Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Section 5 Mystique, Morrison, And The Future Of Federal Antidiscrimination Law, Margaret H. Lemos, Samuel Estreicher
The Section 5 Mystique, Morrison, And The Future Of Federal Antidiscrimination Law, Margaret H. Lemos, Samuel Estreicher
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Personal Rights And Rule Dependence: Can The Two Co-Exist?, Matthew D. Adler
Personal Rights And Rule Dependence: Can The Two Co-Exist?, Matthew D. Adler
Faculty Scholarship
Constitutional doctrine is typically "rule-dependent." Typically, a constitutional litigant will not prevail unless she can show that a particular kind of legal rule is in force, e.g., a rule that discriminates against "suspect classes" in violation of the Equal Protection Clause, or that targets speech in violation of the First Amendment, or that is motivated by a religious purpose in violation of the Establishment Clause. Further, the litigant must typically establish a violation of her "personal rights." The Supreme Court has consistently stated that a reviewing court should not invalidate an unconstitutional governmental action at the instance of a claimant …
Recent Efforts To Change Discovery Rules: Advice For Draftsmen Of Rules For State Courts, Paul D. Carrington
Recent Efforts To Change Discovery Rules: Advice For Draftsmen Of Rules For State Courts, Paul D. Carrington
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Rights, Rules And The Structure Of Constitutional Adjudication: A Response To Professor Fallon, Matthew D. Adler
Rights, Rules And The Structure Of Constitutional Adjudication: A Response To Professor Fallon, Matthew D. Adler
Faculty Scholarship
Constitutional doctrine is typically rule-dependent. A viable constitutional challenge typically hinges upon the existence of a discriminatory, overbroad, improperly motivated, or otherwise invalid rule, to which the claimant has some nexus. In a prior article, Prof. Adler proposed one model of constitutional adjudication that tries to make sense of rule-dependence. He argued that reviewing courts are not vindicating the personal rights of claimants, but rather are repealing or amending invalid rules. IN a Commentary in this issue, Professor Fallon now puts forward a different model of constitutional adjudication, equally consistent with rule-dependence. Fallon proposes that a reviewing court should overturn …
Rights And Rules: An Overview, Matthew D. Adler, Michael C. Dorf
Rights And Rules: An Overview, Matthew D. Adler, Michael C. Dorf
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.