Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Race and law (8)
- Congressional districts (7)
- Gerrymandering (7)
- LULAC v. Perry (7)
- Latinos (7)
-
- Redistricting (7)
- Texas (7)
- United States Supreme Court (7)
- Voting Rights Act (7)
- Elections (6)
- Equal Protection Clause (6)
- Congress (2)
- Political parties (2)
- Academic performance (1)
- Book reviews (1)
- Bureaucracy (1)
- Committee for Educational Equality v. State (1)
- Common good (1)
- Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues (1)
- Desegregation (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Domestic surveillance (1)
- Educational outcomes (1)
- Government (1)
- Harry Potter (1)
- History (1)
- Kansas City (1)
- Kennedy (Anthony) (1)
- Lawmaking (1)
- Legitimacy of governments (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The Nsa Domestic Surveillance Program: An Analysis Of Congressional Oversight During An Era Of One-Party Rule, Tara M. Sugiyama, Marisa Perry
The Nsa Domestic Surveillance Program: An Analysis Of Congressional Oversight During An Era Of One-Party Rule, Tara M. Sugiyama, Marisa Perry
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
On December 16, 2005, the New York Times sounded a fire alarm when it revealed that, in response to the September 11, 2001 attacks, President George W Bush had issued a secret executive order permitting the National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct warrantless surveillance on individuals to unearth nascent terrorist activity. Congress responded to the disclosure of the NSA domestic surveillance program largely by shirking its oversight duties. This Note argues that when a single party controls both the executive and the legislative branches, the fire-alarm model fails to provide sufficient congressional oversight. Short of future elections altering the balance …
Harry Potter And The Half-Crazed Bureaucracy, Benjamin H. Barton
Harry Potter And The Half-Crazed Bureaucracy, Benjamin H. Barton
Michigan Law Review
What would you think of a government that engaged in this list of tyrannical activities: tortured children for lying; designed its prison specifically to suck all life and hope out of the inmates; placed citizens in that prison without a hearing; ordered the death penalty without a trial; allowed the powerful, rich, or famous to control policy; selectively prosecuted crimes (the powerful. go unpunished and the unpopular face trumped-up charges); conducted criminal trials without defense counsel; used truth serum to force confessions; maintained constant surveillance over all citizens; offered no elections and no democratic lawmaking process; and controlled the press? …
This Way To The Egress And Other Reflections On Partisan Gerrymandering Claims In Light Of Lulac V. Perry, Bernard Grofman
This Way To The Egress And Other Reflections On Partisan Gerrymandering Claims In Light Of Lulac V. Perry, Bernard Grofman
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
After winning control of both houses of the legislature and the governorship, Texas Republicans eventually succeeded in redistricting Texas’s congressional seats in 2003, replacing a 2001 court-drawn plan. LULAC v. Perry reviewed a number of challenges to that second redistricting. The decision deals with a multiplicity of issues, including, most importantly, the standard for violations of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the nature of tests for unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering. While there are some clear holdings in the case, several of them reflect different combinations of Justices in the majority and, since there are six different opinions, it …
Lulac On Partisan Gerrymandering: Some Clarity, More Uncertainty, Richard Briffault
Lulac On Partisan Gerrymandering: Some Clarity, More Uncertainty, Richard Briffault
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
In League of United Latin American Citizens (“LULAC”) v. Perry, the Supreme Court, for the second time in two years, agonized over partisan gerrymandering. LULAC’s rejection of a Democratic challenge to the Texas legislature’s mid-decade pro-Republican congressional redistricting resembles the Court’s 2004 dismissal of a Democratic gerrymandering suit against Pennsylvania’s pro-Republican congressional redistricting plan in Vieth v. Jubelirer. As in Vieth, the Justices wrangled over justiciability, the substantive standard for assessing the constitutionality of partisan gerrymandering claims, and the interplay of justiciability and constitutionality. As in Vieth, the Court was highly fragmented: Vieth produced five separate opinions, while LULAC took …
Self-Defeating Minimalism, Adam B. Cox
Self-Defeating Minimalism, Adam B. Cox
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Everyone wants a piece of Tom DeLay. The former majority leader is under investigation and indictment, and even the Supreme Court threatened last Term to undo one of his signal achievements. In 2003, DeLay orchestrated a highly unusual mid-decade revision of Texas’s congressional map. The revised map was a boon to Republicans, shifting the Texas congressional delegation from 15 Republicans and 17 Democrats to 21 Republicans and 11 Democrats. The map was attacked as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander and a violation of the Voting Rights Act. When the Supreme Court agreed to hear those challenges in LULAC v. Perry, many …
Cultural Compactness, Daniel R. Oritz
Cultural Compactness, Daniel R. Oritz
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
The Supreme Court’s opinions in LULAC v. Perry, the Texas redistricting case, confounded expectation. While many believed that the Court would develop the law governing partisan gerrymandering in one direction or another, it did not. As exactly before, such claims are justiciable but there is no law to govern them. In other words, the courthouse doors are open, but until some plaintiff advances a novel theory persuasive to five justices, no claims will succeed. On the other hand, few expected the Court to make any major changes to doctrine under the Voting Rights Act and Shaw v. Reno. But LULAC …
The Congressional Caucus For Women's Issues: An Inside Perspective On Lawmaking By And For Women, Julia L. Ernst
The Congressional Caucus For Women's Issues: An Inside Perspective On Lawmaking By And For Women, Julia L. Ernst
Michigan Journal of Gender & Law
This Article is written to inform constituencies who seek to advance the status of women through the federal legislative process- including lawmakers, Congressional staff, women's organizations, and interested individuals of the general public-about the inner workings of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues during the 108th Congress, particularly in the second session. Historians and academics studying women and the law may also find this Article useful. Commonly known as the Women's Caucus, this bipartisan group consists of women Representatives who work together to advance women's issues through raising awareness of and taking action on federal legislation and policy particularly affecting …
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, …
Urban Legends, Desegregation And School Finance: Did Kansas City Really Prove That Money Doesn't Matter?, Preston C. Green Iii, Bruce D. Baker
Urban Legends, Desegregation And School Finance: Did Kansas City Really Prove That Money Doesn't Matter?, Preston C. Green Iii, Bruce D. Baker
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
This Article examines whether conservative critics are correct in their assertion that the Kansas City, Missouri School District (KCMSD) desegregation plan clearly establishes that no correlation exists between funding and academic outcomes. The first section provides a summary of public education in KCMSD prior to 1977, the beginning of the Missouri v. Jenkins school desegregation litigation. The second and third sections analyze whether the Jenkins desegregation and concurrent school finance litigation (Committee for Educational Equality v. State) addressed these problems. The fourth section provides an overview of school finance litigation and explains how KCMSD desegregation plan has been …
From Laredo To Fort Worth: Race, Politics And The Texas Redistricting Case, Ellen D. Katz
From Laredo To Fort Worth: Race, Politics And The Texas Redistricting Case, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
LULAC v. Perry held that Texas violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act when it displaced nearly 100,000 Latino residents from a congressional district in Laredo to protect the Republican incumbent they refused to support. At the same time, the Justices let stand the dismantling of a so-called “coalition” district in Fort Worth where African-American voters comprising a minority of the district’s population allegedly enjoyed effective control in deciding the district’s representative. Only Justice Kennedy supported the outcome in both Laredo and Fort Worth. His opinion marks the first time that he, or indeed a majority of the Justices, …