Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Eighth Amendment (2)
- All-payer claims database (1)
- Arbitrariness (1)
- Brain development (1)
- Children sentenced to die in prison (1)
-
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Cruel and Unusual Punishment (1)
- Decarceration (1)
- ERISA (1)
- Eminent domain (1)
- Empirical study (1)
- Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) (1)
- Executive power (1)
- Gobielle (1)
- HLA Hart (1)
- History (1)
- Imperial presidency (1)
- In personam jurisdiction (1)
- International law (1)
- JLWOP (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Jury trial (1)
- Just compensation (1)
- Juvenile life without parole (1)
- Land use planning (1)
- Legal constraint (1)
- Plain language (1)
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
A Second Look For Children Sentenced To Die In Prison, Kathryn E. Miller
A Second Look For Children Sentenced To Die In Prison, Kathryn E. Miller
Articles
Scholars have championed “second look” statutes as a decarceral tool. Second look statutes allow certain incarcerated people to seek resentencing after having served a portion of their sentences. This Essay weighs the advantages and disadvantages of these statutes as applied to children sentenced to die in prison and argues that focusing on this small, discrete group may be a digestible entry point for more conservative states who fear widespread resentencing. Moreover, because early data indicates that children convicted of homicide and released as adults have very low recidivism rates, second look beneficiaries are likely to pose little threat to public …
Getting Past The Imperial Presidency, Deborah Pearlstein
Getting Past The Imperial Presidency, Deborah Pearlstein
Articles
In an age in which the “imperial presidency” seems to have reached its apex, perhaps most alarmingly surrounding the use of military force, conventional wisdom remains fixed that constitutional and international law play a negligible role in constraining executive branch decision-making in this realm. Yet as this Article explains, the factual case that supports the conventional view, based largely on highly selected incidents of presidential behavior, is meaningless in any standard empirical sense. Indeed, the canonical listing of presidential decisions to use force without prior authorization feeds a compliance-centered focus on the study of legal constraint rooted in long-since abandoned …
Erisa Preemption After Gobeille V. Liberty Mutual: Completing The Retrenchment Of Shaw, Edward A. Zelinsky
Erisa Preemption After Gobeille V. Liberty Mutual: Completing The Retrenchment Of Shaw, Edward A. Zelinsky
Articles
Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. is the U.S. Supreme Court’s most recent preemption decision under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). In Gobeille, the Court completed the process of reconciling the restrained approach to ERISA preemption announced in New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Insurance Co. with the Court’s literal and expansive approach adopted earlier in Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. Gobeille consummated this reconciliation by confirming the sub silentio retrenchment of Shaw and its “plain language” approach in favor of Traveler’s broader construction of ERISA preemption. …
Reconceptualizing The Eighth Amendment: Slaves, Prisoners, And Cruel And Unusual Punishment, Alexander A. Reinert
Reconceptualizing The Eighth Amendment: Slaves, Prisoners, And Cruel And Unusual Punishment, Alexander A. Reinert
Articles
The meaning of the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause has long been hotly contested. For scholars and jurists who look to original meaning or intent, there is little direct contemporaneous evidence on which to rest any conclusion. For those who adopt a dynamic interpretive framework, the Supreme Court’s “evolving standards of decency” paradigm has surface appeal, but deep conflicts have arisen in application. This Article offers a contextual account of the Eighth Amendment’s meaning that addresses both of these interpretive frames by situating the Amendment in eighteenth and nineteenth-century legal standards governing relationships of subordination.
In particular, I …
Constitutional Venue, Peter L. Markowitz, Lindsay C. Nash
Constitutional Venue, Peter L. Markowitz, Lindsay C. Nash
Articles
A foundational concept of American jurisprudence is the principle that it is unfair to allow litigants to be haled into far away tribunals when the litigants and the litigation have little or nothing to do with the location of such courts. Historically, both personal jurisdiction and venue each served this purpose in related, but distinct ways. Personal jurisdiction is, at base, a limit on the authority of the sovereign. Venue, in contrast, aims to protect parties from being forced to litigate in a location where they would be unfairly disadvantaged. The constitutional boundaries of these early principles came to be …
Rethinking The Boundaries Between Public Law And Private Law For The Twenty First Century: An Introduction, Michel Rosenfeld
Rethinking The Boundaries Between Public Law And Private Law For The Twenty First Century: An Introduction, Michel Rosenfeld
Articles
The distinction between public law and private law has been both ever present and unwieldy in civil law as well as in common law jurisdictions. Kelsen found the distinction “useless” for “a general systematization of law,” and Paul Verkuil has remarked that “[i]f the law is a jealous mistress, the public-private distinction is like a dysfunctional spouse. . . . It has been around forever, but it continues to fail as an organizing principle.”
The Demise Of Federal Takings Litigation, Stewart E. Sterk
The Demise Of Federal Takings Litigation, Stewart E. Sterk
Articles
For more than twenty years the Supreme Court has held that a federal takings claim is not ripe until the claimant seeks compensation in state court. The Court's recent opinion in San Remo Hotel, L.P. v. City & County of San Francisco establishes that the federal full faith and credit statute applies to federal takings claims. The Court itself recognized that its decision limits the availability of a federal forum for takings claims. In fact, however, claim preclusion doctrine-not considered or discussed by the Court-may result in more stringent limits on federal court review of takings claims than the Court's …
The Federalist Dimension Of Regulatory Takings Jurisprudence, Stewart E. Sterk
The Federalist Dimension Of Regulatory Takings Jurisprudence, Stewart E. Sterk
Articles
Conventional wisdom teaches that the Supreme Court's takings doctrine is a muddle. Appearances, however, are deceiving. The "property" protected by the Takings Clause is defined not by a single sovereign, but by the legislative enactments and judicial pronouncements of fifty separate states. As a result, federalism concerns - underappreciated in the takings literature - do and should play an important role in shaping the Court's takings doctrine. In particular, these concerns make it inappropriate for the Court to use the Takings Clause as a vehicle for articulating a comprehensive theory of the limits on government power to regulate land. This …
Travelers, Reasoned Textualism, And The New Jurisprudence Of Erisa Preemption, Edward A. Zelinsky
Travelers, Reasoned Textualism, And The New Jurisprudence Of Erisa Preemption, Edward A. Zelinsky
Articles
Upon the enactment of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), few would have predicted that, a generation later, ERISA's provisions preempting state law would be front page news, a central topic of national debate about health care and its regulation. Similarly, few foresaw at the time ERISA was adopted that the United States Supreme Court would have great difficulty construing ERISA's preemption provisions. By the same token, in 1974 the contemporary revival of interest in statutory textualism lay well into the future.
James Madison And Public Choice At Gucci Gulch: A Procedural Defense Of Tax Expenditures And Tax Institutions, Edward A. Zelinsky
James Madison And Public Choice At Gucci Gulch: A Procedural Defense Of Tax Expenditures And Tax Institutions, Edward A. Zelinsky
Articles
Few academic doctrines can claim the intellectual and political success of tax expenditure analysis. In roughly a generation's time, Professor Surrey's procedural and substantive critique of tax subsidies has become entrenched in the law school curriculum and in legal scholarship. More impressively, the tax expenditure concept has been enshrined in federal law and become part of the daily discourse of the national budget process.