Digital Commons Network^™

Normalizing "Erie", Suzanna Sherry

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Article argues that the Erie doctrine should be normalized by bringing it into line with ordinary doctrines of federalism. Under ordinary federalism doctrines-such as the dormant commerce clause, implied preemption, federal preclusion law, and certain special "enclaves" of federal common law courts will displace state law to protect federal interests even when neither Congress nor the Constitution clearly articulates those interests. But under the Eric doctrine, the Supreme Court has mandated exactly the opposite approach: state law trumps federal interests unless those interests have been legislatively codified. This striking anomaly has not been noticed, in part because the voluminous …

"The Threes": Re-Imagining Supreme Court Decisionmaking, Tracey E. George, Chris Guthrie

Vanderbilt Law Review

Article III is odd. In contrast to Articles 12 and II, which specify in some detail how the legislative and executive branches are to be assembled, Article III says virtually nothing about the institutional design of the Supreme Court.

Consistent with this Constitutional silence, the Court's look, shape, and behavior have adapted to changed circumstances. For example, the Court's membership has changed substantially. Initially, six Justices sat on the Court; in time, the Court grew to ten and shrank to seven. Only in 1869 did it settle at nine. Likewise, the Court's jurisdiction has changed, first expanding, then contracting, and …

Symposium: Federalism's Future, Jeffrey R. Pettit

Vanderbilt Law Review

Two years have passed since my predecessor, Mike Smith, sat in Professor Barry Friedman's office to begin choosing a topic for the Symposium that now sits before you. Although choosing a topic for a symposium two years in advance of its occurrence can be a difficult task, the topic they agreed upon, Federalism's Future, transcends the risk of becoming outdated. If the Supreme Court's struggle to articulate a "reasoned principle" in balancing the powers and responsibilities of our state and federal governments in Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, and later in New York v. United States,2 is any …

Why The Supreme Court Overruled "National League Of Cities", Mark Tushnet

Vanderbilt Law Review

We are now in the midst of a confused era for federalism doctrine. A court of appeals has read the Supreme Court's precedents for at least as much as they are worth in holding that Congress, in enacting the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, exceeded the power the Commerce Clause grants it., The Supreme Court itself has been unable to develop a stable constitutional doctrine about the roles of Congress and the courts in protecting federalism. Every time the Supreme Court has wandered into the federalism forest, it has gotten lost. For a while, scholars believed we understood why. …

Federalism, Untamed, Ann Althouse

Vanderbilt Law Review

Do you rankle at those amorphous rhapsodies about "Our Federalism" indulged in by judges who relegate civil rights litigants to state courts?' Why would anyone see cases in which state officials stand charged of violating the rights of individuals as presenting an occasion for deference to the states? If federal rights take precedence over state policies and practices, is it not perverse to prefer adjudication in the courts that have the strongest bias in favor of state interests? If jurisdiction is a duty and declining jurisdiction consequently a dubious business, shouldn't we reject judge-made doctrine and statutory interpretation that restrict …

The Abstention Doctrine: A Problem Of Federalism, Joyce Britt

Vanderbilt Law Review

Equitable abstention refers to the deference a federal court will give a state tribunal to determine the rights of the litigants, even though technically, a federal court could entertain the action, whether by means of diversity of citizenship or because of a federal issue involved. Because of comity, or convenience, or a sense of balance in the federal system, or better handling of the problem, or some other reason of policy, federal courts at times have required a litigant to proceed in the state courts before invoking federal court jurisdiction. How this doctrine arose, its extensions and limitations form the …

Book Reviews, Stanley D. Rose (Reviewer), Wallace Mendelson (Reviewer), Lawrence Herman (Reviewer), William R. Anderson (Reviewer)

Vanderbilt Law Review

THE PRESIDENCY OF JOHN ADAMS, THE COLLAPSE OF FEDERALISM, 1795-1800. By Stephen G. Kurtz-- Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1957. Pp. 448. $8.50.

==============================

THE JEFFERSONIAN REPUBLICANS, THE FORMATION OF PARTY ORGANIZATION, 1789-1801. By Noble E. Cunningham, Jr.-- Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1957. Pp. x, 279. $6.00.

==============================

THE SUPREME COURT FROM TAFT TO WARREN-- By Alpheus T. Mason-- Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1958. Pp. 250. $4.95.

===============================

THE LAW OF AWOL. By Alfred Avins. New York: Oceana Publications, 1957. Pp. xxxi, 288. $4.95. --

===============================

TRAFFIC VICTIMS, TORT LAW & INSURANCE. By Leon Green. …