Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Judicial Review (2)
- Aba (1)
- Adjudication (1)
- American bar association (1)
- Citizenship (1)
-
- Congress (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutional Federalism (1)
- Constitutional Interpretation (1)
- Constitutionalism (1)
- Constraint of Choice (1)
- Court (1)
- Crime (1)
- Democracy (1)
- Democratic Legitimacy (1)
- Federal (1)
- Federal court (1)
- Federal habeas (1)
- Feminist Legal Theory (1)
- First Principles (1)
- Founders (1)
- Habeas (1)
- Indeterminacy (1)
- Individual Choice (1)
- King's courts (1)
- King's year books (1)
- Law practice (1)
- Mainstream Constitutioal Theory (1)
- Model code (1)
- Model rules (1)
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
A Feminist Revisit To The First-Year Curriculum, Anita Bernstein
A Feminist Revisit To The First-Year Curriculum, Anita Bernstein
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Lon Fuller, The Model Code, And The Model Rules, John M.A. Dipippa
Lon Fuller, The Model Code, And The Model Rules, John M.A. Dipippa
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Federal Evidentiary Hearings Under The New Habeas Corpus Statute, Larry Yackle
Federal Evidentiary Hearings Under The New Habeas Corpus Statute, Larry Yackle
Faculty Scholarship
Constitutional claims invariably turn on the underlying historical facts. In order to adjudicate claims presented in habeas corpus petitions, accordingly, the federal courts must somehow ascertain the facts. In some instances, the factual record can be augmented via discovery or expansion of the record under the federal habeas corpus rules.' Otherwise, disputed factual issues typically must be determined on the basis of previous litigation in state court or in independent federal evidentiary hearings.
Work Of Knowledge , Abner S. Greene
Work Of Knowledge , Abner S. Greene
Faculty Scholarship
Interpretation involves the acquisition of knowledge. We are continually confronted with the results of purposive action. Sometimes these results are written texts, such as statutes or novels. Other times these results are events in the physical world, actions that we observe or the results of actions about which we are told. To make sense of these results of purposive action, that is, to make the results be more than just a jumble of sense impressions, the observer must find a way of organizing the material with which he or she is presented. These methods of organizing the results of purposive …
A Primer On The New Habeas Corpus Statute, Larry Yackle
A Primer On The New Habeas Corpus Statute, Larry Yackle
Faculty Scholarship
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (Pub. L. 104-132), signed into law on April 24, 1996, represents Congress' attempt to deal with the problems deemed to beset federal habeas corpus for state prisoners. This new statute addresses many important aspects of habeas law and practice and, as to them, now occupies the field to the exclusion of previous arrangements-whether developed as a construction of preexisting statutes or as interstitial decisional law. On the whole, however, Pub. L. 104-132 presupposes the basic framework now in place. This matter-of-fact point (that the new statute takes the preexisting habeas landscape as its …
The Distinction Between Crime And Tort In The Early Common Law, David J. Seipp
The Distinction Between Crime And Tort In The Early Common Law, David J. Seipp
Faculty Scholarship
Lawyers and judges in English royal courts between 1200 and 1500 drew a distinction between crime and tort. Each type of lawsuit-each writ or action-had its own form and nature. Medieval English lawyers grouped these individual actions into categories such as real actions and personal actions, writs of possession and writs of right.' The lawyers recognized categories that later acquired the labels crime and tort, although those were not the names for them in the early common law. Crimes were prosecuted by actions known as indictments and appeals of felony. Torts were remedied by writs of trespass alleging use of …
Legal Indeterminacy: Its Cause And Cure, Gary S. Lawson
Legal Indeterminacy: Its Cause And Cure, Gary S. Lawson
Faculty Scholarship
Legal indeterminacy--the extent to which any particular legal theory cannot provide knowable answers to concrete problems is one of the principal themes of modern jurisprudence. Indeterminacy plays an important role in debates concerning interpretation, the nature of legal obligation, and the character and possibilities of the rule of law. Indeterminacy looms particularly large in debates concerning originalism as a method of constitutional interpretation. Some scholars insist that originalism resolves too few problems to be of much use, while others argue that originalism's indeterminacy is often overstated.
Tragic Irony Of American Federalism: National Sovereignty Versus State Sovereignty In Slavery And In Freedom, The Federalism In The 21st Century: Historical Perspectives, Robert J. Kaczorowski
Tragic Irony Of American Federalism: National Sovereignty Versus State Sovereignty In Slavery And In Freedom, The Federalism In The 21st Century: Historical Perspectives, Robert J. Kaczorowski
Faculty Scholarship
A plurality on the Supreme Court seeks to establish a state-sovereignty based theory of federalism that imposes sharp limitations on Congress's legislative powers. Using history as authority, they admonish a return to the constitutional "first principles" of the Founders. These "first principles," in their view, attribute all governmental authority to "the consent of the people of each individual state, not the consent of the undifferentiated people of the Nation as a whole." Because the people of each state are the source of all governmental power, they maintain, "where the Constitution is silent about the exercise of a particular power-that is, …
Democracy And Feminism , Tracy E. Higgins
Democracy And Feminism , Tracy E. Higgins
Faculty Scholarship
Although feminist legal theory has had an important impact on most areas of legal doctrine and theory over the last two decades, its contribution to the debate over constitutional interpretation has been comparatively small. In this Article, Professor Higgins explores reasons for the limited dialogue between mainstream constitutional theory and feminist theory concerning questions of democracy, constitutionalism, and judicial review. She argues that mainstream constitutional theory tends to take for granted the capacity of the individual to make choices, leaving the social construction of those choices largely unexamined. In contrast, feminist legal theory's emphasis on the importance of constraints on …