Law Commons^™

Tragic Irony Of American Federalism: National Sovereignty Versus State Sovereignty In Slavery And In Freedom, The Federalism In The 21st Century: Historical Perspectives, Robert J. Kaczorowski

Faculty Scholarship

A plurality on the Supreme Court seeks to establish a state-sovereignty based theory of federalism that imposes sharp limitations on Congress's legislative powers. Using history as authority, they admonish a return to the constitutional "first principles" of the Founders. These "first principles," in their view, attribute all governmental authority to "the consent of the people of each individual state, not the consent of the undifferentiated people of the Nation as a whole." Because the people of each state are the source of all governmental power, they maintain, "where the Constitution is silent about the exercise of a particular power-that is, …

Reflections On From Slaves To Citizens Bondage, Freedom And The Constitution: The New Slavery Scholarship And Its Impact On Law And Legal Historiography, Robert J. Kaczorowski

Faculty Scholarship

The thesis of Professor Donald Nieman's paper, "From Slaves to Citizens: African-Americans, Rights Consciousness, and Reconstruction," is that the nation experienced a revolution in the United States Constitution and in the consciousness of African Americans. According to Professor Nieman, the Reconstruction Amendments represented "a dramatic departure from antebellum constitutional principles,"' because the Thirteenth Amendment reversed the pre-Civil War constitutional guarantee of slavery and "abolish[ed] slavery by federal authority." The Fourteenth Amendment rejected the Supreme Court's "racially-based definition of citizenship [in Dred Scott v. Sandford4], clearly establishing a color-blind citizenship” and the Fifteenth Amendment "wrote the principle of equality into the …

The Rise And Rise Of The Administrative State, Gary S. Lawson

Faculty Scholarship

The post-New Deal administrative state is unconstitutional, and its validation by the legal system amounts to nothing less than a bloodless constitutional revolution. The original New Dealers were aware, at least to some degree, that their vision of the national government's proper role and structure could not be squared with the written Constitution: The Administrative Process, James Landis's classic exposition of the New Deal model of administration, fairly drips with contempt for the idea of a limited national government subject to a formal, tripartite separation of powers. Faced with a choice between the administrative state and the Constitution, the architects …

The Social Origins Of Property, Jack M. Beermann, Joseph William Singer

Faculty Scholarship

The takings clause of the United States Constitution requires government to pay compensation when private property is taken for public use.' When government regulates, but does not physically seize, property, the Supreme Court of the United States has had trouble defining when individuals have been deprived of property rights so as to give them a right to compensation. The takings clause serves "to bar Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens that, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole."' To determine when a regulation amounts to a "taking" of property …

Supreme Court's Tilt To The Property Right: Procedural Due Process Protections Of Liberty And Property Interests, Jack M. Beermann, Barbara A. Melamed, Hugh F. Hall

Faculty Scholarship

The Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution provide important protections against government oppression. They provide that government may not deprive any person of "life, liberty or property" without due process of law. In recent decisions, the Supreme Court has appeared willing to strengthen its protection of traditional property interests yet weaken its protection of liberty interests.

It has long been accepted, albeit with controversy, that due process has both procedural and substantive elements. This essay concerns the procedural elements. Procedural due process analysis asks two questions: first, whether there exists a liberty …

A Constitutional Conspiracy Unmasked: Why "No State" Does Not Mean "No State", Mark A. Graber

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

From The Constitutionality Of Juvenile Curfew Ordinances To A Children's Agenda For The 1990s: Is It Really A Simple Matter Of Supporting Family Values And Recognizing Fundamental Rights?, Michael K. Jordan

Faculty Scholarship

The analysis of the constitutionality of curfew ordinances provides a window into a process that obfuscates rather than clarifies the nature of the constitutional problem. By defining the issue as one governed by rights, we limit our ability to comprehend the larger issue of how the Supreme Court has defined the relationship between minors, the family and society. The issue of the rights of minors as they relate to curfew ordinances offers a measure of solace by reducing the number of disturbing questions which concern cultural change and public policy decisions relating to the family. An understanding of this process …

Rethinking "Original Intent", David B. Lyons

Faculty Scholarship

Although Dred Scott v. Sandford is one of the Supreme Court's most controversial decisions, it is not often taught or read. But its approach to constitutional interpretation is by no means outdated, and its historical importance has not diminished. So it seems a good example to consider.

Constitutional Protection Of Freedom Of Expression In The United States As It Affects Defamation Law, Oscar S. Gray

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

'Were There No Appeal': The History Of Review In American Criminal Courts, David Rossman

Faculty Scholarship

The contemporary criminal justice system is guided, in large part, from the top down. A great deal of the force that drives the "terrible engine" of the criminal law is supplied by courts that consider cases on review after a defendant has been convicted.

Choosing Judges The Democratic Way, Larry Yackle

Faculty Scholarship

A generation ago, the pressing question in constitutional law was the countermajoritarian difficulty.' Americans insisted their government was a democratic republic and took that to mean rule by a majority of elected representatives in various offices and bodies, federal and local. Yet courts whose members had not won election presumed to override the actions of executive and legislative officers who had. The conventional answer to this apparent paradox was the Constitution, which arguably owed its existence to the people directly. Judicial review was justified, accordingly, when court decisions were rooted firmly in the particular text, structure, or historical backdrop of …

Dual Sovereignty, Federalism And National Criminal Law: Modernist Constitutional Doctrine And The Nonrole Of The Supreme Court, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

This paper examines the growing movement away from the functional nature of federalism contained within the Constitution toward a federalist system that gives extensive discretion to Congress and is only limited by political checks. This political system of federalism has limited the role of the Court in national criminal law because of the deference the Court is expected to give Congress.

The Search For An Author: Shakespeare And The Framers, James Boyle

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

What The Constitution Means By Executive Power, Charles J. Cooper, Orrin Hatch, Eugene V. Rowstow, Michael E. Tigar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The President’S Powers As Commander-In-Chief Versus Congress’ War Power And Appropriations Power, Charles Bennett, Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr., Geoffrey P. Miller, William Bradford Reynolds, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Preface To Constitutional Theory, David B. Lyons

Faculty Scholarship

We have a plethora of theories about judicial review, including theories about theories, but their foundations require stricter scrutiny. This Essay presents some aspects of the problem through an examination of two important and familiar ideas about judicial review.

The controversy over "noninterpretive" review concerns the propriety of courts' deciding constitutional cases by using extraconstitutional norms. But the theoretical framework has not been well developed and appears to raise the wrong questions about judicial review. Thayer's doctrine of extreme judicial deference to the legislature has received much attention, but his reasoning has been given less careful notice. Thayer's rule rests …

The Privileges And Immunities Clause Of Article Iv, David S. Bogen

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Book Review: The Constitution In The Supreme Court: The First Hundred Years, 1789-1888., David S. Bogen

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Revolutionary Constitutionalism In The Era Of The Civil War And Reconstruction , Robert J. Kaczorowski

Faculty Scholarship

The meaning and scope of the fourteenth amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1866 remain among the most controversial issues in American constitutional law. Professor Kaczorowski contends that the issues have generated more controversy than they warrant, in part because scholars analyzing the legislative history of the amendment and statute have approached their task with preconceptions reflecting twentieth century legal concerns. He argues that the most important question for the framers was whether national or state governments possessed primary authority to determine and secure the status and rights of American citizens. Relying on records of the congressional debates as …

Notes On A Bicentennial Constitution: Part I, Processes Of Change, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

With the approach of the Bill of Rights bicentennial, this paper takes the cause for celebration as an equally important occasion for critique. This work argues that the most distinguishing aspects of our Constitution are not the Bill of Rights, federalism, and separation of powers, but rather the availability of judicial review, the political insulation of federal judges, and the limited mechanisms available for constitutional change.

Exclusionary Land Use Controls And The Takings Issue, Robert R. Wright

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Regulation Of Electroconvulsive Therapy, Carol Sanger

Faculty Scholarship

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a psychiatric procedure that induces a convulsive seizure in the patient in order to treat severe depression. Recently, courts, legislatures, and the medical profession have paid increasing attention to the regulation of ECT. Their interest has been stimulated by the growing recognition of the rights of mental patients, the developing role of consent in medical transactions, and the results of recent scientific research on the efficacy and consequences of ECT.

Regulation of ECT has generally focused on whether the patient or his representative effectively consented to the treatment. The highly intrusive nature of ECT and the …

Book Review, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

This review of "The Supreme Court on Trial" by Charles Hyneman, questions why the work’s tackling the age-old issues of the source of judicial review and its constitutionality is particularly novel or unique from other such examinations. Issue is also taken with Brown v. Board of Educaion's dominance of such discussion and the book’s poor treatment of the desegregation cases.

Book Review, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

This review champions the editor’s use of Mr. Justice Black’s own opinions in showcasing his emphasis of the emancipating aspects of the Constitution. This work cautions the reader to avoid relying on this compilation as an accurate depiction of the state of the law, especially considering that most of the included opinions are dissents.