Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Tapping The State Court Resource, Ann Althouse Oct 1991

Tapping The State Court Resource, Ann Althouse

Vanderbilt Law Review

Supreme Court opinions about federal jurisdiction usually feature painstaking analysis of the text of statutes and constitutional clauses and the intentions of those who authored them, or they are based on long-standing traditions of equity jurisprudence. But, as the Court's many divided decisions attest, these materials are scarcely clear enough to determine all outcomes. Thus, the Justices often seem to weigh various interests when they draw the lines around federal jurisdiction. The Court sometimes openly acknowledges this interest weighing, referring to "state interests" and "federal interests."

Justice Stevens has taken exception to this process. He has ob- served that much …


Municipal Liability Under Section 1983: The Rationale Underlying The Final Authority Doctrine, Steven E. Comer Mar 1991

Municipal Liability Under Section 1983: The Rationale Underlying The Final Authority Doctrine, Steven E. Comer

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Reconstruction Congress passed section 1 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (Act), commonly known as the Ku Klux Klan Act,1 to com- bat racial violence in the South where local police officers, in violation of the victims' constitutional rights, often failed to protect blacks from attacks by lynch mobs. Although section 1 protects all citizens regard- less of race, it was designed primarily to (1) prevent states from passing racially discriminatory laws, (2) provide blacks with redress for deprivations of civil rights when state law proved inadequate, and (3) enable victims to sue in federal court when state …


Constitutional Limitations On State Power To Hold Parents Criminally Liable For The Delinquent Acts Of Their Children, Kathryn J. Parsley Mar 1991

Constitutional Limitations On State Power To Hold Parents Criminally Liable For The Delinquent Acts Of Their Children, Kathryn J. Parsley

Vanderbilt Law Review

In late 1988 as part of a comprehensive effort to combat violent street gang activity,' the California legislature passed an amendment to section 272 of California's Penal Code, commonly known as the Parental Responsibility Law. Section 272 originally stated only that every person who commits any act or fails to perform any duty that causes or tends to cause a minor to do a prohibited act is guilty of contributing to the delinquency of a minor, a misdemeanor under the California Penal Code, and subject to a maximum fine of twenty-five hundred dollars, one year in jail, or both. When …