Digital Commons Network^™

Partisan Gerrymandering: The Promise And Limits Of State Court Judicial Review, Norman R. Williams

Marquette Law Review

In 2021, the Oregon Legislature succeeded in redrawing the state’s legislative and congressional districts, but the new redistricting plans were immediately challenged in state court as partisan gerrymanders. The Oregon Supreme Court rejected the challenge to the state legislative map, but its analysis, which accorded significant deference to the legislature’s choices, raised more questions than answers about the appropriate level of scrutiny for state redistricting plans. A special, five-judge court likewise rejected the gerrymandering challenge to the congressional map, and, while its analysis was less deferential, its decision also left unanswered the fundamental question regarding at what point a redistricting …

A Critical Jeffersonian Mind For A Community Reinvestment Bind, Chaz D. Brooks

Marquette Benefits and Social Welfare Law Review

The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 ("CRA") primarily sought to remedy decades of government sanctioned disinvestment in so-called “redlined communities.” Through the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation and later the Federal Housing Administration, the United States of America created from whole cloth a structure that encouraged and subsidized the explosion of homeownership in white American households. Following decades of racialized wealth generation, the United States had a change of heart. Congress determined that financiers needed a gentle push to invest fairly. Additionally, Congress wanted one thing clear in the drafting of this remedy— it must not allocate credit. This essay considers …

What Is The Trade-Off: Are New Trade Deals Worth The Changes To Pharmaceutical Patents?, Kaitlyn Carter

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None.

Disgorging Emoluments, Caprice L. Roberts

Marquette Law Review

This Article is about unjust enrichment. It includes a theory of an unjust

enrichment cause of action against executive actors who receive unlawful

emoluments. Interpretations of the boundaries of unlawful emoluments range

from receipt of a gift or benefit because of the position of power held to quid

pro quo exchanges of a thing of value in exchange for government information

or advantage. Wherever the proper line, the purpose of the law of unjust

enrichment is to prevent and undo benefits one has no right to retain. It

achieves those goals with the use of restitution remedies including

disgorgement of …

Political Parties And Constitutional Fidelity

Marquette Law Review

In the aftermath of the 2016 presidential election, fewer themes have received more attention from scholars and public commentators than political polarization. However, given the recent focus on tension and conflict in contemporary American society, the present also seems an especially appropriate moment to investigate those fundamental structures that have successfully worked in the opposite direction to bind and stabilize the American polity. The goal of this paper is precisely this task, and to emphasize the centrality of one particular structure that has played such a stabilizing function: the political parties. Parties are often invoked in discussions of political polarization. …

The Plot To Overthrow Genocide: State Laws Mandating Education About The Foulest Crime Of All

Marquette Law Review

This Article shines a light on a little noticed phenomenon in American law: the promulgation of ten state statutes and one state regulation, each requiring education about genocide in elementary and/or secondary schools. The mandates, adopted from 1989 through 2018, appear to be only the beginning inasmuch as in 2017 another nineteen states publicly pledged to pass such mandates as well.

The Article describes each of the existing mandates and compares them to each other, including an analysis of the laws’ respective strong and weak points. This exposition, of interest in itself, also sets the stage for proposals to improve …

Constitutional Conflict And Congressional Oversight, Andrew Mccanse Wright

Marquette Law Review

In matters of oversight, Congress and the President have fundamentally incompatible views of their institutional roles within the constitutional structure. This Article offers an explanation of divergent branch behavior and legal doctrine. Congress, much like a party to litigation, views itself as having fixed substantive rights to obtain desired information from the Executive and private parties. In contrast, the Executive views itself like a party to a business transaction, in which congressional oversight requests are the opening salvo in an iterative negotiation process to resolve competing interests between co-equal branches. In general, legislators want to litigate and executive officers want …