Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Civil rights (1)
- Congress (1)
- Congressional intent (1)
- Courts (1)
- Early Childhood (1)
-
- Equity (1)
- Evidence-based (1)
- FTCA (1)
- Federal (1)
- Federal Courts (1)
- Federal Tort Claims Act (1)
- Federal experiment (1)
- Federalism (1)
- Formula-funded (1)
- Home (1)
- Home Visiting (1)
- INS (1)
- Immigration (1)
- Infant (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Law (1)
- Legislative Processreme Court (1)
- Litigation (1)
- Maternal (1)
- Remedies (1)
- Sovereign immunity (1)
- Stare decisis (1)
- Statute of limitations (1)
- Statutory interpretation (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Communicating The Canons: How Lower Courts React When The Supreme Court Changes The Rules Of Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Communicating The Canons: How Lower Courts React When The Supreme Court Changes The Rules Of Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
A Jurisprudential Divide In U.S. V. Wong & U.S. V. June, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
A Jurisprudential Divide In U.S. V. Wong & U.S. V. June, Richard J. Peltz-Steele
Faculty Publications
In spring 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two consolidated cases construing the Federal Tort Claims Act, U.S. v. Kwai Fun Wong and U.S. v June, Conservator. The Court majority, 5-4, per Justice Kagan, ruled in favor of the claimants and against the Government in both cases. On the face of the majority opinions, Wong and June come off as straightforward matters of statutory construction. But under the surface, the cases gave the Court a chance to wrestle with fundamental questions of statutory interpretation. The divide in Wong and June concerns the role of the courts vis-à-vis Congress — one …
Longstanding Agency Interpretations, Anita S. Krishnakumar
Longstanding Agency Interpretations, Anita S. Krishnakumar
Faculty Publications
How much deference — or what kind — should courts give to longstanding agency interpretations of statutes? Surprisingly, courts and scholars lack a coherent answer to this question. Legal scholars long have assumed that longstanding agency statutory interpretations are treated with heightened deference on judicial review, and federal courts sometimes have made statements suggesting that this is the case. But in practice, federal court review of longstanding agency interpretations — at both the Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court levels — turns out to be surprisingly erratic. Reviewing courts sometimes note the longevity of an agency’s statutory interpretation …
Funding For Programs That Work: Lessons From The Federal Home Visiting Program, Philip G. Peters Jr.
Funding For Programs That Work: Lessons From The Federal Home Visiting Program, Philip G. Peters Jr.
Faculty Publications
Congress spends hundreds of billions of dollars each year on social programs. Many don’t work. Congress and the President have called for greater reliance on evidence-based programs. Thus far, however, only one major federal program conditions state access to formula-based federal funding on the use of evidence-based practices: the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program. In this Article, I examine the extent to which this initial effort has succeeded and conclude that Congress has taken a promising first step, but attainment of its objective will require more demanding proof standards than those contained in the current Home Visiting …