Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

What Bush Wants To Hear, David Cole Nov 2005

What Bush Wants To Hear, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

No abstract provided.


House Resolution On The Appropriate Role Of Foreign Judgements In The Interpretation Of The Constitution Of The United States: Hearing Before The Subcomm. On The Constitution, H. Comm. On The Judiciary, 109th Cong., July 19, 2005 (Statement Of Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz Jul 2005

House Resolution On The Appropriate Role Of Foreign Judgements In The Interpretation Of The Constitution Of The United States: Hearing Before The Subcomm. On The Constitution, H. Comm. On The Judiciary, 109th Cong., July 19, 2005 (Statement Of Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.


Democracy Without A Net? Separation Of Powers And The Idea Of Self-Sustaining Constitutional Constraints On Undemocratic Behavior, James A. Gardner Jan 2005

Democracy Without A Net? Separation Of Powers And The Idea Of Self-Sustaining Constitutional Constraints On Undemocratic Behavior, James A. Gardner

Journal Articles

The United States Constitution is designed to achieve good government by relying on two distinct systems: a primary system that achieves good governance through democratic electoral accountability; and a set of self-sustaining structural backup systems designed for situations in which the democratic system fails, and which operate by limiting the ability of bad rulers to do serious harm to the public good. A key premise of this kind of dual structural arrangement is that effective backup systems must operate independently of primary democratic systems; because they are needed precisely when democratic mechanisms have failed, they cannot depend for their success ...


Controlling Executive Power In The War On Terrorism, Mark V. Tushnet Jan 2005

Controlling Executive Power In The War On Terrorism, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

How does - or should - the U.S. Constitution regulate the exercise of power in response to threats to national security, to ensure that power is used wisely? s Broadly speaking, two mechanisms of control are available: a separation-of-powers mechanism and a judicial-review mechanism. Both mechanisms aim to ensure that the national government exercises its power responsibly - with sufficient vigor to meet the nation's challenges, but without intruding on protected liberties. Under the separation-of-powers mechanism, nearly all of the work of regulating power is done by the principle that the President can do only what Congress authorizes. Its primary concern ...


Schiavo And Klein (Symposium), Evan H. Caminker Jan 2005

Schiavo And Klein (Symposium), Evan H. Caminker

Articles

When teaching federal courts, I sometimes find that students are slow to care about legal issues that initially seem picayune, hyper-technical, and unrelated to real-world concerns. It takes hard work to engage students in discussion of United States v. Klein,1 notwithstanding its apparent articulation of a foundational separation of powers principle that Congress may not dictate a "rule of decision" governing a case in federal court. A Civil War-era decision about the distribution of war spoils, one the Supreme Court has hardly ever cited since and then only to distinguish it, in cases involving takings and spotted owls? Yawn.


Should Ideology Matter In Selecting Federal Judges? Ground Rules For The Debate, Dawn E. Johnsen Jan 2005

Should Ideology Matter In Selecting Federal Judges? Ground Rules For The Debate, Dawn E. Johnsen

Articles by Maurer Faculty

A recurring constitutional controversy of great practical and political importance concerns the criteria Presidents and Senators should use in selecting federal judges. Particularly contentious is the relevance of what sometimes is described as a prospective judge's ideology, or alternatively, judicial philosophy and views on substantive questions of law. This essay seeks to promote principled and productive discussion by proposing five ground rules to govern debate by all participants regarding appropriate judicial selection criteria. Because the continued controversy does not simply reflect principled disagreement on the merits, progress may be encouraged by focusing on deficiencies in current public discourse, including ...