Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The Originalist Case Against Congressional Supermajority Voting Rules, Dan T. Coenen
The Originalist Case Against Congressional Supermajority Voting Rules, Dan T. Coenen
Scholarly Works
Controversy over the Senate’s filibuster practice dominates modern discussion of American legislative government. With increasing frequency, commentators have urged that the upper chamber’s requirement of sixty votes to close debate on pending matters violates a majority-rulebased norm of constitutional law. Proponents of this view, however, tend to gloss over a more basic question: Does the Constitution’s Rules of Proceedings Clause permit the houses of Congress to adopt internal parliamentary requirements under which a bill is deemed “passed” only if it receives supermajority support? This question is important. Indeed, the House already has such a rule in place, and any challenge …
Exploiting Trauma: The So-Called Victim's Rights Amendment, Lynne Henderson
Exploiting Trauma: The So-Called Victim's Rights Amendment, Lynne Henderson
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Pitfalls Of Public Policy: The Case Of Arbitration Agreements, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Pitfalls Of Public Policy: The Case Of Arbitration Agreements, Jeffrey W. Stempel
Scholarly Works
As the juxtaposition of these quotations suggests, judges have long held disparate views on the legitimacy and value of “public policy” considerations as a basis for legal decision making. The popular notion posits that Justice Holmes and legal realists carried the day, making public policy analysis an ordinary part of the adjudication process. The story, of course, is more complex than this legal version of Don Quixote. Many judges and lawyers, including Justice Holmes in other writings, continued to speak of adjudication in more formalist and positivist terms, with most laypersons in apparent agreement. Judge Burroughs' view of public policy …
Terrorism And The Constitution, Christopher L. Blakesley
Terrorism And The Constitution, Christopher L. Blakesley
Scholarly Works
How do terrorism and the Iran-Contra hearings relate to the Constitution? My thesis is that there is a tendency for the executive of this or any nation to eschew even constitutionally mandated avenues of problem solving considered to be cumbersome, inefficient, or inimical to the executive’s vision of the national interest in foreign affairs. There is also a tendency to consider one’s own conduct and the conduct of one’s allies and friends to be justified when it is directed at goals deemed by the executive branch to be good. Constitutional provisions based on the checks and balances and separation of …