Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (70)
- University of Colorado Law School (35)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (25)
- Georgetown University Law Center (13)
- Fordham Law School (7)
-
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (7)
- University of Richmond (6)
- Pepperdine University (5)
- American University Washington College of Law (4)
- Boston University School of Law (4)
- Notre Dame Law School (4)
- New York Law School (3)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (3)
- University of the District of Columbia School of Law (3)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (3)
- Cleveland State University (2)
- Emory University School of Law (2)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (2)
- Selected Works (2)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (2)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (2)
- University of Missouri School of Law (2)
- Cedarville University (1)
- Columbia Law School (1)
- Liberty University (1)
- Marquette University Law School (1)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (1)
- Southern Illinois University Edwardsville (1)
- St. Mary's University (1)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Articles (41)
- Touro Law Review (23)
- Michigan Law Review (15)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (13)
- The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8) (12)
-
- Faculty Scholarship (11)
- The Public Lands During the Remainder of the 20th Century: Planning, Law, and Policy in the Federal Land Agencies (Summer Conference, June 8-10) (7)
- Publications (6)
- Indiana Law Journal (5)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (5)
- Pepperdine Law Review (5)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (5)
- Law Faculty Publications (4)
- All Faculty Scholarship (3)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (3)
- Faculty Articles (3)
- University of the District of Columbia Law Review (3)
- Western Water Law in Transition (Summer Conference, June 3-5) (3)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (2)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (2)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (2)
- Faculty Publications (2)
- Journal Articles (2)
- Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law (2)
- Michigan Journal of International Law (2)
- Notre Dame Law Review (2)
- Scholarly Works (2)
- The Federal Impact on State Water Rights (Summer Conference, June 11-13) (2)
- University of Richmond Law Review (2)
- Washington and Lee Law Review Online (2)
- Publication Type
Articles 61 - 90 of 218
Full-Text Articles in Law
Bond V. United States: Concurring In The Judgment, Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz
Bond V. United States: Concurring In The Judgment, Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Bond v. United States presented the deep constitutional question of whether a treaty can increase the legislative power of Congress. Unfortunately, a majority of the Court managed to sidestep the constitutional issue by dodgy statutory interpretation. But the other three Justices—Scalia, Thomas, and Alito—all wrote important concurrences in the judgment, grappling with the constitutional issues presented. In particular, Justice Scalia’s opinion (joined by Justice Thomas), is a masterpiece, eloquently demonstrating that Missouri v. Holland is wrong and should be overruled: a treaty cannot increase the legislative power of Congress.
Corrections Day, John Copeland Nagle
Corrections Day, John Copeland Nagle
John Copeland Nagle
In July 1995, the House of Representatives established a Corrections Day procedure for fixing statutory mistakes. This article traces the history of the corrections day idea, beginning with suggestions offered by Justices Cardozo and Ginsburg many years apart. The article also recounts the early applications of Correction Day by the House. This article describes the problem of statutory mistakes: what they are, and who makes them. It explains that statutory mistakes do exist, regardless of how one defines mistake. Congress, agencies, and the courts all make mistakes, though the responsibility for them ultimately resides with Congress, the author of the …
Retroactivity And Crack Sentencing Reform, Harold J. Krent
Retroactivity And Crack Sentencing Reform, Harold J. Krent
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Article argues that the strong presumption against retroactive application of reduced punishments articulated in the Supreme Court’s recent decision, Dorsey v. United States, is neither historically grounded nor constitutionally compelled. Although not dispositive in Dorsey, the presumption may mislead legislatures in future contexts, whether addressing marijuana decriminalization or lessened punishment for file sharing, and in no way should signal to Congress that future changes should apply prospectively only. Although the Court reached the right result in applying the reduction in punishment for crack offenses to offenders whose sentences had not been finalized, the Court relied excessively on the general …
Decision Theory And Babbitt V. Sweet Home: Skepticism About Norms, Discretion, And The Virtues Of Purposivism, Victoria Nourse
Decision Theory And Babbitt V. Sweet Home: Skepticism About Norms, Discretion, And The Virtues Of Purposivism, Victoria Nourse
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In this writing, the author applies a “decision theory” of statutory interpretation, elaborated recently in the Yale Law Journal, to Professor William Eskridge’s illustrative case, Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon. In the course of this application, she takes issue with the conventional wisdom that purposivism, as a method of statutory interpretation, is inevitably a more virtuous model of statutory interpretation. First, the author questions whether we have a clear enough jurisprudential picture both of judicial discretion and legal as opposed to political normativity. Second, she argues that, under decision theory, Sweet Home is …
Environmental Law At The Crossroads: Looking Back 25, Looking Forward 25, Richard J. Lazarus
Environmental Law At The Crossroads: Looking Back 25, Looking Forward 25, Richard J. Lazarus
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
Twenty-five years used to seem like an exceedingly long time. It certainly did when I was graduating from law school and not yet twentyfive. My perspective on time, however, has (naturally) since evolved, much as environmental law itself and the controversies surrounding it have, too, evolved. The contrast between environmental law twenty-five years ago and environmental law today is remarkable and makes clear that environmental law and lawmaking were changing in fundamental ways a generation ago, but those changes are revealed only now with the aid of hindsight. To be sure, the statutory texts of domestic environmental law are strikingly …
Preemption And Choice-Of-Law Coordination, Erin O'Hara O'Connor, Larry E. Ribstein
Preemption And Choice-Of-Law Coordination, Erin O'Hara O'Connor, Larry E. Ribstein
Michigan Law Review
The doctrine treating federal preemption of state law has been plagued by uncertainty and confusion. Part of the problem is that courts purport to interpret congressional intent when often Congress has never considered the particular preemption question at issue. This Article suggests that courts deciding preemption cases should take seriously a commonly articulated rationale for the federalization of law: the need to coordinate applicable legal standards in order to facilitate a national market or to otherwise provide clear guidance to parties regarding the laws that apply to their conduct. In situations where federal law can serve a coordinating function but …
The Constitutionality Of The Federal Sentencing Reform Act After Mistretta V. United States, Charles R. Eskridge Iii
The Constitutionality Of The Federal Sentencing Reform Act After Mistretta V. United States, Charles R. Eskridge Iii
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Judicial Ethics And Supreme Court Exceptionalism, Amanda Frost
Judicial Ethics And Supreme Court Exceptionalism, Amanda Frost
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
In his 2011 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary, Chief Justice John Roberts cast doubt on Congress’s authority to regulate the Justices’ ethical conduct, declaring that the constitutionality of such legislation has “never been tested.” Roberts’ comments not only raise important questions about the relationship between Congress and the Supreme Court, they also call into question the constitutionality of a number of existing and proposed ethics statutes. Thus, the topic deserves close attention.
This Essay contends that Congress has broad constitutional authority to regulate the Justices’ ethical conduct, just as it has exercised control over other vital aspects of the …
Faithful Agency Versus Ordinary Meaning Advocacy, James J. Brudney
Faithful Agency Versus Ordinary Meaning Advocacy, James J. Brudney
Faculty Scholarship
This Article contends that ordinary meaning analysis based on dictionaries and language canons cannot be reconciled with the faithful agent model. Fidelity to Congress as a principal entails fidelity to its lawmaking enterprise, not to words or sentences divorced from that enterprise. Congress has indicated that it does not value dictionaries as part of its lawmaking process, and it ascribes at most limited weight to language canons in that process. Further, Justices advocating ordinary meaning analysis too often use dictionary definitions, and language canons such as the rule against surplusage, the whole act rule, and ejusdem generis, in ways that …
The Jurisdiction Of The D.C. Circuit, Matthew B. Lawrence, Eric M. Fraser, David Kessler, Stephen A. Calhoun
The Jurisdiction Of The D.C. Circuit, Matthew B. Lawrence, Eric M. Fraser, David Kessler, Stephen A. Calhoun
Faculty Articles
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is unique among federal courts, well known for an unusual caseload that is disproportionally weighted toward administrative law. What explains that unusual caseload? This Article explores that question. We identify several factors that “push” some types of cases away from the Circuit and several factors that “pull” other cases to it. We give particular focus to the jurisdictional provisions of federal statutes, which reveal congressional intent about the types of actions over which the D.C. Circuit should have special jurisdiction. Through a comprehensive examination of the U.S. Code, we identify several …
Shelby County V. Holder: Why Section 2 Matters, Ellen D. Katz
Shelby County V. Holder: Why Section 2 Matters, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Editor’s Note: Professor Ellen D. Katz writes and teaches about election law, civil rights and remedies, and equal protection. She and the Voting Rights Initiative at Michigan Law filed a brief as amicus curiae in Shelby County v. Holder, on which the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments February 27. Here, she examines why Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act bears consideration in the case, which involves a challenge to Section 5 of the act.
A Cure Worse Than The Disease?, Ellen D. Katz
A Cure Worse Than The Disease?, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
The pending challenge to section 5 of the Voting Rights Act insists the statute is no longer necessary. Should the Supreme Court agree, its ruling is likely to reflect the belief that section 5 is not only obsolete but that its requirements do more harm today than the condition it was crafted to address. In this Essay, Professor Ellen D. Katz examines why the Court might liken section 5 to a destructive treatment and why reliance on that analogy in the pending case threatens to leave the underlying condition unaddressed and Congress without the power to address it.
Plata V. Brown And Realignment: Jails, Prisons, Courts, And Politics, Margo Schlanger
Plata V. Brown And Realignment: Jails, Prisons, Courts, And Politics, Margo Schlanger
Articles
The year 2011 marked an important milestone in American institutional reform litigation. That year, a bare majority of the U.S. Supreme Court, in an opinion in Brown v. Plata by Justice Anthony Kennedy, affirmed a district court order requiring California to remedy its longstanding constitutional deficits in prison medical and mental health care by reducing prison crowding. Not since 1978 had the Court ratified a lower court's crowding-related order in a jail or prison case, and the order before the Court in 2011 was fairly aggressive; theoretically, it could have (although this was never a real prospect) induced the release …
South Carolina's 'Evolutionary Process', Ellen D. Katz
South Carolina's 'Evolutionary Process', Ellen D. Katz
Articles
When Congress first enacted the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in 1965, public officials in South Carolina led the charge to scrap the new statute. Their brief to the Supreme Court of the United States described the VRA as an “unjustified” and “arbitrary” affront to the “Equality of Statehood” principle, and a “usurp[ation]” of the State’s legislative and executive functions. Not surprisingly, the Warren Court was unpersuaded and opted instead to endorse broad congressional power to craft “inventive” remedies to address systematic racial discrimination and to “shift the advantage of time and inertia from the perpetrators of evil to its victims.” …
What Was Wrong With The Record?, Ellen D. Katz
What Was Wrong With The Record?, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Shelby County v. Holder offers three reasons for why the record Congress amassed to support the 2006 reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) was legally insufficient to justify the statute's continued regional application: (1) the problems Congress documented in 2006 were not as severe as those that prompted it to craft the regime in 1965; (2) these problems did not lead Congress to alter the statute's pre-existing coverage formula; and (3) these problems did not exclusively involve voter registration and the casting of ballots.
The Gravitational Force Of Originalism, Randy E. Barnett
The Gravitational Force Of Originalism, Randy E. Barnett
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In part I of this essay, prepared for the Fordham conference on “The New Originalism and Constitutional Law,” I describe four aspects of the New Originalism: (1) The New Originalism is about identifying the original public meaning of the Constitution rather than the original framers intent; (2) The interpretive activity of identifying the original public meaning of the text is a purely descriptive empirical inquiry; (3) But there is also a normative tenet of the New Originalism that contends that the original public meaning of the text should be followed; (4) Distinguishing between the activities of interpretation and construction identifies …
Substance And Method In The Year 2000, Akhil Reed Amar
Substance And Method In The Year 2000, Akhil Reed Amar
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Supreme Court's Most Extraordinary Term - Introduction, Douglas W. Kmiec
The Supreme Court's Most Extraordinary Term - Introduction, Douglas W. Kmiec
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Judicial Limitation Of The Epa's Oversight Authority In Clean Water Act Permitting Of Mountaintop Mining Valley Fills , Christopher D. Eaton
Judicial Limitation Of The Epa's Oversight Authority In Clean Water Act Permitting Of Mountaintop Mining Valley Fills , Christopher D. Eaton
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
Mountaintop removal mining operations in the Appalachian region have expanded significantly in recent decades. The practice decimates the mountain ecosystems by leveling forests, filling headwater streams, and producing significant runoff of heavy metals, sediment, and other pollutants that impair the aquatic environment of entire watersheds. Yet environmental permitting of the practice is relatively limited. A recent trend in litigation aimed at halting mining operations has involved challenging permits that authorize the discharge of mining overburden into headwater streams pursuant to the Clean Water Act (CWA). The Army Corps of Engineers has assumed jurisdiction over such discharges under section 404 of …
Determining The Proper Pleading Standard Under The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act Of 1995 After In Re Silicon Graphics , Erin Brady
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Utah V. Evans: How Census 2000'S "Sampling In Disguise" Fooled The Supreme Court Into Allocating Utah's Seat In The U.S. House Of Representatives To North Carolina, Nathan T. Dwyer
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Disdain Campaign, Randy E. Barnett
The Disdain Campaign, Randy E. Barnett
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
A response to Pamela S. Karlan, The Supreme Court 2011 Term Forward: Democracy and Disdain, 126 Harv. L. Rev. 1 (2012).
In her Foreword, Professor Pamela Karlan offers a quite remarkable critique of the conservative Justices on the Supreme Court. She faults them not so much for the doctrines they purport to follow, or outcomes they reach, but for the attitude they allegedly manifest toward Congress and the people. “My focus here is not so much on the content of the doctrine but on the character of the analysis.” She describes Chief Justice Roberts’s opinion of the Court as …
Deconstructing 'Just And Proper': Arguments In Favor Of Adopting The 'Remedial Purpose' Approach To Section 10(J) Labor Injunctions, William K. Briggs
Deconstructing 'Just And Proper': Arguments In Favor Of Adopting The 'Remedial Purpose' Approach To Section 10(J) Labor Injunctions, William K. Briggs
Michigan Law Review
Congress, through the 1947 addition of section 10(j) to the National Labor Relations Act, authorized district courts to grant preliminary injunctive relief for unfair labor practices if they deem such relief "just and proper." To this day a circuit split persists over the correct interpretation of this "just and proper" standard. Some circuits interpret "just and proper" to require application of the traditional equitable principles approach that normally governs preliminary injunctions. Other circuits interpret "just and proper" to require an analysis of whether injunctive relief is necessary to preserve the National Labor Relations Board's remedial power This Note examines the …
Supreme Court Section 1983 Decisions: (October 2001 Term), Martin A. Schwartz
Supreme Court Section 1983 Decisions: (October 2001 Term), Martin A. Schwartz
Martin A. Schwartz
No abstract provided.
The Thirteenth Amendment And Interest Convergence, William M. Carter Jr.
The Thirteenth Amendment And Interest Convergence, William M. Carter Jr.
Articles
The Thirteenth Amendment was intended to eliminate the institution of slavery and to eliminate the legacy of slavery. Having accomplished the former, the Amendment has only rarely been extended to the latter. The Thirteenth Amendment’s great promise therefore remains unrealized.
This Article explores the gap between the Thirteenth Amendment’s promise and its implementation. Drawing on Critical Race Theory, this Article argues that the relative underdevelopment of Thirteenth Amendment doctrine is due in part to a lack of perceived interest convergence in eliminating what the Amendment’s Framers called the “badges and incidents of slavery.” The theory of interest convergence, in its …
Skilling: More Blind Monks Examining The Elephant, Julie R. O'Sullivan
Skilling: More Blind Monks Examining The Elephant, Julie R. O'Sullivan
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Most academics and practitioners with whom the author has discussed the result in Skilling v. United States believe that it is a sensible decision. That is, the Supreme Court did the best it could to limit the reach of 18 U.S.C. § 1346, which all nine justices apparently believed—correctly—was, on its face, unconstitutionally vague. Congress responded quickly and with little consideration with the supremely under-defined § 1346. In the over twenty years since the statute's enactment, the Courts of Appeals have been unable to come up with any unified limiting principles to contain its reach. The Skilling Court, evidently reluctant …
Uniformity, Inferiority, And The Law Of The Circuit Doctrine, Martha Dragich
Uniformity, Inferiority, And The Law Of The Circuit Doctrine, Martha Dragich
Faculty Publications
This Article considers whether Congress or the Supreme Court could reverse the law of the circuit doctrine. Part I explores the importance of uniformity in federal law. Part II considers the extent to which a desire for uniformity has shaped the structure of the federal court system. Part III considers how the evolution of the courts of appeals as independent regional adjudicatory bodies affects the uniformity objective. Part IV examines the attributes of superior and inferior courts, and applies these criteria to the current courts of appeals. Part V examines the tension between uniformity and inferiority as determinants of the …
The Conflict Between State Tests Of Tribal Entity Immunity And The Congressional Policy Of Indian Self-Determination, Aaron F.W. Meek
The Conflict Between State Tests Of Tribal Entity Immunity And The Congressional Policy Of Indian Self-Determination, Aaron F.W. Meek
American Indian Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Structural Vision Of Habeas Corpus, Eve Brensike Primus
A Structural Vision Of Habeas Corpus, Eve Brensike Primus
Articles
As scholars have recognized elsewhere in public law, there is no hermetic separation between individual rights and structural or systemic processes of governance. To be sure, it is often helpful to focus on a question as primarily implicating one or the other of those categories. But a full appreciation of a structural rule includes an understanding of its relationship to individuals, and individual rights can both derive from and help shape larger systemic practices. The separation of powers principle, for example, is clearly a matter of structure, but much of its virtue rests on its promise to help protect the …
Litigation Strategies For Dealing With The Indigent Defense Crisis, Eve Brensike Primus
Litigation Strategies For Dealing With The Indigent Defense Crisis, Eve Brensike Primus
Articles
The indigent defense delivery system in the United States is in a state of crisis. Public defenders routinely handle well over 1,000 cases a year, more than three times the number of cases that the American Bar Association says one attorney can handle effectively. As a result, many defendants sit in jail for months before even speaking to their court-appointed lawyers. And when defendants do meet their attorneys, they are often disappointed to learn that these lawyers are too overwhelmed to provide adequate representation. With public defenders or assigned counsel representing more than 80% of criminal defendants nationwide, the indigent …