Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
Nonparty Jurisdiction, Aaron D. Simowitz, Linda J. Silberman
Nonparty Jurisdiction, Aaron D. Simowitz, Linda J. Silberman
Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law
The Supreme Court's recent decisions on personal jurisdiction, including its 2021 decision in Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court, have all focused on the adjudication of plenary claims. In seven years, the Court has decided six major cases on personal jurisdiction in that context. However, these precedents also appear to guide lower courts in areas outside the traditional focus of personal jurisdiction doctrine but where personal jurisdiction is nonetheless necessary. For example, a court must have personal jurisdiction over a nonparty witness in order to compel the witness to testify or to produce documents. A court must …
Emotional Common Sense As Constitutional Law, Terry A. Maroney
Emotional Common Sense As Constitutional Law, Terry A. Maroney
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In Gonzales v. Carhart the Supreme Court invoked post-abortion regret to justify a ban on a particular abortion procedure. The Court was proudly folk-psychological, representing its observations about women's emotional experiences as "self-evident." That such observations could drive critical legal determinations was, apparently, even more self-evident, as it received no mention at all. Far from being sui generis, Carhart reflects a previously unidentified norm permeating constitutional jurisprudence: reliance on what this Article coins "emotional common sense." Emotional common sense is what one unreflectively thinks she knows about the emotions. A species of common sense, it seems obvious and universal to …
Disentangling Deregulatory Takings, Jim Rossi, Susan Rose-Ackerman
Disentangling Deregulatory Takings, Jim Rossi, Susan Rose-Ackerman
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Constitutional takings protections, such as those in the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, create a potential for state liability for changes in regulatory policy by governments. This Article critiques takings jurisprudence in the context of two infrastructure investment issues: the stranded cost problem facing United States utility industries, which has given rise to claims of compensation for deregulatory takings; and the development of standards to protect direct foreign investment in developing countries. In both contexts, traditional legal doctrines do not adequately provide for the type of remedy sought so courts are in need of standards to assist them …
What's Wrong With Baker V. Carr?, Robert Lancaster
What's Wrong With Baker V. Carr?, Robert Lancaster
Vanderbilt Law Review
The decision of the majority of the Supreme Court in Baker v. Carr, the recently decided Tennessee Reapportionment Case, may well turn out to be one of the landmark decisions of American jurisprudence. If by reason of apathetic acquiescence such a judicial intrusion is permitted to go unchallenged and undebated, our federal system of limited and constitutional government may be further weakened. Although the balance of power as between the states and the national government has shifted and this shift has been reflected in and furthered by judicial interpretation of our Constitution, it seems questionable that such a far-reaching and …