Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
States As Nations: Dignity In Cross-Doctrinal Perspective, Peter J. Smith
States As Nations: Dignity In Cross-Doctrinal Perspective, Peter J. Smith
GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works
In a series of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has asserted that the states' sovereign immunity from suit serves principally to protect the "dignity" of the states. This seemingly oxymoronic notion has perplexed and amused commentators, who have tended to dismiss it largely as rhetorical flourish without substantive content. Although the concept of state dignity is at best an unusual anchor for a doctrine that already has been roundly criticized as unfaithful to constitutional history, text, and structure, the notion of state dignity is not foreign to the law. This article argues that in relying on state dignity, the Court's …
The Constitutional Structure And The Jurisprudence Of Justice Scalia, Bradford R. Clark
The Constitutional Structure And The Jurisprudence Of Justice Scalia, Bradford R. Clark
GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works
Commentators generally regard federalism and separation of powers as distinct features of the constitutional structure. In reality, these doctrines were designed to work together to further the same goals: to avoid tyranny and to preserve individual liberty. Professor Thomas Merrill overlooks this connection in a recent attempt to explain the Supreme Court's decision making process under Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Professor Merrill maintains that there have been two Rehnquist Courts: one from 1986 to 1994, and another from 1994 to the present. In Professor Merrill's view, the first Rehnquist Court focused on social issues - such as abortion, affirmative action, …
The Supremacy Clause As A Constraint On Federal Power, Bradford R. Clark
The Supremacy Clause As A Constraint On Federal Power, Bradford R. Clark
GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works
Today, it is widely accepted that the Constitution authorizes courts to review and invalidate state laws that conflict with federal statutes. At the same time, prominent commentators and even some judges maintain that courts should not seriously review the constitutionality of federal statutes alleged to exceed the scope of Congress' enumerated powers. In their view, the constitutional structure protects the states (and thereby reduces the need for judicial review of federal power), but establishes no comparable safeguards to deter states from interfering with federal prerogatives. Contrary to this position, there is an express textual basis for judicial review of federal …