation In Europe And Israel After The Holocaust, David Abraham
Jewish Honor Courts: Revenge, Retribution, And Reconciliation In Europe And Israel After The Holocaust, David Abraham
Articles
No abstract provided.
Empirical Doctrine, Jessie Allen
Empirical Doctrine, Jessie Allen
Articles
We can observe and measure how legal decision makers use formal legal authorities, but there is no way to empirically test the determinative capacity of legal doctrine itself. Yet, discussions of empirical studies of judicial behavior sometimes conflate judges’ attention to legal rules with legal rules determining outcomes. Doctrinal determinacy is not the same thing as legal predictability. The extent to which legal outcomes are predictable in given contexts is surely testable empirically. But the idea that doctrine’s capacity to produce or limit those outcomes can be measured empirically is fundamentally misguided. The problem is that to measure doctrinal determinacy, …
The Puzzling Presumption Of Reviewability, Nicholas Bagley
The Puzzling Presumption Of Reviewability, Nicholas Bagley
Articles
The presumption in favor of judicial review of agency action is a cornerstone of administrative law, accepted by courts and commentators alike as both legally appropriate and obviously desirable. Yet the presumption is puzzling. As with any canon of statutory construction that serves a substantive end, it should find a source in history, positive law, the Constitution, or sound policy considerations. None of these, however, offers a plausible justification for the presumption. As for history, the sort of judicial review that the presumption favors - appellate-style arbitrariness review - was not only unheard of prior to the twentieth century, but …
The Puzzling Presumption Of Reviewability, Nicholas Bagley
The Puzzling Presumption Of Reviewability, Nicholas Bagley
Articles
The presumption in favor of judicial review of agency action is a cornerstone of administrative law, accepted by courts and commentators alike as both legally appropriate and obviously desirable. Yet the presumption is puzzling. As with any canon of statutory construction that serves a substantive end, it should find a source in history, positive law, the Constitution, or sound policy considerations. None of these, however, offers a plausible justification for the presumption. As for history, the sort of judicial review that the presumption favors - appellate-style arbitrariness review - was not only unheard of prior to the twentieth century, but …
Federal Law In State Court: Judicial Federalism Through A Relational Lens, Charlton C. Copeland
Federal Law In State Court: Judicial Federalism Through A Relational Lens, Charlton C. Copeland
Articles
Enforcing federalism is most commonly thought to involve the search for a constitutional delegation of substantive power. Although in modern times the substantive power might be overlapping or shared authority, federalism enforcement proceeds from a determination about the site of substantive power. This conception of federalism enforcement preserves the Constitution's commitment to fractionated authority by determining whether power is legitimately possessed. Thus we understand significant federalism disputes in our age as framed by whether Congress has the authority to enact comprehensive health care reform legislation, or whether Congress has exceeded its authority in reenacting the Voting Rights Act's preclearance requirements. …
The Art Of Statutory Interpretation: Identifying The Interpretative Theory Of The Judges Of The United States Court Of Appeals For Veterans' Claims And The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit, Linda Jellum
Articles
No abstract provided.
Seeing Subtle Racism, Pat K. Chew
Seeing Subtle Racism, Pat K. Chew
Articles
Traditional employment discrimination law does not offer remedies for subtle bias in the workplace. For instance, in empirical studies of racial harassment cases, plaintiffs are much more likely to be successful if they claim egregious and blatant racist incidents rather than more subtle examples of racial intimidation, humiliation, or exclusion. But some groundbreaking jurists are cognizant of the reality and harm of subtle bias - and are acknowledging them in their analysis in racial harassment cases. While not yet widely recognized, the jurists are nonetheless creating important precedents for a re-interpretation of racial harassment jurisprudence, and by extension, employment discrimination …
A Gambling Paradox: Why An Origin-Neutral 'Zero-Quota' Is Not A Quota Under Gats Article Xvi, Donald H. Regan
A Gambling Paradox: Why An Origin-Neutral 'Zero-Quota' Is Not A Quota Under Gats Article Xvi, Donald H. Regan
Articles
In US-Gambling, the Appellate Body held that an origin-neutral prohibition on remote gambling (which is how they mostly viewed the United States law) was "in effect" a "zero-quota", and that such a "zero-quota" violated GATS Article XVI:2. That holding has been widely criticized, especially for what critics refer to as the Appellate Body's "effects test". This article argues that the Appellate Body's "in effect" analysis is not an "effects test" and is not the real problem. The real mistake is regarding a so-called "zero-quota" as a quota under Article XVI. That is inconsistent with the ordinary meaning of the word …
Crawford, Davis, And Way Beyond, Richard D. Friedman
Crawford, Davis, And Way Beyond, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
Until 1965, the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution hardly mattered. It was not applicable against the states, and therefore had no role whatsoever in the vast majority of prosecutions. Moreover, if a federal court was inclined to exclude evidence of an out-of-court statement, it made little practical difference whether the court termed the statement hearsay or held that the evidence did not comply with the Confrontation Clause.
Schiavo And Klein (Symposium), Evan H. Caminker
Schiavo And Klein (Symposium), Evan H. Caminker
Articles
When teaching federal courts, I sometimes find that students are slow to care about legal issues that initially seem picayune, hyper-technical, and unrelated to real-world concerns. It takes hard work to engage students in discussion of United States v. Klein,1 notwithstanding its apparent articulation of a foundational separation of powers principle that Congress may not dictate a "rule of decision" governing a case in federal court. A Civil War-era decision about the distribution of war spoils, one the Supreme Court has hardly ever cited since and then only to distinguish it, in cases involving takings and spotted owls? Yawn.
Federalism, Preclearance, And The Rehnquist Court, Ellen D. Katz
Federalism, Preclearance, And The Rehnquist Court, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Lopez v. Monterey County is an odd decision. Justice O'Connor's majority opinion easily upholds the constitutionality of a broad construction of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in language reminiscent of the Warren Court. Acknowledging the "substantial 'federalism costs" resulting from the VRA's "federal intrusion into sensitive areas of state and local policymaking," Lopez recognizes that the Reconstruction Amendments "contemplate" this encroachment into realms "traditionally reserved to the States." Justice O'Connor affirms as constitutionally permissible the infringement that the section 5 preclearance process "by its nature" effects on state sovereignty, and applies section 5 broadly, holding the statute …
State Responses To Task Force Reports On Race And Ethnic Bias In The Courts, Suellyn Scarnecchia
State Responses To Task Force Reports On Race And Ethnic Bias In The Courts, Suellyn Scarnecchia
Articles
While several states have embarked on studies of race and ethnic bias in their courts, Minnesota is only the sixth to publish its report to date. As Minnesota joins the ranks of states with published reports, it is worthwhile to assess the impact of the five earlier published reports from other states. Final reports have been published in Michigan (1989), Washington (1990), New York (1991), Florida (1991) and New Jersey (1992). The published reports make findings and provide several specific recommendations for change. This article will review the published findings and recommendations of the task forces and will discuss the …
Appellate Review Of Refusals To Depart, David Yellen