Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Authority (4)
- Constitution (3)
- Federal courts (3)
- Congress (2)
- Preemption (2)
-
- Prosecution (2)
- United States Supreme Court (2)
- Absentee ballots (1)
- Accessibility (1)
- Actions (1)
- Anticommandeering (1)
- Antitrust (1)
- Bribery (1)
- Cartels (1)
- Claims (1)
- Competition (1)
- Constitutional history (1)
- Constitutional interpretation (1)
- Corporate crime (1)
- Corporations (1)
- Corruption (1)
- Crimes (1)
- Criminal justice (1)
- Deferred prosecution agreements (1)
- Department of Justice (1)
- Election law federalism (1)
- Electoral process (1)
- Enforcement (1)
- Enumerated powers (1)
- Europe (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Private Actors And Public Corruption: Why Courts Should Adopt A Broad Interpretation Of The Hobbs Act, Megan Demarco
Private Actors And Public Corruption: Why Courts Should Adopt A Broad Interpretation Of The Hobbs Act, Megan Demarco
Michigan Law Review
Federal prosecutors routinely charge public officials with “extortion under color of official right” under a public-corruption statute called the Hobbs Act. To be prosecuted under the Hobbs Act, a public official must promise official action in return for a bribe or kickback. The public official, however, does not need to have actual authority over that official action. As long as the victim reasonably believed that the public official could deliver or influence government action, the public official violated the Hobbs Act. Private citizens also solicit bribes in return for influencing official action. Yet most courts do not think the Hobbs …
State-Action Immunity And Section 5 Of The Ftc Act, Daniel A. Crane, Adam Hester
State-Action Immunity And Section 5 Of The Ftc Act, Daniel A. Crane, Adam Hester
Michigan Law Review
The state-action immunity doctrine of Parker v. Brown immunizes anticompetitive state regulations from preemption by federal antitrust law so long as the state takes conspicuous ownership of its anticompetitive policy. In its 1943 Parker decision, the Supreme Court justified this doctrine, observing that no evidence of a congressional will to preempt state law appears in the Sherman Act’s legislative history or context. In addition, commentators generally assume that the New Deal court was anxious to avoid re-entangling the federal judiciary in Lochner-style substantive due process analysis. The Supreme Court has observed, without deciding, that the Federal Trade Commission might …
Improving Patent Quality Through Post-Grant Claim Amendments: A Comparison Of European Opposition Proceedings And U.S. Post-Grant Proceedings, Jennifer Turchyn
Improving Patent Quality Through Post-Grant Claim Amendments: A Comparison Of European Opposition Proceedings And U.S. Post-Grant Proceedings, Jennifer Turchyn
Michigan Law Review
Congress enacted the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act to encourage innovation, strengthen U.S. patents, and achieve greater uniformity with foreign patent systems. The America Invents Act introduced two new post-grant patent validity proceedings: inter partes review and post-grant review. The new U.S. proceedings are similar to European opposition proceedings, but there are significant differences in the extent of the patent owner’s ability to amend claims, the patent’s claim construction, the patent owner’s evidentiary burden, and the procedural requirements. The U.S. proceedings result in a very limited opportunity for amendment and a high percentage of invalidated patents. In contrast, European opposition proceedings …
Election Law Federalism, Justin Weinstein-Tull
Election Law Federalism, Justin Weinstein-Tull
Michigan Law Review
This Article provides the first comprehensive account of non-Voting Rights Act federal voting laws. Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act—long the most effective voting rights law in American history—was disabled by the Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is in the crosshairs. As the Supreme Court becomes more hostile to race-based antidiscrimination laws like the Voting Rights Act, Congress will turn to race-neutral, election administration-based reforms to strengthen the right to vote. Indeed, many proposals for reform post-Shelby County have taken this form. The federal laws this Article examines—the National Voter …
More Than Just A Potted Plant: A Court's Authority To Review Deferred Prosecution Agreements Under The Speedy Trial Act And Under Its Inherent Supervisory Power, Mary Miller
Michigan Law Review
In the last decade, the Department of Justice has increasingly relied on pretrial diversion agreements as a means of resolving corporate criminal cases short of prosecution. These pretrial diversion agreements—non-prosecution and deferred prosecution agreements—include substantive terms that a company must abide by for the duration of the agreement in order to avoid prosecution. When entering a deferred prosecution agreement, the Department of Justice files charges against the defendant corporation as well as an agreement outlining the variety of terms with which the company must comply. This delay in prosecution is permitted under the Speedy Trial Act, which provides an exception …
Why Enumeration Matters, Richard A. Primus
Why Enumeration Matters, Richard A. Primus
Michigan Law Review
The maxim that the federal government is a government of enumerated powers can be understood as a “continuity tender”: not a principle with practical consequences for governance, but a ritual statement with which practitioners identify themselves with a history from which they descend. This interpretation makes sense of the longstanding paradox whereby courts recite the enumeration principle but give it virtually no practical effect. On this understanding, the enumerated-powers maxim is analogous to the clause that Parliament still uses to open enacted statutes: “Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty.” That text might imply that the Queen is …
Congress And The Reconstruction Of Foreign Affairs Federalism, Ryan Baasch, Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash
Congress And The Reconstruction Of Foreign Affairs Federalism, Ryan Baasch, Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash
Michigan Law Review
Though the Constitution conspicuously bars some state involvement in foreign affairs, the states clearly retain some authority in foreign affairs. Correctly supposing that state participation may unnecessarily complicate or embarrass our nation’s foreign relations, the Supreme Court has embraced aggressive preemption doctrines that sporadically oust the states from discrete areas in foreign affairs. These doctrines are unprincipled, supply little guidance, and generate capricious results. Fortunately, there is a better way. While the Constitution permits the states a limited and continuing role, it never goes so far as guaranteeing them any foreign affairs authority. Furthermore, the Constitution authorizes Congress to enact …