Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Disability Law
Toward A Less Adversarial Relationship Between Chevron And Gardner, James Ridgway
Toward A Less Adversarial Relationship Between Chevron And Gardner, James Ridgway
James D. Ridgway
In twenty-five years of judicial review of veterans benefits claims, the courts have failed to reconcile the interpretive canons of veteran friendliness and deference to the agency’s policy making role. This article argues that the courts must develop a coherent relationship between these doctrines by recognizing that each are core values of veterans law. First, it explores the history and nature of these two doctrines that are central to veterans law. Then, It considers how the canons are situated in the spectrum of fact- and value-based judicial review. Ultimately, separation-of-powers principles and the legislative history of the Veterans Judicial Review …
In Defense Of Idea Due Process, Mark C. Weber
In Defense Of Idea Due Process, Mark C. Weber
Mark C. Weber
Due Process hearing rights under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act are under attack. A major professional group and several academic commentators charge that the hearings system advantages middle class parents, that it is expensive, that it is futile, and that it is unmanageable. Some critics would abandon individual rights to a hearing and review in favor of bureaucratic enforcement or administrative mechanisms that do not include the right to an individual hearing before a neutral decision maker. This Article defends the right to a due process hearing. It contends that some criticisms of hearing rights are simply erroneous, and …
Idea Class Actions After Wal-Mart V. Dukes, Mark C. Weber
Idea Class Actions After Wal-Mart V. Dukes, Mark C. Weber
Mark C. Weber
Wal-Mart v. Dukes overturned the certification of a class of a million and a half female employees alleging sex discrimination in Wal-Mart’s salary and promotion decisions. The Supreme Court ruled that the case did not satisfy the requirement that a class have a common question of law or fact, and said that the remedy sought was not the type of relief available under the portion of the class action rule permitting mandatory class actions. Over the last two years, courts have struggled with how to apply the ruling, especially how to apply it beyond its immediate context of employment discrimination …