Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (3)
- Administrative Law (2)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (2)
- Constitutional Law (2)
- Courts (2)
-
- Fourth Amendment (2)
- Immigration Law (2)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (2)
- Law and Race (2)
- Legal Writing and Research (2)
- Privacy Law (2)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (1)
- Commercial Law (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Family Law (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Human Rights Law (1)
- Intellectual Property Law (1)
- International Law (1)
- Judges (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Legal History (1)
- National Security Law (1)
- State and Local Government Law (1)
- Transnational Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- Aliens (2)
- Due process (2)
- Ninth Circuit (2)
- Noncitizens (2)
- Privacy (2)
-
- Riley v. California (2)
- United States v. Jones (2)
- 1789 Judiciary Act (1)
- Administrative Procedure Act (1)
- Administrative state (1)
- African Americans (1)
- Alien Tort Statute (1)
- Alternatives (1)
- Amateurism (1)
- Anticompetition (1)
- Antisubordination (1)
- Arab Americans (1)
- Attorney General Wirt (1)
- Baltimore (1)
- Basketball (1)
- Birth certificates (1)
- Blackstone’s Commentaries (1)
- Bounded universality (1)
- California v. Ciraolo (1)
- Categorization (1)
- Cell phones (1)
- Census (1)
- City of Los Angeles v. Patel (1)
- Classification (1)
- College athletes (1)
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Inside Regulatory Interpretation: A Research Note, Christopher J. Walker
Inside Regulatory Interpretation: A Research Note, Christopher J. Walker
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
We now live in a regulatory world, where the bulk of federal lawmaking takes place at the bureaucratic level. Gone are the days when statutes and common law predominated. Instead, federal agencies—through rulemaking, adjudication, and other regulatory action—have arguably become the primary lawmakers, with Congress delegating to its bureaucratic agents vast swaths of lawmaking power, the President attempting to exercise some control over this massive regulatory apparatus, and courts struggling to constrain agency lawmaking within statutory and constitutional bounds. This story is not new. Over two decades ago, for instance, Professor Lawson lamented the rise of the administrative state and …
When Congress Is Away The President Shall Not Play: Justice Scalia's Concurrence In Nlrb V. Noel Canning, Krista M. Pikus
When Congress Is Away The President Shall Not Play: Justice Scalia's Concurrence In Nlrb V. Noel Canning, Krista M. Pikus
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
On June 26, 2014, the Supreme Court unanimously decided NLRB v. Noel Canning, holding that the Recess Appointments Clause authorizes the president “to fill any existing vacancy during any recess . . . of sufficient length.” Justice Scalia filed a concurring opinion, joined by Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Thomas, and Justice Alito. While Justice Scalia “concurred,” his opinion read more like a dissent. Both the majority and the concurring opinions relied heavily on historical evidence in arriving at their respective opinions. This was expected from Justice Scalia given his method of “new originalism,” which focuses on “the original public …
Mens Rea, Criminal Responsibility, And The Death Of Freddie Gray, Michael Serota
Mens Rea, Criminal Responsibility, And The Death Of Freddie Gray, Michael Serota
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Who (if anyone) is criminally responsible for the death of Freddie Gray, the 25-year-old African-American man who died from injuries suffered while in the custody of Baltimore police? This question has been at the forefront of the extensive coverage of Gray’s death, which has inspired a national discussion about law enforcement’s relationship with black communities. But it is also a question that may never be fairly resolved for reasons wholly unrelated to the topic of community policing, with which Gray’s death has become synonymous. What may ultimately hamper the administration of justice in the prosecution of the police officers involved …
Plenary Power Is Dead! Long Live Plenary Power, Michael Kagan
Plenary Power Is Dead! Long Live Plenary Power, Michael Kagan
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
For decades, scholars of immigration law have anticipated the demise of the plenary power doctrine. The Supreme Court could have accomplished this in its recent decision in Kerry v. Din, or it could have reaffirmed plenary power. Instead, the Court produced a splintered decision that did neither. This Essay examines the long process of attrition that has significantly gutted the traditional plenary power doctrine with regard to procedural due process, while leaving it largely intact with regard to substantive constitutional rights.
Substantive Due Process For Noncitizens: Lessons From Obergefell, Anthony O'Rourke
Substantive Due Process For Noncitizens: Lessons From Obergefell, Anthony O'Rourke
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
The state of Texas denies birth certificates to children born in the United States—and thus citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment—if their parents are undocumented immigrants with identification provided by their home countries’ consulates. What does this have to do with same-sex marriage? In a previous article, I demonstrated that the Supreme Court’s substantive due process analysis in United States v. Windsor is particularly relevant to the state’s regulation of undocumented immigrants. This Essay builds on my earlier analysis by examining United States v. Obergefell’s applications outside the context of same-sex marriage. Obergefell’s due process holding, I argue, can …
A Demographic Threat? Proposed Reclassification Of Arab Americans On The 2020 Census, Khaled A. Beydoun
A Demographic Threat? Proposed Reclassification Of Arab Americans On The 2020 Census, Khaled A. Beydoun
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
“Arab Americans are white?” This question—commonly posed as a demonstration of shock or surprise—highlights the dissonance between how “Arab” and “white” are discursively imagined and understood in the United States today. These four words also encapsulate the dilemma that currently riddles Arab Americans. The population finds itself interlocked between formal classification as white, and de facto recognition as nonwhite. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the government agency that oversees the definition, categorization, and construction of racial categories, currently counts people from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) as white. The United States Census Bureau (Census Bureau), the …
Spies In The Skies: Dirtboxes And Airplane Electronic Surveillance, Brian L. Owsley
Spies In The Skies: Dirtboxes And Airplane Electronic Surveillance, Brian L. Owsley
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Electronic surveillance in the digital age is essentially a cat-and-mouse game between governmental agencies that are developing new techniques and technologies for surveillance, juxtaposed against privacy rights advocates who voice concerns about such technologies. In November 2014, there was a discovery of a new twist on a relatively old theme. Recently, the Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. Marshals Service was running a surveillance program employing devices—dirtboxes—that gather all cell phone numbers in the surrounding area. Other federal agencies, including the Drug Enforcement Agency, Immigration and Custom Enforcement, and the Department of Homeland Security, are also documented to have …
The Three C'S Of Jurisdiction Over Human Rights Claims In U.S. Courts, Chimène I. Keitner
The Three C'S Of Jurisdiction Over Human Rights Claims In U.S. Courts, Chimène I. Keitner
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
The legal aftermath of the Holocaust continues to unfold in U.S. courts. Most recently, the Seventh Circuit dismissed claims against the Hungarian national railway and Hungarian national bank for World War II-era crimes against Hungarian Jews on the grounds that the plaintiffs had not exhausted available local remedies in Hungary or provided a “legally compelling” reason for not doing so. More broadly, heated debates about the role of U.S. courts in enforcing international human rights law have not abated since the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., which restricted but did not eliminate federal …
Stubborn Things: An Empirical Approach To Facts, Opinions, And The First Amendment, Daniel E. Herz-Roiphe
Stubborn Things: An Empirical Approach To Facts, Opinions, And The First Amendment, Daniel E. Herz-Roiphe
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
This essay offers an empirical approach to the problem, rooted in an argument that the underlying rationale for the fact/opinion distinction in compelled speech doctrine tells us something about how this distinction should be policed. Commercial speech enjoys protection by virtue of its value to listeners, it is from the listener's vantage point, then, that courts should assess whether a compelled disclosure is fact or opinion. And if we are interested in learning how disclosures will affect listeners, we might try asking them, just as courts adjudicating trademark suits frequently use consumer surveys to determine how customers understand the meaning …
Supreme Court Jurisprudence Of The Personal In City Of Los Angeles V. Patel, Brian L. Owsley
Supreme Court Jurisprudence Of The Personal In City Of Los Angeles V. Patel, Brian L. Owsley
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Recently, the Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision in City of Los Angeles v. Patel striking down a city ordinance that required hotel and motel owners to make their guest registries available to police officers whenever requested to do so. Although the Court’s opinion in Patel simply affirmed the Ninth Circuit’s finding that the ordinance was unconstitutional, the Court could have used Patel to readdress the third-party doctrine, which establishes that “a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties.” Patel provided a vehicle for the Court to do so, particularly because …
How Not To Apply The Rule Of Reason: The O’Bannon Case, Michael A. Carrier
How Not To Apply The Rule Of Reason: The O’Bannon Case, Michael A. Carrier
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
The case of O’Bannon v. NCAA has received significant attention. On behalf of a class of student-athletes, former college basketball star Ed O’Bannon sued the NCAA, challenging rules that prohibited payment for the use of names, images, and likenesses (NILs) in videogames, live game telecasts, and other footage. A Ninth Circuit panel, in a 2-1 decision, found that this restraint had anticompetitive effects and procompetitive justifications. And it considered “less restrictive alternatives,” upholding payment for incidental educational expenses beyond tuition and fees, room and board, and required books, but rejecting a deferred $5,000 payment for NILs. Straddling the intersection of …