Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Caminetti v. United States (2)
- Extramarital relation (2)
- Immoral purpose (2)
- Mann Act (2)
- Prostitution (2)
-
- Squalid v. United States (2)
- Statutory interpretation (2)
- United States Supreme Court (2)
- Affirmative action (1)
- Autonomy (1)
- Bowers v. Hardwick (1)
- City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. (1)
- Cleveland v. United States (1)
- Conservative constitutionalism (1)
- Critical legal studies (1)
- Darwinism (1)
- Decisionmaking (1)
- Determinism (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- Equality (1)
- Eskridge (William N.) (1)
- Evolutionism (1)
- Feminist legal theory (1)
- High Middle Ages (1)
- Japan (1)
- Judicial discretion (1)
- Judicial lawmaking (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Legal sociology (1)
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
The Case Of The Amorous Defendant: Criticizing Absolute Stare Decisis For Statutory Cases, William N. Eskridge Jr.
The Case Of The Amorous Defendant: Criticizing Absolute Stare Decisis For Statutory Cases, William N. Eskridge Jr.
Michigan Law Review
Earlier in this the first year of the new millennium, Professor Larry Marshall was appointed Chief Justice of the United States. The first important case coming before the Marshall Court involved the government's prosecution of Frankly Amorous under the White Slave Traffic Act of June 25, 1910 (the Mann Act), as amended. Defendant Amorous was a law student in Virginia who paid for the airplane ticket of his female lover to travel from North Carolina to Virginia for the admitted purpose of having extramarital sexual relations. The U.S. Attorney prosecuted Amorous for violating the Mann Act, which criminalizes the knowing …
Contempt Of Congress: A Reply To The Critics Of An Absolute Rule Of Statutory Stare Decisis, Lawrence C. Marshall
Contempt Of Congress: A Reply To The Critics Of An Absolute Rule Of Statutory Stare Decisis, Lawrence C. Marshall
Michigan Law Review
In the law school tradition of "suspending belief," Professor Eskridge has created a hypothetical in which I, in my first case as Chief Justice of the United States, must decide whether to adhere to various antiquated and seemingly erroneous precedents interpreting the Mann Act. Eskridge assumes that I will feel compelled to adhere to these decisions, for to do otherwise, he contends, would force me to abandon the proposal for an absolute rule of statutory stare decisis that I advanced recently in this Law Review. Eskridge then offers a variety of critiques of my thesis, coming from perspectives as diverse …
Beyond The Warren Court And Its Conservative Critics: Toward A Unified Theory Of Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Donald A. Dripps
Beyond The Warren Court And Its Conservative Critics: Toward A Unified Theory Of Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Donald A. Dripps
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Part I develops more fully the differences that divide liberal and conservative commentators on criminal procedure, taking special note of the series of Reports prepared by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Policy and published recently in the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform. Part II explains my disquiet with the suggestion that original-meaning jurisprudence ought to guide criminal procedure doctrine. Part II also defends the thesis that the fourteenth amendment protects the individual interest in freedom from unjust punishment, rather than any abstract interest in truth for its own sake. Part III considers two familiar controversies in criminal …
The Truth About Massiah, James J. Tomkovicz
The Truth About Massiah, James J. Tomkovicz
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
First, the Article will summarize the Justice Department's discussion of the Massiah right to counsel and the exclusion of evidence under Massiah. Next, it will evaluate the nature of the Report and the character of legal scholarship. Finally, it will explore the substantive debate over Massiah. In that section, the Article will point out the matters on which the DOJ and I agree, will attempt to frame the fundamental questions raised by the Massiah doctrine, and will investigate potential sources of answers to those constitutional questions. Ultimately, it will provide the answers that I prefer, explaining the premises …
Evolutionary Jurisprudence: Prospects And Limitations On The Use Of Modern Darwinism Throughout The Legal Process, Steven Kasten
Evolutionary Jurisprudence: Prospects And Limitations On The Use Of Modern Darwinism Throughout The Legal Process, Steven Kasten
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Evolutionary Jurisprudence: Prospects and Limitations on the Use of Modern Darwinism Throughout the Legal Process by John H. Beckstrom
Sociological Justice, Christopher M. Adams
Sociological Justice, Christopher M. Adams
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Sociological Justice by Donald Black
Original Intent: "With Friends Like These…", Thomas Gibbs Gee
Original Intent: "With Friends Like These…", Thomas Gibbs Gee
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Original Intent and the Framer's Constitution by Leonard W. Levy
Judicial Discretion: Is One More Of A Good Thing Too Much?, David B. Sentelle
Judicial Discretion: Is One More Of A Good Thing Too Much?, David B. Sentelle
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Judicial Discretion by Aharon Barak
History's Challenge To Feminism, Jeanne L. Schroeder
History's Challenge To Feminism, Jeanne L. Schroeder
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe by James A. Brundage
Progressive And Conservative Constitutionalism, Robin West
Progressive And Conservative Constitutionalism, Robin West
Michigan Law Review
The article's central thesis is that the understandings of the constitutional tradition most central to both paradigms are determined by sometimes implicit, but more often explicit, political dispositions toward various forms of social and private power, and the normative authority to which social and private power gives rise. Very broadly, conservative constitutionalists view private or social normative authority as the legitimate and best source of guidance for state action; accordingly, they view both the Constitution and constitutional adjudication as means of preserving and protecting that authority and the power that undergirds it against either legislative or judicial encroachment. Progressive constitutionalists, …