Law Commons^™

Global Labor Rights And The Alien Tort Claims Act, Sarah H. Cleveland

Faculty Scholarship

Are labor rights human rights? Are some worker rights so fundamental that must be respected by all nations, and all corporations, under all circumstances? If so, who has the authority to define such rights, and how should they be enforced? What is the effect on the global economy of enforcing international worker rights? These are some of the questions confronted by the authors of Human Rights, Labor Rights, and International Trade, a compilation of essays by an international group of scholars, labor rights activists, and corporate executives addressing contemporary topics in the dialectic among labor, trade, and human rights.

The First Shall Be Last: A Contextual Argument For Abandoning Temporal Rules Of Lien Priority, Ronald J. Mann

Faculty Scholarship

Within the academic circles of commercial law, secured credit is about as hot as a topic can get. For a good fifteen years, leading scholars have argued contentiously about the most fundamental questions concerning secured credit: not just about the policies that might justify the law's protection of secured creditors, but more fundamentally about the seemingly obvious question of why businesses and their creditors choose to grant collateral to secure their payment obligations. The extensive and inconclusive debate in the academic literature has not, however, undermined the confidence in secured credit exhibited by the law-reform institutions of the profession. Rather, …

What Does A White Woman Look Like? Racing And Erasing In Law, Katherine M. Franke

Faculty Scholarship

In significant ways, legal texts produce a narrative of national identity. They weave stories about who we are, what we are committed to, and what we expect of one another, individually and collectively. The concept of justiciability can be understood as a set of rules determining what stories courts are allowed to tell about who we are and who we can be. In this sense, Ronald Dworkin's account of judging as writing ongoing chapters in a chain novel provides a compelling conception of law as both describing where we have been and directing where we are going. If the salience …

Reflections Inspired By My Critics, Philip Chase Bobbitt

Faculty Scholarship

The crucial idea in constitutional law is legitimacy; the crucial idea in jurisprudence is justification.

For some time, the academic debate about U.S. constitutionalism has looked for justifications for our practices, believing this would confer legitimacy on them. In my work, I have endeavored to derive legitimacy from the practices themselves, reserving the task of justification for other purposes.

By showing the way in which legitimacy is established and maintained in a constitutional system like ours, I hoped to derive solutions to a number of classical questions, all of which, I believe, are at bottom questions about legitimacy and legitimation. …

Distrust Of Democracy, Richard Briffault

Faculty Scholarship

The current rediscovery of state constitutions has had a singular and curious feature: it has been focused largely on state constitutional provisions that are analogous, if not identical, to provisions of the United States Constitution. Scholars and jurists have devoted their attention to state protections of speech, state equal protection clauses, state privileges against self-incrimination, and state proscriptions of cruel and unusual punishments, and have developed interpretations of these texts that diverge from those adopted by the United States Supreme Court in construing comparable federal constitutional provisions. These attempts to play state variations on federal constitutional themes have not been …

Federal Jurisdiction Over Preemption Claims: A Post-Franchise Tax Board Analysis, Ronald J. Mann

Faculty Scholarship

As Congress uses the commerce power to regulate areas of the economy previously controlled by the states, federal statutes conflict with state law with increasing frequency. When such conflicts occur, federal law "preempts" the state law under the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution. Litigants who foresee a preemption issue often seek a declaratory judgment of preemption or nonpreemption in order to clarify their rights and duties. This Note addresses the scope of federal question jurisdiction over declaratory judgment actions in which preemption is the only federal question raised.

A Reply To Professor Ball, Philip Chase Bobbitt

Faculty Scholarship

Although it has been observed that approaching an allegedly universalistic theory by asserting the time- and culture-bound nature of that theory is an attack of some sort, Professor Ball does not take my lectures to be a rebuke to the enterprise in which he, Professor Tushnet, and others are engaged. Instead, he complains that I do not examine the relation between constitutional argument, on the one hand, and, on the other, social, political, and economic interests. This is a mistaken reading of my work. It is nice to be told that Tushnet and Ball accept my formulation "that in our …

Constitutional Fate, Philip Chase Bobbitt

Faculty Scholarship

The Mary Ireland Graves Dougherty Lectures in Constitutional Law were established in 1979 at the University of Texas School of Law in the memory of Mrs. Dougherty by her family. Professor Bobbitt delivered the inaugural series of these lectures on three evenings in April 1979. Of those in attendance, only Professor Bobbitt's students, who had witnessed the evolution of his ideas during that year, and a few colleagues with whom he must have shared his thoughts, could have expected what followed on those spring evenings in Austin. His subject was "the question of judicial review." So stated, the subject hardly …

The Law And Economics Of Vertical Restrictions: A Relational Perspective, Victor P. Goldberg

Faculty Scholarship

Vertical restrictions between franchisors and their dealers have long been a thorny problem in antitrust law. Richard Posner's characterization of the case law as a "fiasco" and a "doctrinal shambles" is echoed by many other commentators. Perhaps partly because of the intellectual confusion in the area, the Supreme Court recently made an apparently sharp change in direction. In Continental T.V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc. the Court reversed the decade-old Schwinn per se doctrine, holding that at least some vertical restrictions deserve a rule of reason test. Whether this decision will prove a more durable precedent than Schwinn remains …