Law Commons^™

A Complete Property Right Amendment, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

The trend of the eminent domain reform and "Kelo plus" initiatives is toward a comprehensive Constitutional property right incorporating the elements of level of review, nature of government action, and extent of compensation. This article contains a draft amendment which reflects these concerns.

Our Sovereign Body: Narrating The Fiction Of Sovereign Immunity In The Supreme Court: Part I-A English Stories, Marc L. Roark

ExpressO

This is part I-A of a Book I am working towards on the narratives and fictions of sovereign immunity. The goal in this part is to look before the American republic and towards the background in which American Sovereignty came to be shaped by -- the feudal notion of the sovereign; the Lockean response, and the Blackstonean doctrine. The first part looks at the legal fictions surrounding the kingship, their sources and their effects. The Second part looks to the specific ways of treating the sovereign in law, namely viewing King as Property owner or patriarch, Trustee, and Constitution.

Our Sovereign Body: Narrating The Fiction Of Sovereign Immunity In The Supreme Court, Marc L. Roark

ExpressO

This is the introduction to a book I am preparing on the Normative and Narrative aspects of the U.S. Sovereign Immunity Doctrine. The introduction sets up the problem of a doctrine that is not exactly coherent with the national narrative.

Lost Opportunity: Bush V. Holmes And The Application Of State Constitutional Uniformity Clauses To School Voucher Programs, Jamie S. Dycus

ExpressO

This article analyzes the Florida Supreme Court’s recent decision in Bush v. Holmes, in which the court struck down Florida’s school voucher program as a violation of Florida's constitutional uniformity clause. It argues that the court erred by applying a simplistic and ahistorical definition of uniformity, and recommends that future courts applying state constitutional uniformity clauses to school voucher schemes take a different approach.

Specifically, it argues that courts in future cases should begin by acknowledging frankly the necessity of determining the meaning of uniformity. Next, drawing on case law and historical evidence, they should fashion definitions of uniformity that …

Breaking The Bank: Revisiting Central Bank Of Denver After Enron And Sarbanes-Oxley, Celia Taylor

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

The Police Power Revisited: Phantom Incorporation And The Roots Of The Takings Muddle, Bradley C. Karkkainen

ExpressO

This article traces the roots of the current muddle in the Supreme Court’s regulatory takings jurisprudence to an ill-considered “phantom incorporation” holding in Penn Central v. New York (1978), the seminal case of the modern regulatory takings era. The Penn Central Court anachronistically misread a long line of Fourteenth Amendment Substantive Due Process cases as Fifth Amendment Takings Clause cases, misattributing to Chicago Burlington & Quincy v. Chicago (1897) (“Chicago B & Q”) the crucial holding that the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause applied to the states. Like other cases of its era, Chicago B & Q was decided strictly on …

The Continuing Showdown Over Who Should Regulate Amusement Attraction Safety: A Critical Analysis Of Why Fixed-Site Amusement Attraction Safety Should Remain State-Governed. , Chad Emerson

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Progressivist Origins Of The 2003 California Gubernatorial Recall, Kira L. Klatchko

ExpressO

Progressivist Origins of the 2003 California Gubernatorial Recall, was written in Sacramento in the midst of the first statewide recall of an elected official in California. The paper explores the nature of the recall procedure and its implementation in the state, and is chiefly an inquiry into the relatedness of the current incarnation and its Progressivist root. It focuses particularly on the recall of Governor Gray Davis, and details how shifting attitudes towards public participation have altered the procedure over time.

Secularism's Laws: State Blaine Amendments And Religious Persecution, Kyle Duncan

ExpressO

The State Blaine Amendments are provisions in thirty-seven state constitutions that restrict persons’ and organizations’ access to public benefits on religious grounds. They arose largely in the mid- to late-1800s in response to bitter strife between an established Protestant majority and a growing Catholic minority that sought equal access to public funding for Catholic schools. After the failure to pass a federal constitutional amendment—the "Blaine Amendment"—that would have sealed off public school funds from "sectarian" institutions, similar provisions proliferated in state constitutions. These "State Blaines" have often been interpreted, under their plain terms, as erecting religion-sensitive barriers to the flow …