Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

Selected Works

Judicial review

2015

Articles 1 - 14 of 14

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

The Role Of Courts In Improving The Legislative Process, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov Nov 2015

The Role Of Courts In Improving The Legislative Process, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov

Dr. Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov

In recent years, there has been growing and widespread discontent with the state of the legislative process in many legislatures. At the same time, there is an emerging trend of courts exercising judicial review of the legislative process. Against this backdrop, this article explores the question of what can be the role of courts in efforts to improve the legislative process. The article offers a fresh perspective on the problems in the legislative process and their causes. It then develops a novel argument – that does not rest upon a cynical view of legislatures, nor on a rosy picture of …

Go to article

ג'ון הארט גרוניס?: פסיקתו של הנשיא גרוניס לאור התיאוריה החוקתית של אילי (John Hart Grunis?: The Jurisprudence Of Chief Justice Grunis In Light Of Ely's Constitutional Theory), Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov Nov 2015

ג'ון הארט גרוניס?: פסיקתו של הנשיא גרוניס לאור התיאוריה החוקתית של אילי (John Hart Grunis?: The Jurisprudence Of Chief Justice Grunis In Light Of Ely's Constitutional Theory), Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov

Dr. Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov

This Article analyzes the jurisprudence of CJ Grunis, the President of the Supreme Court of Israel, in light of John Hart Ely's constitutional theory. In an earlier case, during CJ Barak's Presidency, Justice Grunis publicly endorsed Ely's constitutional theory—which has put him at odds with the previous two Presidents of the Court, CJs Barak and Beinisch. Against this backdrop, this Article examines whether (or to what extent) Ely's theory can explain Justice Grunis's decisions as President of the Court. The Article argues that Ely's theory provides a more promising focal-point for evaluating President Grunis's public-law decisions than simplistic characterization such …

Go to article

Section 1983 Cases In The October 2004 Term, Martin A. Schwartz Oct 2015

Section 1983 Cases In The October 2004 Term, Martin A. Schwartz

Martin A. Schwartz

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Does The Observer Have An Effect?: An Analysis Of The Use Of The Dialogue Metaphor In Canada's Courts, Richard Haigh, Michael Sobkin Oct 2015

Does The Observer Have An Effect?: An Analysis Of The Use Of The Dialogue Metaphor In Canada's Courts, Richard Haigh, Michael Sobkin

Richard Haigh

In "Charter Dialogue Revisited-Or 'Much Ado About Metaphors,"' it is noted that the original idea behind the dialogue metaphor was simply to describe Canada's constitutional structure. Despite this, the metaphor has been criticized for having normative content and influencing courts and legislatures. In this commentary, the authors analyze all Supreme Court of Canada and lower court uses of the dialogue metaphor and conclude that, with some exceptions, the courts have employed the metaphor properly, i.e., descriptively. Since, however, the metaphor can be misapplied-used other than to describe or explain the relationship between the courts and legislatures in Canada-the authors recommend …

Go to article

Taking State Constitution Seriously, Marvin Krislov, Daniel M. Katz Sep 2015

Taking State Constitution Seriously, Marvin Krislov, Daniel M. Katz

Daniel M Katz

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Deference Lotteries, Jud Mathews Aug 2015

Deference Lotteries, Jud Mathews

Jud Mathews

When should courts defer to agency interpretations of statutes, and what measure of deference should agencies receive? Administrative law recognizes two main deference doctrines — the generous Chevron standard and the stingier Skidmore standard — but Supreme Court case law has not offered a bright-line rule for when each standard applies.Many observers have concluded that courts’ deference practice is an unpredictable muddle. This Article argues that it is really a lottery, in the sense the term is used in expected utility theory. Agencies cannot predict which deference standard a court will apply or with what effect, but they have a …

Go to article

Judicial Review Of Icann Domain Name Dispute Decisions, David E. Sorkin Jul 2015

Judicial Review Of Icann Domain Name Dispute Decisions, David E. Sorkin

David E. Sorkin

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Reconciling With The Past: John Willis And The Question Of Judicial Review In Interwar And Postwar England, Peter L. Lindseth Apr 2015

Reconciling With The Past: John Willis And The Question Of Judicial Review In Interwar And Postwar England, Peter L. Lindseth

Peter L. Lindseth

This contribution was prepared for a conference at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law in honor of John Willis, the late Anglo-Canadian administrative law theorist who died in 1997. It will appear in a forthcoming issue of the University of Toronto Law Journal. Throughout his career, John Willis puzzled over the way in which both popular and elite opinion in England (not to mention throughout the Commonwealth and in the United States) persistently, and in his view uncritically, equated the "Rule of Law" in important respects with judicial review in the administrative state. Willis believed this attachment to judicial …

Go to article

The Coherentism Of Democracy And Distrust, Michael C. Dorf Feb 2015

The Coherentism Of Democracy And Distrust, Michael C. Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Majoritarian Difficulty And Theories Of Constitutional Decision Making, Michael C. Dorf Feb 2015

Majoritarian Difficulty And Theories Of Constitutional Decision Making, Michael C. Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

Recent scholarship in political science and law challenges the view that judicial review in the United States poses what Alexander Bickel famously called the "counter-majoritarian difficulty." Although courts do regularly invalidate state and federal action on constitutional grounds, they rarely depart substantially from the median of public opinion. When they do so depart, if public opinion does not eventually come in line with the judicial view, constitutional amendment, changes in judicial personnel, and/or changes in judicial doctrine typically bring judicial understandings closer to public opinion. But if the modesty of courts dissolves Bickel's worry, it raises a distinct one: Are …

Go to article

Moral Rights, Judicial Review, And Democracy: A Response To Horacio Spector, Laura S. Underkuffler Feb 2015

Moral Rights, Judicial Review, And Democracy: A Response To Horacio Spector, Laura S. Underkuffler

Laura S. Underkuffler

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Proportionality And The Relevance Of Rights, Jud Mathews Dec 2014

Proportionality And The Relevance Of Rights, Jud Mathews

Jud Mathews

It is now well known that proportionality-based balancing has become the dominant approach to the judicial review of legislation that limits constitutional rights. But has proportionality outgrown rights? In other words, are specific constitutional rights — as opposed to, say, a general right to proportional treatment — necessary, or desirable, once courts have adopted proportionality analysis? This issue animates the debate between Professors Luc Tremblay and Matthias Klatt in the International Journal of Constitutional Law. In this comment, I weigh in on the Tremblay/Klatt debate, and make a case for the continued relevance of rights in proportionality balancing.

Go to article

Searching For Proportionality In U.S. Administrative Law, Jud Mathews Dec 2014

Searching For Proportionality In U.S. Administrative Law, Jud Mathews

Jud Mathews

There is no such thing as “proportionality review” in American administrative law, but instead, a number of doctrines that courts deploy to evaluate agency exercises of discretion. In some respects, these frameworks for review resemble proportionality in operation, but there are also notable differences. This essay surveys the doctrines governing judicial review of administrative discretion in the United States, highlighting three distinguishing features of the American approach. First, American judicial review is characterized by a high degree of unpredictability, not only with respect to outcomes, but often with respect to what framework of review is applicable. Second, while classical proportionality …

Go to article

Constituencies And Contemporaneousness In Reason-Giving: Thoughts And Direction After T-Mobile, Donald J. Kochan Dec 2014

Constituencies And Contemporaneousness In Reason-Giving: Thoughts And Direction After T-Mobile, Donald J. Kochan

Donald J. Kochan

This Article presents a framework for reason giving requirements in administrative law that includes a demand on agencies that reasons be produced contemporaneously with agency decisions where multiple constituencies (including regulated entities) and not just the courts (and judiciary review) are served and respected as consumers of the reasons. The Article postulates that the January 2015 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of T-Mobile South, LLC v. City of Roswell may prove to be groundbreaking and stir this framework to the forefront of administrative law decisionmaking. There are some fundamental yet very understated lessons in the T-Mobile …

Go to article