Law Commons^™

Commerce Clause, Ivonne Polasky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confrontation Clause, Doris Waldman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Legislative Powers, Ivonne Polasky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Justiciability, Kimberly R. Mccrosson

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Search And Seizure, Doris Waldmann

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Self Incrimination, Dianne K. Leverrier

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trial By Jury, Diana Coen

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Does The Solicitor General Advantage Thwart The Rule Of Law In The Administrative State?, Jim Rossi

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Linda Cohen and Matthew Spitzer's study, "The Government Litigant Advantage," sheds important light on how the Solicitor General's litigation behavior may impact the Supreme Court's decision making agenda and outcomes for regulatory and administrative law cases. By emphasizing how the Solicitor General affects cases that the Supreme Court decides, Cohen and Spitzer's findings confirm that administrative law's emphasis on lower appellate court decisions is not misplaced. Some say that D.C. Circuit cases carry equal-if not more-precedential weight than Supreme Court decisions in resolving administrative law issues. Cohen and Spitzer use positive political theory to provide a novel explanation for some …

Agreements To Waive Or To Arbitrate Legal Claims: An Economic Analysis, Keith N. Hylton

Faculty Scholarship

As arbitration agreements have grown in use, they have become controversial, with many critics describing them as a disguised form of waiver. This paper presents an economic analysis of waiver and arbitiation agreements and applies this analysis to the evolving arbitration case law in the Supreme Court and elsewhere. The paper examines the conditions under which parties have an incentive to enter into these types of agreement, and their welfare implications. It shows that, if parties are well informed, they will enter into waiver agreements when and only when litigation is socially undesirable, in the sense that the deterrence benefits …

The Changing Complexion Of Workplace Law: Labor And Employment Decisions Of The Supreme Court's 1999-2000 Term , James J. Brudney

Faculty Scholarship

At the dawn of a new century of Supreme Court workplace law, it seems especially appropriate to offer some perspective on the recent and relatively recent past. Before addressing the seven cases involving labor and employment issues decided by the Supreme Court in the Term just ended, I want briefly to describe (in what I hope are not mechanical terms) how the Court's interests in labor and employment law have evolved from the start of the Burger Era in 1969 to the current, mature stage of the Rehnquist Court.

The Section 5 Mystique, Morrison, And The Future Of Federal Antidiscrimination Law, Margaret H. Lemos, Samuel Estreicher

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Sovereign Immunity, Due Process, And The Alden Trilogy, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Alden v. Maine, the Court held that the principle of sovereign immunity protects states from being sued without their consent in their own courts by private parties seeking damages for the states' violation of federal law. The Court thus rejected the "forum allocation" interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment, under which the Amendment serves merely to channel suits against the states based on federal law into the state courts, which are required by the Supremacy Clause to entertain such suits. The Court held instead that the Eleventh Amendment protects the states from being subjected to private damage liability by …

Damage Control? A Comment On Professor Neuman’S Reading Of Reno V. Aadc, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This comment responds to an article by Professor Gerald Neuman on the Supreme Court's recent decision in Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (AADC). The Court in AADC rejected a selective prosecution claim by immigrants targeted for deportation based on First Amendment-protected activities, finding that Congress had stripped the federal courts of jurisdiction over such claims, and that in any event the Constitution does not recognize a selective prosecution objection to a deportation proceeding. Professor Neuman argues that the decision should not be read as implying that aliens have less First Amendment protection than citizens, and that the decision can …

Preemption & Human Rights: Local Options After Crosby V. Nftc, Robert Stumberg

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In June 2000, the Supreme Court held in Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC) that federal sanctions against Burma preempted the Massachusetts Burma law. With its "Burma Law," Massachusetts sought to replicate the anti-Apartheid boycott, one of the most successful human rights campaigns in history. Massachusetts' Burma law authorized state agencies to exercise a strong purchasing preference in favor of companies that do not conduct business in Burma unless the preference would impair essential purchases or result in inadequate competition.

In Crosby, the Court held that Congress preempted the Massachusetts Burma law when it adopted federal sanctions on …

When The Wall Has Fallen: Decades Of Failure In The Supervision Of Capital Juries, José F. Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

Since the return of capital punishment after Furman v. Georgia nearly three decades ago, the Supreme Court of the United States has struggled to control the administration of capital punishment when those decisions are made or recommended by a citizen jury. Although there is no constitutional requirement that a jury participate in the death penalty process, most states do provide, through their capital punishment statutes, that a jury will participate in the decision. The preference for jury sentencing in these circumstances reflects a reluctance to leave power over life solely in the hands of one judge. Still, some scholars have …

The Reconceptualization Of Legislative History In The Supreme Court, Charles Tiefer

All Faculty Scholarship

In 1995, the Supreme Court began to embrace a approach to interpreting Congressional intent. From that year forward, the Breyers-Stevens model of legislative history, or "institutional legislative history," has seen significant success, emerging in the shadows of the success Justice Scalia's enjoyed while promoting his brand of textualism in the early 1990s. In developing a new way to view Congressional intent, Justices Breyers and Stevens synthesize information gathered from congressional report details, preferably attached to bill drafting choices, thereby renouncing Scalia's reliance on the purposes espoused by the Congressional majority. This new approach, the author contends, rejuvenated the court's approach …

Discrimination Cases In The Supreme Court’S 1998 Term, Eileen Kaufman

Scholarly Works

In the Supreme Court's 1997 Term, the Supreme Court had decided a record number of statutory discrimination cases. However, that record was exceeded in the Supreme Court's 1998 Term with the Court addressing issues arising under Title VII, which covers discrimination in employment; Title IX, which covers discrimination in schools; and most significantly, the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibits discrimination based on disability. Overall, the term scored significant victories for employers who were given considerable latitude to set their own physical characteristic standards and who were, to a large extent, immunized from liability for punitive damages. There was an …