Digital Commons Network^™

The Personhood Paradox: Citizens United As Rejection Of Corporate Personhood?, Stefan J. Padfield

ConLawNOW

This ConLawNOW submission is an excerpt from a previously published piece. The following abstract is from that piece.

UCLA Law Professor Adam Winkler has published an excellent book on the history of corporate rights. The book, We the Corporations: How American Businesses Won Their Civil Rights, “reveals the secret history of one of America’s most successful yet least-known ‘civil rights movements’—the centuries-long struggle for equal rights for corporations.” The book has been highly praised by some of the greatest minds in corporate and constitutional law, and the praise is well-deserved. However, the book is not without its controversial assertions, …

The Continuing Validity Of The Electoral College: A Quantitative Confirmation, Audrey J. Lynn

ConLawNOW

In recent years, efforts to undermine or discard the Electoral College have gained substantial momentum, leading to a need for objective answers about how the system affects presidential elections. Using accessible quantitative techniques, this article answers three essential questions about the purposes and effects of the Electoral College using a unique approach that measures the electoral system’s success and potential in terms that correspond to its raison d'être, parameterizing the problem in terms of satisfaction and population instead of voters. This article dispenses with arcane, voter-based statistical models. It recognizes the Electoral College as a discrete mathematical system and applies …

Symposium: 50 Years With The 25th Amendment: The Role Of The White House Counsel In The Twenty-Fifth Amendment: Advising On Presidential Disability, Nancy Kassop

ConLawNOW

This article examines the role of the White House Counsel in counseling and advising the President and administration about the provisions of the Twenty-fifth Amendment providing for removal of the President when the President is unable to perform the duties of office. Throughout the amendment's history, presidents and their advisors have been reluctant to formally invoke it, fearing that a public admission of "disability" will weaken a president's political influence. The White House Counsel must often navigate between the legal and constitutional requirements of the amendment, on the one hand, and considerations of a President's continued political viability, on the …

Symposium: 50 Years With The 25th Amendment: Celebrating The Presidential Inability Provisions Of The Twenty-Fifth Amendment, Joel K. Goldstein

ConLawNOW

The presidential inability provisions of the Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution represent an important contribution to ensuring presidential continuity. The framers of the Amendment responded in a thoughtful and effective way to a series of problems which history had disclosed which had made past officials reluctant to transfer presidential powers even from clearly disabled presidents. Adoption of the Amendment represented an impressive legislative accomplishment. The presidential inability provisions provide clear, workable and reasonable procedures which allow government officials to handle a range of scenarios involving presidential incapacity.