Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional law (2)
- Federalism (2)
- Agency (1)
- Commander in Chief Clause (1)
- Commerce clause (1)
-
- Constitutional conflict (1)
- Cunningham v. California (1)
- Determinate Sentencing Law (1)
- Economic effect (1)
- Federal legislation (1)
- Federal regulation (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Indian gaming (1)
- Judicial interference (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Law enforcement (1)
- Nondelegation doctrine (1)
- Preemption (1)
- Privacy (1)
- Separation of powers (1)
- Sixth Amendment (1)
- State constitutions (1)
- States rights (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Political Safeguards Of Executive Privilege, David A. O'Neil
The Political Safeguards Of Executive Privilege, David A. O'Neil
Vanderbilt Law Review
To an unprecedented degree, the nation's welfare now depends on constitutionally sound outcomes to disputes between Congress and the President over executive branch information. Yet we still lack a satisfying theoretical account of the optimal method for achieving those outcomes. In the years since Watergate, courts and scholars have embraced a theory premised on an unexamined faith that the Constitution's structure embeds in the political process the tools and incentives necessary for each branch to vindicate its interests. Judicial interference, this conventional model further assumes, is both unnecessary and unwise; left to their own devices, the political branches will pursue …
The Constitutional Foundations Of Chenery, Kevin M. Stack
The Constitutional Foundations Of Chenery, Kevin M. Stack
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
The Supreme Court regularly upholds federal legislation on grounds other than those stated by Congress. Likewise, an appellate court may affirm a lower court judgment even if the lower court's opinion expressed the wrong reasons for it. Not so in the case of judicial review of administrative agencies. The established rule, formulated in SEC v. Chenery Corp., is that a reviewing court may uphold an agency's action only on the grounds upon which the agency relied when it acted. This Article argues that something more than distrust of agency lawyers is at work in Chenery. By making the validity of …
The Liberal Assault On The Fourth Amendment, Christopher Slobogin
The Liberal Assault On The Fourth Amendment, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
As construed by the Supreme Court, the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement regulates overt, non-regulatory government searches of homes, cars, and personal effects-and virtually nothing else. This essay is primarily about how we got to this point. It is fashionable to place much of the blame for today's law on the Warren Court's adoption of the malleable expectation of privacy concept as the core value protected by the Fourth Amendment. But this diagnosis fails to explain why even the more liberal justices have often gone along with many of the privacy-diminishing holdings of the Court. This essay argues that three other …
International Law And Constitutional Interpretation: The Commander In Chief Clause Reconsidered, Ingrid Wuerth
International Law And Constitutional Interpretation: The Commander In Chief Clause Reconsidered, Ingrid Wuerth
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
The Commander in Chief Clause is a difficult, underexplored area of constitutional interpretation. It is also a context in which international law is often mentioned, but not fully defended, as a possible method of interpreting the Constitution. This Article analyzes why the Commander in Chief Clause is difficult and argues that international law helps resolve some of the problems that the Clause presents. Because of weaknesses in originalist analysis, changes over time, and lack of judicial competence in military matters, the Court and commentators have relied on second-order interpretive norms like congressional authorization and executive branch practice in interpreting the …
Constitutional Isolationism And The Limits Of State Separation Of Powers As A Barrier To Interstate Compacts, Jim Rossi
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In this Essay, I address the question of which branch of state government ought to have the authority to negotiate interstate compacts - a question of state separation of powers. Recent case law interpreting state constitutions in the context of Indian gambling compacts provides a particularly fertile ground for exploring this question, as it illustrates how courts are struggling to find a way to allow state executive officials greater autonomy to negotiate interstate compacts. Part I illustrates how traditional notions of separation of powers under state constitutions can be understood to pose a barrier to executive branch negotiation of interstate …
The Populist Safeguards Of Federalism, Robert A. Mikos
The Populist Safeguards Of Federalism, Robert A. Mikos
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Extant legal scholarship often portrays citizens as the catalysts of federalization. Scholars say that citizens pressure Congress to impose their morals on people living in other states, to trump home-state laws with which they disagree, or to shift the costs of regulatory programs onto out-of-state taxpayers, all to the demise of states' rights. Since Congress (usually) gives citizens what they want, scholars insist the courts must step in to protect states from federal encroachments. By contrast, this Article proposes a new theory of the populist safeguards of federalism. It develops two distinct but mutually reinforcing reasons why populist demands on …
Cunningham V. California - Case Comment, Rebecca Haw Allensworth
Cunningham V. California - Case Comment, Rebecca Haw Allensworth
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Sixth Amendment--Allocation of Fact-finding in Sentencing.--Apprendi v. New Jersey spawned a series of Supreme Court sentencing decisions which, when viewed together, are at best confusing and at worst contradictory. Commentators and courts have struggled to find a coherent governing principle uniting "Apprendi," "Blakely v. Washington," and "United States v. Booker." The holding in "Apprendi," originally described as a bright-line rule, has proved anything but. Last Term, in "Cunningham v. California," the Court added another chapter to the Apprendi saga when it declared unconstitutional California's Determinate Sentencing Law (DSL). Justice Ginsburg authored the majority opinion that overturned the California Supreme Court's …
The New Commerce Clause Doctrine In Game Theoretical Perspective, Maxwell L. Stearns
The New Commerce Clause Doctrine In Game Theoretical Perspective, Maxwell L. Stearns
Vanderbilt Law Review
The Roberts Court emerges at a critical juncture in the development of Commerce Clause doctrine. While the Commerce Clause doctrine implicates federalism and separation of powers, concerns rooted in the earliest part of our constitutional history, the arrival of a new Court presents an ideal opportunity to critically assess existing doctrines and to develop new analytical paradigms. An analysis of Commerce Clause doctrine reveals that while the Rehnquist Court successfully imposed substantive limits on the scope of this important source of congressional power for the first time in sixty years, that Court was far less successful in developing a coherent …