Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Chief Justice John “Marshall” Roberts – How The Chief Justice’S Majority Opinion Upholding The Federal Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act Of 2010 Evokes Chief Justice Marshall’S Decision In Marbury V. Madison, Mohamed Akram Faizer
Akram Faizer
The United States Supreme Court sustained the Federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 based on Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.’s majority opinion in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012). The Chief Justice’s decision to uphold the Act obviated a potentially harmful confrontation with the Obama Administration in advance of the November 2012 general election. However, the decision accomplished more than merely avoid a confrontation with the executive branch. Rather, the Chief Justice’s rationale for sustaining the Act under the Taxing and Spending Power and not the Commerce Clause is a …
Chief Justice Roberts's Marbury Moment: The Affordable Care Act Case (Nfib V. Sebelius), Stephen M. Feldman
Chief Justice Roberts's Marbury Moment: The Affordable Care Act Case (Nfib V. Sebelius), Stephen M. Feldman
Stephen M. Feldman
This essay is derived from the Jerry W. Housel/Carl F. Arnold Lecture, delivered on November 3, 2012 at the University of Wyoming College of Law. The work discusses Chief Justice John Roberts's decision in the Affordable Care Act case in light of its political significance as compared to the Madison v. Marbury case. The essay briefly summarizes the ACA case and goes on to focus on Congress's commerce power. It examines the constitutional doctrine that preceded the case and then explores how Roberts changed the doctrine.
Transcript For Introduction: The Constitutional Importance Of The District Of Columbia, Jamin B. Raskin
Transcript For Introduction: The Constitutional Importance Of The District Of Columbia, Jamin B. Raskin
Jamin Raskin
No abstract provided.
Judicial Review And Diversity, Deseriee A. Kennedy
Judicial Review And Diversity, Deseriee A. Kennedy
Deseriee A. Kennedy
No abstract provided.
Judicial Review Of Unenumerated Rights: Does Marbury's Holding Apply In A Post-Warren Court World?, John C. Eastman
Judicial Review Of Unenumerated Rights: Does Marbury's Holding Apply In A Post-Warren Court World?, John C. Eastman
John C. Eastman
Prepared to commemmorate the bicentennial of the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Marbury v. Madison, this article explores the limits of the original holding, its expansive interpretation in the 20th Century to claims of judicial supremacy, even exclusiveness, in constitutional interpretation, and the various theories that would support such claims. The article explores in some detail the particularly troubling claim of judicial power to create new, unenumerated rights when the Court itself has rejected the foundational, natural rights principles that would lend legitimacy to the enterprise.