Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (28)
- Equal Protection Clause (11)
- Race and law (11)
- Congress (8)
- Supreme Court (8)
-
- Congressional districts (6)
- Elections (6)
- Gerrymandering (6)
- LULAC v. Perry (6)
- Latinos (6)
- Redistricting (6)
- Texas (6)
- Voting Rights Act (6)
- Affirmative action (5)
- Capital punishment (5)
- Civil Rights Act (5)
- Constitution (5)
- Copyright law (5)
- Death penalty (5)
- Discrimination (5)
- Eighth Amendment (5)
- Juries (5)
- Kansas v. Marsh (5)
- Michigan (5)
- Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (5)
- Sentencing (5)
- Blurring (4)
- Copyright infringement (4)
- Federalism (4)
- File sharing (4)
Articles 31 - 52 of 52
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Supreme Court Affirms Oregon Physician Assisted Suicide Statute, Adam Braun
Supreme Court Affirms Oregon Physician Assisted Suicide Statute, Adam Braun
Public Interest Law Reporter
No abstract provided.
The Right To Say No To Discrimination: A Commentary On Rumsfeld V. Fair, Zachary Wolfe
The Right To Say No To Discrimination: A Commentary On Rumsfeld V. Fair, Zachary Wolfe
The Modern American
No abstract provided.
Stevens's Ratchet: When The Court Should Decide Not To Decide, Joel A. Flaxman
Stevens's Ratchet: When The Court Should Decide Not To Decide, Joel A. Flaxman
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Hidden underneath the racy death penalty issues in Kansas v. Marsh lurks a seemingly dull procedural issue addressed only in separate opinions by Justices Stevens and Scalia: whether the Court should have heard the case in the first place. As he did in three cases from the Court’s 2005 term, Justice Stevens argued in Marsh that the Court has no legitimate interest in reviewing state court decisions that overprotect federal constitutional rights. Instead, the Supreme Court should exercise its certiorari power to tip the scales against states and in favor of individuals. Granting certiorari in Marsh, Stevens argued, was not …
The Revolution Enters The Court: The Constitutional Significance Of Wrongful Convictions In Contemporary Constitutional Regulation Of The Death Penalty, Jordan Steiker
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Over the last decade, the most important events in American death pen-alty law have occurred outside the courts. The discovery of numerous wrongfully convicted death-sentenced inmates in Illinois led to the most substantial reflection on the American death penalty system since the late 1960s and early 1970s. Former Illinois Governor George Ryan, a Republi-can, first declared a moratorium on executions in 2000 and eventually commuted all 167 inmates on Illinois’s death row in 2003. The events in Illinois reverberated nationwide. Almost overnight, state legislative agendas shifted from expanding or maintaining the prevailing reach of the death penalty to studying its …
Anthony Kennedy's Blind Quest, Scot Powe, Steve Bickerstaff
Anthony Kennedy's Blind Quest, Scot Powe, Steve Bickerstaff
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
League of United Latin American Citizens [LULAC] v. Perry embraced, in the context of partisan gerrymandering, Felix Frankfurter’s conclusion that the Supreme Court should not enter the political thicket of legislative apportionment. Two years earlier in Vieth v. Jubelirer, the Court split 4–1–4 on the justiciability of partisan gerrymandering. O’Conner and the three conservatives held it was nonjusticiable. Each of the four moderate liberals offered a test showing it was justiciable. Kennedy dissented from the conservatives while simultaneously rejecting each of the four tests offered. He announced he was waiting for a better test. When far superior tests were offered …
Strict In Theory, Loopy In Fact, Nathaniel Persily
Strict In Theory, Loopy In Fact, Nathaniel Persily
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Most Supreme Court-watchers find the decision in LULAC v. Perry notable for the ground it breaks concerning Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the ground it refuses to break on the topic of partisan gerrymandering. I tend to think the Court’s patchwork application of Section 2 to strike down a district on vote dilution grounds is not all that dramatic, nor is its resolution of the partisan gerrymandering claims all that surprising. The truly unprecedented development in the case for me was Justice Scalia’s vote to uphold what he considered a racial classification under the Equal Protection Clause, …
Dilution's (Still) Uncertain Future, Graeme B. Dinwoodie, Mark D. Janis
Dilution's (Still) Uncertain Future, Graeme B. Dinwoodie, Mark D. Janis
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Dilution looked to be a potent weapon when Congress introduced it as § 43(c) of the Lanham Act in 1995. Indeed, some observers feared that it would be too potent (and in some contexts, such as cybersquatting, it successfully augmented traditional causes of action). But a series of court decisions, culminating in the Supreme Court’s 2003 Moseley v. V Secret Catalogue opinion, weakened dilution protection so profoundly that what remained wasn’t of much consequence. Congress has recently sought to breathe new life into dilution law, enacting the Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006 (“TDRA”). Some might see this as a …
Putting The Guesswork Back Into Capital Sentencing, Sean D. O'Brien
Putting The Guesswork Back Into Capital Sentencing, Sean D. O'Brien
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
In 1972, in Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court deemed it “incon-testable” that a death sentence is cruel and unusual if inflicted “by reason of [the defendant’s] race, religion, wealth, social position, or class, or if it is imposed under a procedure that gives room for the play of such prejudices.” Arbitrary and discriminatory patterns in capital sentencing moved the Court to strike down death penalty statutes that required judges or juries to cast thumbs-up or thumbs-down verdicts against offenders found guilty of capi-tal crimes. The issue of innocence was barely a footnote in Furman; the Court’s concerns focused on …
In The Service Of Secrets: The U.S. Supreme Court Revisits Totten, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 475 (2006), Douglas Kash, Matthew Indrisano
In The Service Of Secrets: The U.S. Supreme Court Revisits Totten, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 475 (2006), Douglas Kash, Matthew Indrisano
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Rebus Sic Stantibus: Notification Of Consular Rights After Medellin, Aaron A. Ostrovsky, Brandon E. Reavis
Rebus Sic Stantibus: Notification Of Consular Rights After Medellin, Aaron A. Ostrovsky, Brandon E. Reavis
Michigan Journal of International Law
This Comment examines, through principles of public international law and U.S. jurisprudence, the relationship between U.S. courts and the ICJ to determine if the former are indeed bound by the latter's decisions, proprio motu, or if instead some Executive action is required to make the decisions binding on the judiciary. Part of this examination will entail a discussion of the potential for dialogue between the ICJ and U.S. courts to "pierce the veil of sovereignty" that traditionally conceals the inner workings of sovereign states from the scrutiny of international tribunals. Based on this assessment, the Comment then addresses how …
Sanchez-Llamas V. Oregon And Article 36 Of The Vienna Convention On Consular Relations: The Supreme Court, The Right To Consul, And Remediation, Mark J. Kadish, Charles C. Olson
Sanchez-Llamas V. Oregon And Article 36 Of The Vienna Convention On Consular Relations: The Supreme Court, The Right To Consul, And Remediation, Mark J. Kadish, Charles C. Olson
Michigan Journal of International Law
This Article analyzes the Sanchez-Llamas decision and attempts to ascertain its impact on future Article 36 litigation.
Effective Alternatives To Causes Of Action Barred By The Eleventh Amendment, Jesse H. Choper, John C. Yoo
Effective Alternatives To Causes Of Action Barred By The Eleventh Amendment, Jesse H. Choper, John C. Yoo
NYLS Law Review
No abstract provided.
Introduction: A Tale Of (At Least) Two Federalisms, Denise C. Morgan
Introduction: A Tale Of (At Least) Two Federalisms, Denise C. Morgan
NYLS Law Review
No abstract provided.
Reconceptualizing Federalism, Erwin Chemerinsky
The Marriage Protection Act: A Lesson In Congressional Over-Reaching, Sarah Kroll-Rosenbaum
The Marriage Protection Act: A Lesson In Congressional Over-Reaching, Sarah Kroll-Rosenbaum
NYLS Law Review
No abstract provided.
Evolving Understandings Of American Federalism: Some Shifting Parameters, Edward A. Purcell Jr.
Evolving Understandings Of American Federalism: Some Shifting Parameters, Edward A. Purcell Jr.
NYLS Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Future Of Federalism? Pierce County V. Guillen As A Case Study, Lynn A. Baker
The Future Of Federalism? Pierce County V. Guillen As A Case Study, Lynn A. Baker
NYLS Law Review
No abstract provided.
Has The Supreme Court Incorrectly Expanded § 271(E)(1) To Risk A Regulatory Taking?, 5 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 216 (2006), Tara Stuart
UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law
The U.S.S.C. expanded the scope of the Hatch-Waxman Act’s safe harbor provision in Merck III to include protection for infringing use of any type of invention as long as a researcher intended to perform research reasonably relevant to FDA approval. This broad interpretation is inconsistent with the legislative intent of the Hatch-Waxman Act, and the policies of the U.S. patent system. Many patent owners may unnecessarily experience such a reduction in their property rights as to constitute a regulatory taking. The proposed narrow interpretation would rectify the constitutional problems and inconsistencies in infringement exemptions. Section 271(e)(1) should apply only to …
Recent Developments In Copyright Law: Selected U.S. Supreme Court, Court Of Appeals, And District Court Opinions Between February 1, 2005 And May 1, 2006, 6 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 40 (2006), Tyler T. Ochoa
UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law
This article highlights nine selected U.S. copyright law decisions handed down between February 1, 2005 and May 1, 2006. Two of the decisions concern peer-to-peer file sharing, including the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in MGM v. Grokster. One of the decisions questions the applicability of the idea/expression dichotomy to works of visual art. Two of the decisions discuss ownership of the renewal rights in a work under the 1909 Act when the author is deceased. One of the decisions interprets the requirement that an author register his or her work before filing an infringement action. Two of the decisions …
Evolving Objective Standards: A Developmental Approach To Constitutional Review Of Morals Legislation, Christian J. Grostic
Evolving Objective Standards: A Developmental Approach To Constitutional Review Of Morals Legislation, Christian J. Grostic
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that the Supreme Court's recent jurisprudence regarding morals legislation mirrors the findings of empirical research on moral and psychological development. Specifically, the Supreme Court upholds morals legislation only if it is justified by stage five reasoning. Part I examines significant Supreme Court cases related to morals legislation over the last 50 years and argues that the Supreme Court has consistently upheld morals legislation that is justified by stage five reasoning, while consistently striking down as unconstitutional morals legislation that is not. Part II argues that a developmental approach to constitutional review of morals legislation, while consistent with …
In The Wake Of Republic Of Austria V. Altmann: The Current Status Of Foreign Sovereign Immunity In United States Courts, David P. Vandenberg
In The Wake Of Republic Of Austria V. Altmann: The Current Status Of Foreign Sovereign Immunity In United States Courts, David P. Vandenberg
University of Colorado Law Review
In Republic of Austria v. Altmann, the United States Supreme Court held that conduct predating the passage of the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act of 1976 could nonetheless be grounds for a claim under the Act. This article begins with a historical survey of foreign sovereign immunity in the U.S. legal system. However, it is foremost an analysis and critique of the Supreme Court's opinion in Altmann. It argues that in the wake of the Court's decision, the floodgates will not open to a rash of foreign sovereign immunity claims based on long-ago conduct because other factors-both legal and practical will …