Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (3)
- Courts (3)
- Law and Politics (3)
- Law and Society (2)
- Administrative Law (1)
-
- Civil Law (1)
- Civil Procedure (1)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1)
- Judges (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Legal History (1)
- Legal Profession (1)
- Litigation (1)
- Privacy Law (1)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (1)
- Rule of Law (1)
- Social Welfare Law (1)
- State and Local Government Law (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
The Voting Rights Act And The "New And Improved" Intent Test: Old Wine In New Bottles, Randolph M. Scott-Mclaughlin
The Voting Rights Act And The "New And Improved" Intent Test: Old Wine In New Bottles, Randolph M. Scott-Mclaughlin
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Does A House Of Congress Have Standing Over Appropriations?: The House Of Representatives Challenges The Affordable Care Act, Bradford Mank
Does A House Of Congress Have Standing Over Appropriations?: The House Of Representatives Challenges The Affordable Care Act, Bradford Mank
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
In U.S. House of Representatives v. Sylvia Matthews Burwell, the District Court for D.C. in 2015 held that the House of Representatives has Article III standing to challenge certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act as violations of the Constitution’s Appropriations Clause. The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on legislative standing is complicated. The Court has generally avoided the contentious question of whether Congress has standing to challenge certain presidential actions because of the difficult separation-of-powers concerns in such cases. In Raines v. Byrd, the Court held that individual members of Congress generally do not have Article III standing by simply holding …
Agenda-Setting In The Regulatory State: Theory And Evidence, Cary Coglianese, Daniel E. Walters
Agenda-Setting In The Regulatory State: Theory And Evidence, Cary Coglianese, Daniel E. Walters
Faculty Scholarship
Government officials who run administrative agencies must make countless decisions every day about what issues and work to prioritize. These agenda-setting decisions hold enormous implications for the shape of law and public policy, but they have received remarkably little attention by either administrative law scholars or social scientists who study the bureaucracy. Existing research offers few insights about the institutions, norms, and inputs that shape and constrain agency discretion over their agendas or about the strategies that officials employ in choosing to elevate certain issues while putting others on the back burner. In this article, we advance the study of …
Congress And The Reconstruction Of Foreign Affairs Federalism, Ryan Baasch, Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash
Congress And The Reconstruction Of Foreign Affairs Federalism, Ryan Baasch, Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash
Michigan Law Review
Though the Constitution conspicuously bars some state involvement in foreign affairs, the states clearly retain some authority in foreign affairs. Correctly supposing that state participation may unnecessarily complicate or embarrass our nation’s foreign relations, the Supreme Court has embraced aggressive preemption doctrines that sporadically oust the states from discrete areas in foreign affairs. These doctrines are unprincipled, supply little guidance, and generate capricious results. Fortunately, there is a better way. While the Constitution permits the states a limited and continuing role, it never goes so far as guaranteeing them any foreign affairs authority. Furthermore, the Constitution authorizes Congress to enact …