Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 13 of 13

Full-Text Articles in Law

The 2006 Winthrop And Frances Lane Lecture: The Unintended Legal And Policy Consequences Of The No Child Left Behind Act, Michael Heise Feb 2015

The 2006 Winthrop And Frances Lane Lecture: The Unintended Legal And Policy Consequences Of The No Child Left Behind Act, Michael Heise

Michael Heise

No abstract provided.


Campaign Finance, Federalism, And The Case Of The Long-Armed Donor, Todd E. Pettys Jan 2014

Campaign Finance, Federalism, And The Case Of The Long-Armed Donor, Todd E. Pettys

Todd E. Pettys

In its ruling last Term in McCutcheon v. FEC, the Court struck down federal campaign-finance laws that limited the aggregate amount of money that Shaun McCutcheon and other would-be campaign donors could give to a variety of political committees and to individuals running for Congress in states and districts other than their own. Chief Justice Roberts began his opinion for the plurality by declaring that "[t]here is no right more basic in our democracy than the right to participate in electing our political leaders." Retired justice John Paul Stevens has argued that the Court's ruling in McCutcheon is "a grossly …


Something To Lex Loci Celebrationis: Federal Marriage Benefits Following United States V. Windsor, Mary Margaret Meg Penrose Aug 2013

Something To Lex Loci Celebrationis: Federal Marriage Benefits Following United States V. Windsor, Mary Margaret Meg Penrose

Meg Penrose

This article provides one of the first substantive treatments of United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court's recent same-sex marriage case. The article's thesis proposes lex loci celebrationis (the place of marriage) as the proper method for determining marriage for federal law purposes. Failure to adopt lex loci celebrationis may violate the Fifth Amendment equal protection guarantee or the constitutional right to travel. Further, adoption of the lex loci celebrationis standard furthers marital stability and predictability.


Something To Lex Loci Celebrationis: Federal Marriage Benefits Following United States V. Windsor, Meg Penrose Aug 2013

Something To Lex Loci Celebrationis: Federal Marriage Benefits Following United States V. Windsor, Meg Penrose

Meg Penrose

This article provides one of the first substantive treatments of United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court's recent same-sex marriage case. The article's thesis proposes lex loci celebrationis (the place of marriage) as the proper method for determining marriage for federal law purposes. Failure to adopt lex loci celebrationis may violate the Fifth Amendment equal protection guarantee or the constitutional right to travel. Further, adoption of the lex loci celebrationis standard furthers marital stability and predictability.


Tocqueville’S Slow And Steady Democratic Order In Light Of Us V. Windsor: Same Sex Marriage, And The Dilemma Of Majority Tyranny, Federalism, And Equality Of Conditions, Harry M. Hipler Jul 2013

Tocqueville’S Slow And Steady Democratic Order In Light Of Us V. Windsor: Same Sex Marriage, And The Dilemma Of Majority Tyranny, Federalism, And Equality Of Conditions, Harry M. Hipler

Harry M Hipler

Tocqueville is a reliable interpreter of contemporary American life. His ideas written in the 1830s still resonate today. Tocqueville’s democratic order in Democracy in America (DA) is a dynamic process of socialization and democratization that balances liberty, authority, and equality of the individual in the community in order to obtain social and political justice. The USSC in US v. Windsor ruled that Section 3 of DOMA violated the doctrine of federalism and state sanctioned same-sex marriage. The decision followed Tocqueville’s gradual and progressive development of social and political justice that is crucial to a sustainable democratic order. In my research …


Religions As Sovereigns: Why Religion Is "Special", Elizabeth A. Clark Feb 2013

Religions As Sovereigns: Why Religion Is "Special", Elizabeth A. Clark

Elizabeth A. Clark

Commentators increasingly challenge religion’s privileged legal status, arguing that it is not “special” or distinct from other associations or philosophical or conscientious claims. I propose that religion is “special” because it functions metaphorically as a legal sovereign, asserting supreme authority over a realm of human life. Under a religion-as-sovereign theory, religious freedom can be understood as at least partial deference to a religious sovereign in a system of shared or overlapping sovereignty. This Article suggests that federalism, which also involves shared sovereignty, can provide a useful heuristic device for examining religious freedom. Specifically, the Article examines a range of federalism …


The Long And Winding Road From Monroe To Connick, Sheldon Nahmod Dec 2011

The Long And Winding Road From Monroe To Connick, Sheldon Nahmod

Sheldon Nahmod

In this article, I address the historical and doctrinal development of § 1983 local government liability, beginning with Monroe v. Pape in 1961 and culminating in the Supreme Court’s controversial 2011 failure to train decision in Connick v. Thompson. Connick has made it exceptionally difficult for § 1983 plaintiffs to prevail against local governments in failure to train cases. In the course of my analysis, I also consider the oral argument and opinions in Connick as well as various aspects of § 1983 doctrine. I ultimately situate Connick in the Court’s federalism jurisprudence which doubles back to Justice Frankfurter’s view …


The Posse Comitatus Act And Disaster Response, Michael Greenberger, Arianne Spaccarelli Oct 2010

The Posse Comitatus Act And Disaster Response, Michael Greenberger, Arianne Spaccarelli

Michael Greenberger

The federal government’s failure to quickly send active duty troops and other military assets to Louisiana in the wake of Hurricane Katrina primarily stems from its narrow interpretation of the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA), which generally bars the use of federal troops for domestic law enforcement. As this chapter explains, the complete breakdown of law and order during a catastrophic emergency such as Hurricane Katrina allows the president to unilaterally deploy federal troops. This authority to deploy federal troops in response to certain natural disasters, in accordance with the PCA and the Constitution, is found in the Insurrection Act, Stafford …


The Posse Comitatus Act And Disaster Response, Michael Greenberger, Arianne Spaccarelli Aug 2010

The Posse Comitatus Act And Disaster Response, Michael Greenberger, Arianne Spaccarelli

Michael Greenberger

The federal government’s failure to quickly send active duty troops and other military assets to Louisiana in the wake of Hurricane Katrina primarily stems from its narrow interpretation of the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA), which generally bars the use of federal troops for domestic law enforcement. As this chapter explains, the complete breakdown of law and order during a catastrophic emergency such as Hurricane Katrina allows the president to unilaterally deploy federal troops. This authority to deploy federal troops in response to certain natural disasters, in accordance with the PCA and the Constitution, is found in the Insurrection Act, Stafford …


Yes, Virginia: The President Can Deploy Federal Troops To Prevent The Loss Of A Major American City From A Devastating Natural Catastrophe, Michael Greenberger Dec 2009

Yes, Virginia: The President Can Deploy Federal Troops To Prevent The Loss Of A Major American City From A Devastating Natural Catastrophe, Michael Greenberger

Michael Greenberger

As a direct response to the lackadaisical and much criticized federal handling of Hurricane Katrina, a critical provision within the Fiscal Year 2007 Defense Authorization Act amended in October 2006 the Insurrection Act to allow the President to deploy Federal troops to respond to catastrophic natural disasters and other major domestic emergencies without a prior request from affected state or local governments. This amendment was passed over universal and bipartisan opposition by the Nation's governors, all of whom claimed that this provision upends the delicate balance between Federal and state responsibilities for responding to natural disasters. In fact, this amendment …


False Conflict: Who's In Charge Of National Public Health Catastrophes, Michael Greenberger Dec 2009

False Conflict: Who's In Charge Of National Public Health Catastrophes, Michael Greenberger

Michael Greenberger

Hurricane Katrina renewed an old debate concerning which level of government should lead the response effort to catastrophic disasters. Traditionally, emergency response is handled at the most local level possible. The National Response Plan (NRP) adheres to this tenet, while providing for extensive coordination between the federal government and states and localities, if necessary. In doing so, the NRP provides procedures to ensure that federal assets may be brought to bear, without stomping on the nation's time honored commitment to the principles of federalism.


The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act Of 2008: A Case Study Of The Need For Better Congressional Responses To Federalism Jurisprudence, Harper Jean Tobin May 2009

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act Of 2008: A Case Study Of The Need For Better Congressional Responses To Federalism Jurisprudence, Harper Jean Tobin

Harper Jean Tobin

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) is the first new civil rights statute enacted since the “federalism revolution” of 1995-2001, in which the Supreme Court announced new limitations on congressional authority. Among other things, these decisions invalidated civil rights remedies against states, declaring that Congress had failed to amass sufficient evidence of the need for legislation. Although passed in the shadow of these decisions, GINA’s limited legislative history makes it vulnerable to attack – potentially limiting its protections for millions of state employees. States will likely attack GINA on two grounds: first, that Congress relied only on its …


Taking Federalism Seriously: Lopez And The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, David B. Kopel, Glenn Harlan Reynolds Jan 1997

Taking Federalism Seriously: Lopez And The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, David B. Kopel, Glenn Harlan Reynolds

David B Kopel

In United States v. Lopez, the United States Supreme Court struck down the federal Gun Free School Zones law as not within congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. This article examines post-Lopez jurisprudence regarding the permissible scope of federal criminal law. Analyzing a wide variety of federal criminal laws challenged in post-Lopez cases (including arson, robbery, gun possession, drugs, violence against women, and abortion clinic disruption), the article shows how courts have followed or evaded Lopez. Studying the proposed federal ban on partial birth abortions, the article suggests that the ban is not a lawful exercise of Congress' interstate commerce …