Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Board of Immigration Appeals (2)
- Department of Justice (2)
- Gerrymandering (2)
- Immigration Courts (2)
- International Law (2)
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (2)
- AID (1)
- Adjudication of Immigration Decisions (1)
- Agency Defense (1)
- Antitrust (1)
- Antonin Scalia (1)
- BIA (1)
- Bostock v Clayton County (1)
- Brain science (1)
- Capitalism (1)
- Caste Discrimination (1)
- Chiarella (1)
- Children (1)
- Clinical psychology (1)
- Communication (1)
- Congress (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutional Interpretation (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Constitutional Rights (1)
- Constitutional Theory (1)
- Counter-clerks (1)
- DHS (1)
- DOJ (1)
- Department of Homeland Security (1)
Articles 1 - 14 of 14
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Child Vanishes: Justice Scalia's Approach To The Role Of Psychology In Determining Children's Rights And Responsibilities, Aviva Orenstein
The Child Vanishes: Justice Scalia's Approach To The Role Of Psychology In Determining Children's Rights And Responsibilities, Aviva Orenstein
Articles by Maurer Faculty
This Article explores how Justice Antonin Scalia’s hostility to psychology, antipathy to granting children autonomous rights, and dismissiveness of children’s interior lives both affected his jurisprudence and was a natural outgrowth of it. Justice Scalia expressed a skeptical, one might even say hostile, attitude towards psychology and its practitioners. Justice Scalia’s cynicism about the discipline and the therapists who practice it is particularly interesting regarding legal and policy arguments concerning children. His love of tradition and his rigid and unempathetic approach to children clash with modern notions of child psychology. Justice Scalia’s attitude towards psychology helps to explain his jurisprudence, …
The Immigrant Struggle For Effective Counsel: An Empirical Assessment, Jayanth K. Krishnan
The Immigrant Struggle For Effective Counsel: An Empirical Assessment, Jayanth K. Krishnan
Articles by Maurer Faculty
Recently, in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, the Supreme Court upheld 8 U.S.C. § 1252(e)(2), a statutory provision placing restrictions on certain noncitizens from seeking habeas review in the federal judiciary. The Court focused on the Constitution’s Suspension Clause, but it also discussed the Due Process Clause, declaring that there was no violation there either.
One question which flows from this decision is whether the federal courts will soon be precluded from hearing other types of claims brought by noncitizens. Consider ineffective assistance of counsel petitions, which in the immigration law context are rooted in the Due Process Clause. …
Facts Versus Discretion: The Debate Over Immigration Adjudication, Jayanth K. Krishnan
Facts Versus Discretion: The Debate Over Immigration Adjudication, Jayanth K. Krishnan
Articles by Maurer Faculty
Justice Amy Coney Barrett recently issued her first majority-led immigration opinion in Patel v. Garland (2022). As background, some immigrants looking to avoid deportation may apply for what is called “discretionary relief’ (e.g., asylum or adjustment of status) initially in an immigration court and then, if they lose, at the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). These immigration forums fall under the Department of Justice. Prior to Patel, immigrants who lost at the BIA could then ask a federal circuit court to review the factual findings of their case. Now, after Justice Barrett’s decision, Article III review is no longer available …
Human Rights, Constitutional Rights, And Judicial Review: Comparing And Assessing Michael Perry's Early And Contemporary Arguments, Daniel O. Conkle
Human Rights, Constitutional Rights, And Judicial Review: Comparing And Assessing Michael Perry's Early And Contemporary Arguments, Daniel O. Conkle
Articles by Maurer Faculty
In this Essay, I explore, compare, and evaluate two theoretical models of judicial review in individual rights cases, each proposed by Professor Michael J. Perry, albeit in books separated by three and a half decades. In his 1982 book, The Constitution, the Courts, and Human Rights: An Inquiry into the Legitimacy of Constitutional Policymaking by the Judiciary, Early Perry embraced an aggressive form of judicial activism, urging the Supreme Court to test political judgments through an open-ended search for political-moral truth. Contemporary Perry, by contrast, takes a very different approach. In his 2017 book, A Global Political Morality: Human Rights, …
Does U.S. Federal Employment Law Now Cover Caste Discrimination Based On Untouchability?: If All Else Fails There Is The Possible Application Of Bostock V. Clayton County, Kevin D. Brown, Lalit Khandare, Annapurna Waughray, Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt, Theodore M. Shaw
Does U.S. Federal Employment Law Now Cover Caste Discrimination Based On Untouchability?: If All Else Fails There Is The Possible Application Of Bostock V. Clayton County, Kevin D. Brown, Lalit Khandare, Annapurna Waughray, Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt, Theodore M. Shaw
Articles by Maurer Faculty
This article discusses the issue of whether a victim of caste discrimination based on untouchability can assert a claim of intentional employment discrimination under Title VII or Section 1981. This article contends that there are legitimate arguments that this form of discrimination is a form of religious discrimination under Title VII. The question of whether caste discrimination is a form of race or national origin discrimination under Title VII or Section 1981 depends upon how the courts apply these definitions to caste discrimination based on untouchability. There are legitimate arguments that this form of discrimination is recognized within the concept …
Why A Federal Wealth Tax Is Constitutional, Ari Glogower, David Gamage, Kitty Richards
Why A Federal Wealth Tax Is Constitutional, Ari Glogower, David Gamage, Kitty Richards
Articles by Maurer Faculty
The 2020 Democratic presidential primaries brought national attention to a new direction for the tax system: a federal wealth tax for the wealthiest taxpayers. During their campaigns, Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) both introduced proposals to tax the wealth of multimillionaires and billionaires, and to use the revenue for public investments, including in health care and education. These reforms generated broad public support—even among many Republicans—and broadened the conversation over the future of progressive tax reform.
A well-designed, high-end wealth tax can level the playing field in an unequal society and promote shared economic prosperity.
Critics have …
Chiarella V. United States And Its Indelible Impact On Insider Trading Law, Donna M. Nagy
Chiarella V. United States And Its Indelible Impact On Insider Trading Law, Donna M. Nagy
Articles by Maurer Faculty
Insider trading cases, which are typically prosecuted as securities fraud, carry a mystique rarely present in securities litigation. As a former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York once observed, the cases involve "'basically cops and robbers. . . .[d]id you get the information and did you trade on it?" It is no wonder that each insider trading case featured in this symposium presents a captivating story. But for two distinct reasons, Chiarella v. United States occupies a special place in history. It was the first prosecution under the federal securities laws for the crime of insider trading. …
Communication Breakdown: How Courts Do - And Don't - Respond To Statutory Overrides, Deborah A. Widiss
Communication Breakdown: How Courts Do - And Don't - Respond To Statutory Overrides, Deborah A. Widiss
Articles by Maurer Faculty
Earlier commentators, including many well-respected judges, have offered thoughtful suggestions for facilitating communication from courts to Congress about problems in statutes that Congress might want to address. My research explores the opposite question. How effective is communication from Congress back to courts? The answer is: Not very. Even when Congress enacts overrides, courts frequently continue to follow the prior judicial precedent. This is likely due more to information failure than willful disregard of controlling law. Nonetheless, a key aspect of the separation of powers is broken.
My research shows that when the Supreme Court overrules a prior decision, lower courts …
Circumventing Standing To Appeal, Ryan W. Scott
Circumventing Standing To Appeal, Ryan W. Scott
Articles by Maurer Faculty
The requirement of standing to sue in federal court is familiar, but the related requirement of standing to appeal within the Article III judiciary is badly undertheorized. The Supreme Court’s opinions suggest (at least) four constitutional rationales. Standing to appeal might serve the same functional purposes as standing to sue, or it might follow from the fact that appeals involve two separate courts, or it might be triggered because the underlying case or controversy has become moot, or because it has reached the point of final judgment.
Compounding the confusion, the requirement of standing to appeal can have troubling consequences …
Dirty Thinking About Law And Democracy In Rucho V. Common Cause, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel E. Charles
Dirty Thinking About Law And Democracy In Rucho V. Common Cause, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel E. Charles
Articles by Maurer Faculty
In order to understand the division in Rucho and, as importantly, to understand why the plaintiffs in Rucho failed to win over the conservatives on the Court, we have to come to terms with these different worldviews on the Court. Is sordid politics an inherently necessary and arguably normatively good part of the political process, and thus a necessary part of our representative institutions? Relatedly, do substantive fairness principles exist—outside of race and the equal-population principle—that constrain political actors when they design electoral structures to favor themselves at the expense of their opponents? We take up these questions in the …
Judicial Intervention As Judicial Restraint, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel E. Charles
Judicial Intervention As Judicial Restraint, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel E. Charles
Articles by Maurer Faculty
This paper examines the Court's decision in Gill v. Whitford. It advances two claims. First, it provides a comprehensive account of the Court's skepticism of judicial supervision of democratic politics, an account that we call the narrative of nonintervention. It situates Gill within that account and argues that the Court's reluctance to intervene is a function of the Court's institutional calculus that it ought to protect its legitimacy and institutional capital when it engages in what look like political fights. Second, the paper provides an instrumentalist account for judicial intervention. It argues that the Court should intervene to prevent partisan …
The Counter-Clerks Of Justice Scalia, Ian Samuel
The Counter-Clerks Of Justice Scalia, Ian Samuel
Articles by Maurer Faculty
“So, what are you going to do when you’re done here?”
That’s what he asked me first. I had just sat down in his chambers, on a big, overstuffed leather couch. It was a day in early April, and I’d spent my last few minutes sitting across the street in a park, shuffling through the index cards I’d been using for weeks to prepare. The cards were organized by topic, each with a few bullet points to remind me of what the man across from me thought about every subject on which he’d had an opinion over the last quarter-century. …
Capitalism, The United States Constitution And The Supreme Court, Part 2, Hugh Evander Willis
Capitalism, The United States Constitution And The Supreme Court, Part 2, Hugh Evander Willis
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
Valuation In The Supreme Court, Alfred Evens
Valuation In The Supreme Court, Alfred Evens
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.