Law Commons^™

Life After Adarand: What Happened To The Metro Broadcasting Diversity Rationale For Affirmative Action In Telecommunications Ownership?, Leonard M. Baynes

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The United States Supreme Court severely restricted affirmative action policies in Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena. In this opinion, a majority of the Court held that all state or federally mandated affirmative action programs are to be analyzed under strict scrutiny. This test requires affirmative action programs to meet a compelling governmental interest and be narrowly tailored.

Adarand raised issues concerning the validity of the Federal Communications Commission's affirmative action ownership policies. Previously, the Court in Metro Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC found the FCC minority ownership policies constitutional under a lower (intermediate) standard of review. In Adarand, the Court …

Increasing Consumer Power In The Grievance And Appeal Process For Medicare Hmo Enrollees, Kenneth J. Pippin

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Federal law requires that Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) and Managed Care Organizations (MCOs) provide Medicare beneficiaries with specific grievance and appeal rights for challenging adverse decisions of these organizations. The Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) is charged with enforcing these regulations. Currently, however, HCFA contracts with HMOs, allowing them to enroll Medicare beneficiaries despite the fact that many of the statutory and regulatory requirements are ignored by the Medicare HMOs. This is problematic because the elderly Medicare population may not be able to independently and adequately challenge the HMO's denial of care or reimbursement. Because HCFA has been reluctant and …

Is The Clean Air Act Unconstitutional?, Cass R. Sunstein

Michigan Law Review

This Article deals with two linked questions. The first involves the future of the Clean Air Act. The particular concern is how the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") might be encouraged, with help from reviewing courts, to issue better ambient air quality standards, and in the process to shift from some of the anachronisms of 1970s environmentalism to a more fruitful approach to environmental protection. The second question involves the role of the nondelegation doctrine in American public law, a doctrine that shows unmistakable signs of revival. I will suggest that improved performance by EPA and agencies in general, operating in …

Moving Toward A Clearer Definition Of Insider Trading: Why Adoption Of The Possession Standard Protects Investors, Lacey S. Calhoun

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In recent years, insider trading has become a publicized focus of securities law enforcement. The definition of insider trading has emerged slowly through case law, and the term has been clarified by new theories of liability. The use and possession tests are two standards of liability used to judge the treatment of inside information. The use standard offers a defense to insider trading liability while the possession standard premises liability on mere possession of inside information. This Note argues that courts should adopt the possession standard because this standard better protects investors, a primary goal of the Securities Exchange Act …

Keeping Clean Waters Clean: Making The Clean Water Act's Antidegradation Policy Work, John A. Chilson

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note stresses the importance of making the Clean Water Act's antidegradation policy work in order to avoid a system of national waters of equally mediocre quality. The Nation's highest quality and most important waters are not receiving appropriate protection under the Act because the antidegradation policy contains vague definitions, the states fail to review water quality standards every three years and to entertain citizens' petitions, and the Environmental Protection Agency has not taken an active role in ensuring compliance with federal standards. This Note examines the schemes of the Great Lakes States and Florida and hypothesizes that similar provisions …

The Quality Of Mercy Is Not Strained: Interpreting The Notice Requirement Of The Federal Tort Claims Act, Ann Mcguire

Michigan Law Review

Under the Federal Tort Claims Act of 1946 {FfCA), the United States is liable for tort claims "in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances." This limited waiver of sovereign immunity, subject to certain exceptions, grants federal district courts exclusive jurisdiction over civil tort actions against the United States for money damages. The Act requires a claimant suing the United States to file her claim first with the appropriate administrative agency. If the agency denies the claim, it mails a notice of final denial, and the claimant then has six months to …