Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Court Packing (2)
- Supreme Court (2)
- 2020 Election (1)
- Activist Judges (1)
- Compelled disclosures (1)
-
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Controversial speech (1)
- Court Expansion (1)
- Court Reform (1)
- Democracy (1)
- Democratic Party (1)
- Democrats (1)
- Election (1)
- Elizabeth Warren (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Government speech (1)
- Law Professors (1)
- NIFLA v. Becerra (1)
- Pete Buttigieg (1)
- Republican Party (1)
- Republicans (1)
- SCOTUS (1)
- Uncontroversial information (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Court Expansion And The Restoration Of Democracy: The Case For Constitutional Hardball, Aaron Belkin
Court Expansion And The Restoration Of Democracy: The Case For Constitutional Hardball, Aaron Belkin
Pepperdine Law Review
Neither electoral politics, norms preservation, nor modest good government reform can restore the political system because they cannot mitigate the primary threat to the American democracy, Republican radicalism. Those who believe otherwise fail to appreciate how and why radicalism will continue to impede democratic restoration regardless of what happens at the ballot box, misdiagnose the underlying factors that produce and sustain GOP radicalism, and under-estimate the degree of democratic deterioration that has already taken place. Republicans do not need to prevail in every election to forestall the restoration of democracy or to prevent Democrats from governing. The only viable path …
A Call For America's Law Professors To Oppose Court-Packing, Bruce Ledewitz
A Call For America's Law Professors To Oppose Court-Packing, Bruce Ledewitz
Pepperdine Law Review
A Court-packing proposal is imminent. Mainstream Democratic Party Presidential Candidates are already supporting it. The number of Justices on the Supreme Court has been set at nine since 1869, but this is merely a statutory requirement. As soon as Democrats regain control of the Presidency and the Congress, Court-packing will be on the agenda, either expressly or under the guise of Court-reform. Now is the time for the American legal academy to join together to oppose this threat. Court-packing would threaten democracy, destroy the rule of law and undermine judicial independence. It is a pointless and unnecessary reaction born of …
Compelled Speech And The Irrelevance Of Controversy, Seana Valentine Shiffrin
Compelled Speech And The Irrelevance Of Controversy, Seana Valentine Shiffrin
Pepperdine Law Review
NIFLA v. Becerra stealthily introduced a new First Amendment test for compelled speech that has injected chaos into the law of compelled disclosures. NIFLA reinterpreted the requirement that compelled disclosures contain only “purely factual and uncontroversial information” in a way that imbued independent force into the “uncontroversial” component of that test. Yet, the Court failed to supply criteria for what sort of purely factual information would fail to qualify as “uncontroversial information” and identified no important free speech concerns that this new prong protects. This Article distinguishes seven different interpretations of “uncontroversial information.” It then assesses them to ascertain whether …