Digital Commons Network^™

"Let Congress Do It": The Case For An Absolute Rule Of Statutory Stare Decisis, Lawrence C. Marshall

Michigan Law Review

The sporadic way that various members of the Supreme Court and the legal community treat the principle of stare decisis is increasingly striking. At times, the rule of stare decisis appears to be trotted out in defense of decisions that were actually reached on quite independent grounds. At other times, the dictates of the rule appear to be casually ignored when other factors call for the overruling of a precedent. It is tempting, therefore, to dismiss the rule of stare decisis as a mere rhetorical device, much like the question of whether a Supreme Court nominee's judicial philosophy is an …

Separation Of Powers And The Independent Governmental Entity After Mistretta V. United States, Mary Buffington

Louisiana Law Review

No abstract provided.

A ‘Non-Power’ Looks At Separation Of Powers, Alan B. Morrison

Philip A. Hart Memorial Lecture

On April 6, 1989, Dean, Alan B. Morrison of George Washington Law, delivered the Georgetown Law Center’s ninth Annual Philip A. Hart Memorial Lecture: "A ‘Non-Power’ Looks at Separation of Powers."

Dean Morrison is the Lerner Family Associate Dean for Public Interest & Public Service at GW Law. He is responsible for creating pro bono opportunities for students, bringing a wide range of public interest programs to the law school, encouraging students to seek positions in the non-profit and government sectors, and assisting students find ways to fund their legal education to make it possible for them to pursue careers …

Foreign Policy And The Separation Of Powers: Who Sets The Course For The Ship Of State, Robert A. Friedlander

Cornell International Law Journal

No abstract provided.

How Separation Of Powers Protects Individual Liberties, Cynthia R. Farina

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Separation Of Powers: A New Look At The Functionalist Approach, Suzanne Prieur Clair

Case Western Reserve Law Review

No abstract provided.

History And Executive Removal Power: Morrison V. Olson And Separation Of Powers, John L. Gedid

Campbell Law Review

Why have there been such wide divergences in the cases involving executive power to remove? This Article attempts a partial answer to that puzzle.

Symposium: Judicial Refusal To Exercise Congressional Grants Of Jurisdiction And Separation Of Powers, J. Timothy Mc Donald

Case Western Reserve Law Review

No abstract provided.

Equitable Discretion To Dismiss Congressional-Plaintiff Suits: A Reassessment, Sophia C. Goodman

Case Western Reserve Law Review

No abstract provided.

Separation Of Powers After The Independent Counsel Decision, George J. Alexander

Santa Clara Law Review

No abstract provided.

Essential Elements Of Reform Of The War Powers Resolution, Mark L. Krotoski

Santa Clara Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Procedure And The Separation Of Powers In Minnesota, Maynard E. Pirsig, Randall M. Tietjen

William Mitchell Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Programs, Private Deciders: The Constitutionality Of Arbitration In Federal Programs, Harold H. Bruff

Publications

No abstract provided.

A Comment On The Rule Of Law Model Of Separation Of Powers, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

Isolationism Or Deference? The Alien Tort Claims Act And The Separation Of Powers, Victor A. Pappalardo

Michigan Journal of International Law

This Note examines the rationales behind Filartiga and other cases which have had the opportunity to pass upon its holding, notably the holdings in Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic and Forti v. Suarez- Mason. It then focuses on the validity of these rationales with respect to the constitutional separation of powers scheme. In so doing, it analyzes Filartiga's conclusions in light of the act of state and political question doctrines, two closely interrelated doctrines which have been at the forefront of the separation of powers criticisms of Filartiga. This Note concludes by suggesting that a clear case exists …

The Yonkers Case: Separation Of Powers As A Yardstick For Determining Official Immunity, Amy Walsh

Fordham Urban Law Journal

The author examines the application of the official immunity doctrine to a situation where a federal district court issued contempt citations to local legislators in Yonkers who refused to pass legislation as required by a consent decree. The author argues that the function test for official immunity is by its very nature conclusory, and thus courts, in close cases, should use a separation of powers analysis to inform their application of the function test. Courts should deploy this separation of powers analysis by finding that where an official act was based on a mixture of powers, a rebuttable presumption should …

A Two-Tiered Theory Of Consolidation And Separation Of Powers, David S. Yassky

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Note explores the jurisprudential implications of the New Deal watershed and elaborates a post-New Deal theory of allocation of governmental power. Part I begins with a discussion of the Federalist theory of separation of powers. For the Federalists, two conditions ensured an effective separation. First, governmental branches must be institutionally independent; each must be free from control by the others. Second, the branches must be functionally specialized; each must wield a distinct component of governmental power, so that the assent of all three is required for government action.

Until the New Deal, the Supreme Court incorporated this theory into …

Bad Judicial Activism And Liberal Federal-Courts Doctrine: A Comment On Professor Doernberg And Professor Redish, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

JUDUCIAL ACTIVISM IS often portrayed as a liberal vice. This perception is wrong both historically and, as Professor Redish argues, ³ currently as well. The federal judiciary has been and still is an activist institution, working with both substantive law and jurisdictional rules to achieve its own policy goals. It has done this in statutory, constitutional, and common-law matters. Specifically, the Supreme Court of the United States has actively-shaped the jurisdiction of the federal courts in a restrictive and generally conservative manner.

Professors Doernberg⁴ and Redish attack this last form of activism by the federal courts, activism in shaping …