Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Federal courts (2)
- Law reform (2)
- Access to information (1)
- Appellate models (1)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal (1)
-
- Astronomy (1)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (1)
- Book reviews (1)
- Circuit courts (1)
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (1)
- Classification (1)
- Clear-Statement Approach (1)
- Commercial speech (1)
- Constitutional borrowing (1)
- Constitutionalism (1)
- Constructs (1)
- Corporations (1)
- Corruption (1)
- DeGrasse Tyson (Neil) (1)
- Discovery (1)
- Displacement (1)
- Elections (1)
- Equality (1)
- Facts (1)
- Freedom of speech (1)
- Hedging (1)
- Hierarchies (1)
- Information (1)
- Judicial activism (1)
- Judicial decisions (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
Citizens United And The Threat To The Regulatory State, Tamara R. Piety
Citizens United And The Threat To The Regulatory State, Tamara R. Piety
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Although Citizens United has been roundly criticized for its potential effect on elections and its display of judicial immodesty (or "activism"), the effect of the case which may be both most profound and perhaps most pernicious is its effect on the commercial speech doctrine. This is an aspect of the case which has been largely overlooked. Most people seem to be unaware of any connection between election law and the commercial speech doctrine-except, that is, those who have been working long and hard to accomplish the change it foreshadows. They are keenly aware of its implications.
A Planet By Any Other Name…, Kimberly Kessler Ferzan
A Planet By Any Other Name…, Kimberly Kessler Ferzan
Michigan Law Review
In case you haven't heard, Pluto isn't a planet anymore (and maybe it never was). In grade school, we all memorized the planets, giving little thought to what made something a planet besides revolving around the Sun and being part of some familiar mnemonic. However, scientific discoveries about Pluto and other parts of space led scientists to question Pluto's planetary status and ultimately, to strip Pluto of its standing among the planets. This leads to the inevitable question-what is a planet?-which turns out to be a more difficult and fascinating question than one might think. The Pluto Files grapples with …
Constitutional Borrowing, Nelson Tebbe, Robert L. Tsai
Constitutional Borrowing, Nelson Tebbe, Robert L. Tsai
Michigan Law Review
Borrowing from one domain to promote ideas in another domain is a staple of constitutional decisionmaking. Precedents, arguments, concepts, tropes, and heuristics all can be carried across doctrinal boundaries for purposes of persuasion. Yet the practice itself remains underanalyzed. This Article seeks to bring greater theoretical attention to the matter It defines what constitutional borrowing is and what it is not, presents a typology that describes its common forms, undertakes a principled defense of borrowing, and identifies some of the risks involved. Our examples draw particular attention to places where legal mechanisms and ideas migrate between fields of law associated …
Structure And Precedent, Jeffrey C. Dobbins
Structure And Precedent, Jeffrey C. Dobbins
Michigan Law Review
The standard model of vertical precedent is part of the deep structure of our legal system. Under this model, we rarely struggle with whether a given decision of a court within a particular hierarchy is potentially binding at all. When Congress or the courts alter the standard structure and process offederal appellate review, however, that standard model of precedent breaks down. This Article examines several of these unusual appellate structures and highlights the difficulties associated with evaluating the precedential effect of decisions issued within them. For instance, when Congress consolidates challenges to agency decision making in a single federal circuit, …
New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson
New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson
Michigan Law Review
Pleading in federal court has a new narrative. The old narrative was one of notice, with the goal of broad access to the civil justice system. New Pleading, after the landmark Supreme Court cases of Twombly and Iqbal, is focused on factual sufficiency, with the purpose of screening out meritless cases that otherwise might impose discovery costs on defendants. The problem with New Pleading is that factual insufficiency often is a poor proxy for meritlessness. Some plaintifs lack sufficient factual knowledge of the elements of their claims not because the claims lack merit but because the information they need is …