Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 12 of 12
Full-Text Articles in Law
Self-Incrimination, Supreme Court, Suffolk County: People V. Shulman
Self-Incrimination, Supreme Court, Suffolk County: People V. Shulman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Separation Of Powers, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department: Dorst V. Pataki
Separation Of Powers, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department: Dorst V. Pataki
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Right To Counsel, Supreme Court, Queens County: People V. Bell
Right To Counsel, Supreme Court, Queens County: People V. Bell
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Right To Jury Trial, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department: Hynes V. Tomei Court
Right To Jury Trial, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department: Hynes V. Tomei Court
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Right To A Speedy Trial, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department: People V. Coplin
Right To A Speedy Trial, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department: People V. Coplin
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Self-Incrimination, Supreme Court, Bronx County: Seabrook V. Johnson
Self-Incrimination, Supreme Court, Bronx County: Seabrook V. Johnson
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Right To Jury Trial, Supreme Court, Dutchess County: People V. Mcintosh
Right To Jury Trial, Supreme Court, Dutchess County: People V. Mcintosh
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Equal Protection, Supreme Court, New York County: Walter V. City Of New York Police Department
Equal Protection, Supreme Court, New York County: Walter V. City Of New York Police Department
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Political Association, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department: Kalkstein V. Dinapoli
Political Association, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department: Kalkstein V. Dinapoli
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Clean Air Act Amendments Of 1990 And An Unbridled Spending Power: Will They Survive On The Supreme Court's Road To Substantive Federalism, Mark A. Miller
The Clean Air Act Amendments Of 1990 And An Unbridled Spending Power: Will They Survive On The Supreme Court's Road To Substantive Federalism, Mark A. Miller
Cleveland State Law Review
The question remains as to how far the Supreme Court will go in its refortification of the Tenth Amendment. This Note explores emerging federalism trends and evaluates the CAA in light of a stronger state sovereignty that is appearing on the constitutional horizon. Parts II and III examine the CAAA and the constitutional problems engendered by the Act. Part IV examines current Tenth Amendment and Spending Clause jurisprudence, and illustrates that the CAAA is a classic example of how Congress has been able to circumvent the Tenth Amendment with its Spending power. Part V presents a new view of federalism …
Understanding Mahon In Historical Context, William Michael Treanor
Understanding Mahon In Historical Context, William Michael Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Despite its enormous influence on constitutional law, Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon is just such an opinion; the primary purpose of the author’s article Jam for Justice Holmes: Reassessing the Significance of Mahon is to clarify Holmes's intent by placing the opinion in historical context and in the context of Holmes's other opinions. While other scholars have also sought to place Mahon in context, his account differs in large part because of its recognition, as part of the background of Mahon, of a separate line of cases involving businesses affected with a public interest.
The author argues that at …
Jam For Justice Holmes: Reassessing The Significance Of Mahon, William Michael Treanor
Jam For Justice Holmes: Reassessing The Significance Of Mahon, William Michael Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
When courts and commentators discuss Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, they use the same word with remarkable regularity: famous. Mahon has achieved this fame in part because it was the occasion for conflict between judicial giants, and because the result seems ironic. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.--the great Lochner dissenter and a jurist generally considered a champion of judicial deference to legislatures in the sphere of economic decision-making--wrote the opinion striking down a Pennsylvania statute barring coal mining that could cause the surface to cave-in. Sharply dissenting from Holmes's opinion was his consistent ally on the Court, Justice Louis …