Law Commons^™

Assessing The New Judicial Minimalism, Christopher J. Peters

All Faculty Scholarship

In this article, which has been published in slightly revised form at 100 Colum. L. Rev. 1454 (2000), I critique some recently prominent arguments for "judicial minimalism" in constitutional decisionmaking. Current minimalist arguments, I contend, are primarily "policentric," that is, focused on the role the judiciary can play in bolstering the accountability and deliberativeness of the political branches. Drawing in part on a previous article, I offer an alternative approach to minimalism that is "juricentric" - focused on the inherent democratic legitimacy of the adjudicative process and the unique competence of that process to produce decisions about individual rights. I …

Mt. Healthy And Causation In Fact: The Court Still Doesn't Get It!, Sheldon Nahmod

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

When The Wall Has Fallen: Decades Of Failure In The Supervision Of Capital Juries, José F. Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

Since the return of capital punishment after Furman v. Georgia nearly three decades ago, the Supreme Court of the United States has struggled to control the administration of capital punishment when those decisions are made or recommended by a citizen jury. Although there is no constitutional requirement that a jury participate in the death penalty process, most states do provide, through their capital punishment statutes, that a jury will participate in the decision. The preference for jury sentencing in these circumstances reflects a reluctance to leave power over life solely in the hands of one judge. Still, some scholars have …

Raising Arizona: Reflections On Sovereignty And The Nature Of The Plaintiff In Federal Suits Against States, Catherine T. Struve

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Another Attack On The Fast Track, Constance Z. Wagner

All Faculty Scholarship

Although the Congressional fight over the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) may have ended when the NAFTA Implementation Act passed by a narrow margin, the controversy surrounding NAFTA has not. In Made in the USA Foundation v. United States, the United Steel Workers of American and others asserted that NAFTA was void because it had been approved as a congressional-executive agreement when it should have been approved as a treaty under Article II, Clause 2 of the U.S. constitution. The author discusses the constitutional law issue raised by the lawsuit, namely the validity of the long-standing U.S. practice of …

The Real Separation In Separation Of Powers Law, Elizabeth Magill

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article argues that contemporary separation of powers commentary is misconceived. Despite the disagreement that dominates the commentary, a closer look at that debate reveals a surprise: commentators subscribe to a consensus about separation of powers. Once exposed, however, that consensus turns out to be underdeveloped, confused, and possibly incoherent. This Article, first, identifies the latent consensus about separation of powers, and, second, critically examines the consensus. The Article argues that the present consensus must be abandoned or refashioned in some as-yet-undeveloped way.

Separation of powers commentary is conventionally thought to be dominated by a contest between adherents of "formalist" …

Rethinking Welfare Rights: Reciprocity Norms, Reactive Attitudes, And The Political Economy Of Welfare Reform, Amy L. Wax

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Positivism And The Notion Of An Offense, Claire Oakes Finkelstein

All Faculty Scholarship

While the United States Supreme Court has developed an elaborate constitutional jurisprudence of criminal procedure, it has articulated few constitutional doctrines of the substantive criminal law. The asymmetry between substance and procedure seems natural given the demise of Lochner and the minimalist stance towards due process outside the area of fundamental rights. This Article, however, argues that the "positivistic" approach to defining criminal offenses stands in some tension with other basic principles, both constitutional and moral. In particular, two important constitutional guarantees depend on the notion of an offense: the presumption of innocence and the ban on double jeopardy. Under …

Can The Vice President Preside At His Own Impeachment Trial?: A Critique Of Bare Textualism, Joel K. Goldstein

All Faculty Scholarship

Turn the clock back for a moment to August 1973. In the midst of the burgeoning Watergate scandal, the nation discovered that Vice President Spiro T. Agnew was being investigated for allegedly accepting bribes from contractors, and for committing tax fraud while Governor of Maryland and Vice President. The investigation, by attorneys in the United States Attorneys Office in Maryland, ultimately gathered sufficient evidence to present to a grand jury. To avoid the spectre of likely indictment and prosecution, Agnew elected to resign his office and plead nolo contendere.[1]

But suppose Agnew had decided not to go quietly.[2] Instead of …

Can The Vice President Preside At His Own Impeachment Trial?: A Critique Of Bare Textualism, Joel K. Goldstein

All Faculty Scholarship

Turn the clock back for a moment to August 1973. In the midst of the burgeoning Watergate scandal, the nation discovered that Vice President Spiro T. Agnew was being investigated for allegedly accepting bribes from contractors, and for committing tax fraud while Governor of Maryland and Vice President. The investigation, by attorneys in the United States Attorneys Office in Maryland, ultimately gathered sufficient evidence to present to a grand jury. To avoid the spectre of likely indictment and prosecution, Agnew elected to resign his office and plead nolo contendere.[1]

But suppose Agnew had decided not to go quietly.[2] Instead of …