Law Commons^™

Charles Reich, New Dealer, John Q. Barrett

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

My encounters with Charles Reich began long before I had any personal contact with him. I read his 1970 bestseller The Greening of America late in that decade, when I was in high school. From then on, I always owned a copy of that book, until it would disappear in a move or on "loan" to some friend.

Luckily so many copies of Greening are in print that I easily would find it anew in used bookstores. So, I often restocked, reread in the book, and got to feel afresh the lift of Reich's spirit and his words.

Consider, …

Herbert Hoover And The Constitution, John Q. Barrett

Faculty Publications

Herbert Clark Hoover, first an international businessman, a global hero during World War I, and then a cabinet officer under Presidents Harding and Coolidge, was elected president in 1928. The next year, as President Hoover embarked on his progressive agenda for the country, the Roaring Twenties ended, crashingly, in the Great Depression. Hoover responded inadequately, constrained more by his own beliefs in volunteerism than by constitutional limits on his powers. His failure to relieve public suffering overshadowed his presidential accomplishments, including innovative government programs and three Supreme Court appointments.

Legalism And Decisionism In Crisis, Noa Ben-Asher

Faculty Publications

In the years since September 11, 2001, scholars have advocated two main positions on the role of law and the proper balance of powers among the branches of government in emergencies. This Article critiques these two approaches-which could be called Legalism and Decisionism-and offers a third way. Debates between Legalism and Decisionism turn on (1) whether emergencies can be governed by prescribed legal norms; and (2) what the balance of powers among the three branches of government should be in emergencies. Under the Legalist approach, legal norms can and should guide governmental response to emergencies, and the executive branch is …

Legal Holes, Noa Ben-Asher

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In the years that followed the events of September 11, 2001, a debate crystallized between those who think that “legal grey and black holes”—which I call simply “legal holes”—are necessary and integral to U.S. law and those who think that they are dangerous and should be abolished. Legal black holes “arise when statutes or legal rules ‘either explicitly exempt[] the executive from the requirements of the rule of law or explicitly exclude[] judicial review of executive action.’” Grey holes, in contrast, “arise when ‘there are some legal constraints on executive action . . . but the[y] are so insubstantial …