Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Adjudicative fairness (1)
- Aggressive majoritarianism (1)
- Charles Beard (1)
- Conceptions of citizenship (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
-
- Constitutional adjudication (1)
- Constitutional history (1)
- Constitutional issues (1)
- Duty to listen (1)
- Ethics of caring (1)
- Exclusionary rule (1)
- Federalist (1)
- Feminist ethics (1)
- Illinois v. Gates (1)
- Massachusetts v. Sheppard (1)
- Moral decision-making (1)
- Participation in constitutional decisions (1)
- Rights and rules (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- U.S. v. Leon (1)
- Willful deafness (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Most Sacred Text: The Supreme Court's Use Of The Federalist Papers, James G. Wilson
The Most Sacred Text: The Supreme Court's Use Of The Federalist Papers, James G. Wilson
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
In interpreting the Constitution the Supreme Court has increasingly referred to The Federalist papers, a series of essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay during the struggle to ratify the Constitution. This article describes in narrative form how the Court has incorporated The Federalist into its opinions, and summarizes how constitutional historians and political scientists have evaluated The Federalist and the Constitution. This format highlights the limited nature of the Court's historical inquiry by demonstrating that the Court and constitutional scholars have been traveling in parallel universes. Either the Court has ignored or been unaware of the …
Gates, Leon, And The Compromise Of Adjudicative Fairness (Part Ii): Of Aggressive Majoritarianism, Willful Deafness, And The New Exception To The Exclusionary Rule, Joel Jay Finer
Cleveland State Law Review
Part I examined in a dialogue form the idea that Justice White and other members of the Leon majority had prejudged issues of law in earlier cases––pre-committed themselves in violation of their duty of impartiality––by elaborating in detailed, cohesive, comprehensive opinions, reasons why existing law was incorrect and had to be changed to permit a "good-faith, objective police reasonableness" exception to the exclusionary rule. These prejudgments precluded fair consideration of the merits in Leon. Beyond that, the Leon opinion itself, considered in view of the arguments of counsel and the scholarship in currency, evinced an agenda-driven pre-commitment to its outcome; …
Constitutional Citizenship, Paul Brest
Constitutional Citizenship, Paul Brest
Cleveland State Law Review
Our practices for determining issues of public morality are deeply flawed. We rely too heavily on the Supreme Court of the United States to determine them for us. We give too much responsibility to the Court, and too little to other institutions; we evade our own responsibility as citizens in a democratic polity. The problem is not that too many issues are "constitutionalized," for many of our most important public moral issues are quite properly treated as constitutional questions. The problem, rather, is that we assume that only the Court is authorized to decide, or is capable of deciding, constitutional …