Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Supreme court (2)
- Clarence Thomas (1)
- Conformity act (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Equal Protection (1)
-
- Federal common law (1)
- First amendment (1)
- Fourteenth amendment (1)
- Freedom of speech (1)
- Historical practice (1)
- Implied rights of action (1)
- Judges (1)
- Legislative intent (1)
- Precedent (1)
- Process act (1)
- Race (1)
- Racial equality (1)
- Sandoval (1)
- Scalia (1)
- Stare decisis (1)
- Statutory interpretation (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Precedent And Speech, Randy J. Kozel
Precedent And Speech, Randy J. Kozel
Journal Articles
The U.S. Supreme Court has shown a notable willingness to reconsider its First Amendment precedents. In recent years the Court has departed from its prior statements regarding the constitutional value of false speech. It has revamped its process for identifying categorical exceptions to First Amendment protection. It has changed its position on corporate electioneering and aggregate campaign contributions. In short, it has revised the ground rules of expressive freedom in ways both large and small.
The Court generally describes its past decisions as enjoying a presumption of validity through the doctrine of stare decisis. This Article contends that within the …
The Missing Justice In Coleman V. Miller, Barry Cushman
The Missing Justice In Coleman V. Miller, Barry Cushman
Journal Articles
All nine of the sitting justices took part in the 1939 case of Coleman v. Miller, which concerned whether the Kansas legislature had ratified the pending Child Labor Amendment. One of the issues in the case was decided by a vote of 5-4, while another was resolved by a vote of 7-2. With respect to a third issue, however, Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes reported that it presented “a question upon which the Court is equally divided and therefore the Court expresses no opinion upon that point.”
Scholars understandably have been puzzled by how a decision in which a full …
"To Help, Not To Hurt": Justice Thomas's Equality Canon, Nicole Stelle Garnett, William S. Consovoy
"To Help, Not To Hurt": Justice Thomas's Equality Canon, Nicole Stelle Garnett, William S. Consovoy
Journal Articles
To comprehend Justice Thomas’s views on racial equality requires an understanding of how his life experiences influence his approach to questions of race and the law. Recurring themes in his opinions about racial equality include his belief that racial preferences stigmatize their beneficiaries, his concern that the prevailing notion that racial integration is necessary to black achievement is rooted in a presumption of racial inferiority, his worry that affirmative action efforts provide cover for the failure to address the urgent needs of disadvantaged Americans, and his knowledge that seemingly benign policies can mask illicit motives. Finally, Justice Thomas contends that …
Justice Scalia, Implied Rights Of Action, And Historical Practice, Anthony J. Bellia
Justice Scalia, Implied Rights Of Action, And Historical Practice, Anthony J. Bellia
Journal Articles
In the realm of Federal Courts, the question of “implied rights of action” asks when, if ever, may a plaintiff bring a federal right of action for the violation of a federal statute that does not expressly create one. Justice Scalia argued that a court should not entertain an action for damages for the violation of a federal statute unless the text of the statute demonstrates that Congress meant to create a right of action. The Supreme Court adopted this approach in 2001 in Alexander v. Sandoval, with Justice Scalia writing for the majority. Certain judges and scholars have argued …