Law Commons^™

Take Two Tablets And Do Not Call For Judicial Review Until Our Heads Clear: The Supreme Court Prepares To Demolish The 'Wall Of Separation' Between Church And State, Terence Lau, William Wines

Terence Lau

In this article, we examine the issues that bring First Amendment jurisprudence to the grant of certiorari in Pleasant Grove v. Summum, scheduled for oral argument in the Supreme Court of the United States in November. We examine the historical basis for America’s religious heritage, the historical judicial treatment of the religious clauses, and the erosion of the wall of separation between church and state. We examine the Ten Commandments, finding inherent discrimination present in modern-day attempts to advance a particular version of the Ten Commandments as secular. By drawing upon Rousseau’s civic religion, we suggest alternative routes for the …

Same-Sex Marriage And Jewish Law: Time For A New Paradigm?, Doron M. Kalir

Doron M Kalir

In recent years the Supreme Court, as well as important segments of society, has come to accept and even celebrate same-sex relations that in the past, and for some still today, have generated contempt, hostility, and violence. This change in law and culture poses a unique challenge for those who are moved by the plight of gay people yet concomitantly feel bound by their religious convictions and therefore prevented from providing religious legitimacy to people who yearn to be part of their community. Professor Kalir meets this challenge by proposing that the Torah (and Jewish law), read in context, accepts …

Is Suspension A Political Question, Amanda L. Tyler

Amanda L Tyler

The article focuses on the Suspension Clause of the U.S. Constitution being a political issue. It says that once suspension is viewed as a nonjusticiable political question, it would turn as a subject on which most of the restraints imposed by the Constitution would not be subjected to judicial enforcement. It is claimed that such thought should be denied because it is at odds of writ of habeas corpus heritage and would only complicate the separation of powers and the institution of judicial reviews.

A Comparison Of The Jurisprudence Of The Ecj And The Efta Court On The Free Movement Of Goods In The Eea: Is There An Intolerable Separation Of Article 34 Of The Tfeu And Article Of 11 Of The Eea?, Jarrod Tudor

Jarrod Tudor

Article 11 of the European Economic Area (“EEA”) and Article 34 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibit quantitative restrictions on the free movement of goods. The EEA is monitored by the European Free Trade Area Court (“EFTA Court”) and the TFEU is monitored by the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”). In theory, the EFTA Court and the ECJ should interpret Article 11 and Article 34 in the same manner in order to promote harmonization of the law on the free movement of goods and allow for further economic integration between EFTA and the EU. …

The Rise Of Judicial Governance In The Supreme Court Of India, Manoj Mate

Manoj S. Mate

Dog Whistling, The Color-Blind Jurisprudential Regime And The Constitutional Politics Of Race, Calvin J. Terbeek

Calvin J TerBeek

Ian Haney Lopez’s new book, "Dog Whistle Politics: How Coded Racial Appeals Have Reinvented Racism and Wrecked the Middle Class", has a provocative thesis. Lopez contends that dog-whistling, that is, coded racial rhetoric, “explains how politicians backed by concentrated wealth manipulate racial appeals to win elections and also to win support for regressive policies that help corporations and the super-rich, and in the process wreck the middle class." Though this may seem plausible enough, the thesis cannot stand up to scrutiny; the relevant political science literature provides no support for this. What is more, Lopez's treatment of the Supreme Court's …