Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Abortion (1)
- Affirmative action plans in university admissions (1)
- Constitutional Interpretation (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Constitutional Norms (1)
-
- Constitutional Theory (1)
- Detention of noncitizens with criminal records (1)
- Digital privacy (1)
- Double jeopardy (1)
- General Jurisprudence (1)
- Gerrymandering (1)
- Government and politics (1)
- Ideology (1)
- Individual rights (1)
- International relations (1)
- Law (1)
- Law and Politics (1)
- Legal Decision-Making (1)
- Legal Reasoning (1)
- Legal Sociology (1)
- Limiting voting rolls (1)
- Michigan Law Review (1)
- Natural rights (1)
- Non-natural rights (1)
- Philosophy and ethics (1)
- Refusing services based on religious beliefs (1)
- Roberto Rosas (1)
- St. Mary's University School of Law (1)
- Supreme Court decisions (1)
- Supreme Court justices (1)
- Publication
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
Evolution Of Legal Topics, Rights And Obligations In The United States, Roberto Rosas
Evolution Of Legal Topics, Rights And Obligations In The United States, Roberto Rosas
Faculty Articles
What new constitutional rights does the American Legal system have to offer? The United States Constitution is a document that continues to be interpreted every year. The Supreme Court hears recent cases with the purpose of interpreting the meaning of the Constitution. Since the creation of the Supreme Court, the Constitution has been analyzed in different ways – some interpretations lasting decades and some amendments going through changes depending on the different ideologies of the Justices on the Court.
This article discusses some of the rights established by the Supreme Court from 2016 to 2019 and provides the background as …
Anti-Modalities, David E. Pozen, Adam Samaha
Anti-Modalities, David E. Pozen, Adam Samaha
Faculty Scholarship
Constitutional argument runs on the rails of “modalities.” These are the accepted categories of reasoning used to make claims about the content of supreme law. Some of the modalities, such as ethical and prudential arguments, seem strikingly open ended at first sight. Their contours come into clearer view, however, when we attend to the kinds of claims that are not made by constitutional interpreters – the analytical and rhetorical moves that are familiar in debates over public policy and political morality but are considered out of bounds in debates over constitutional meaning. In this Article, we seek to identify the …