Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (4)
- Federal courts (2)
- Admiralty (1)
- Attorney's fees (1)
- Burger Court (1)
-
- Califano v. Goldfarb (1)
- Califano v. Webster (1)
- Causes of action (1)
- Commerce (1)
- Compensation (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Damages (1)
- Equal protection (1)
- Fairness (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Gender and law (1)
- Governmental action (1)
- History (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County (1)
- Navigable waters (1)
- Postmodernism (1)
- Private property (1)
- Section 1983 (1)
- Sex discrimination (1)
- Takings (1)
- Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld (1)
- Women (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
What Is A Postmodern Constitutionalism?, J. M. Balkin
What Is A Postmodern Constitutionalism?, J. M. Balkin
Michigan Law Review
I begin with a puzzle. It must certainly strike one as odd that the subject of postmodern constitutional law arises at a time when the actual arbiters of the Constitution - the federal judiciary and in particular the Supreme Court of the United States - appear to be more conservative than they have been for many years, and indeed, are likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. Postmodernism is often associated with what is new, innovative, and on the cutting edge of cultural development. Yet if we were to define the elements of a postmodern constitutional culture, it would …
A Critical Reexamination Of The Takings Jurisprudence, Glynn S. Lunney Jr
A Critical Reexamination Of The Takings Jurisprudence, Glynn S. Lunney Jr
Michigan Law Review
To provide some insight into the nature of these disagreements, and to suggest a possible solution to the compensation issue, this article undertakes a critical reexamination of the takings jurisprudence. It focuses on the two bases which the modem Court has articulated as support for its resolution of the compensation issue: (1) the articulated purpose of using the just compensation requirement "to bar Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens"; and (2) the early case law. Beginning with the Court's first struggles with the compensation issue in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, this article traces …
Legislative Inputs And Gender-Based Discrimination In The Burger Court, Earl M. Maltz
Legislative Inputs And Gender-Based Discrimination In The Burger Court, Earl M. Maltz
Michigan Law Review
In An Interpretive History of Modem Equal Protection, Michael Klarman poses a powerful challenge to the conventional wisdom regarding the structure of Burger Court jurisprudence. Most commentators have concluded that during the Burger era the Court lacked a coherent vision of constitutional law, and was given to a "rootless" activism or a "pragmatic" approach to constitutional analysis. Klarman argues that, at least in the area of equal protection analysis, the Burger Court's approach did reflect a unifying theme, which he describes as a focus on "legislative inputs." According to Klarman, this approach "directs judicial review towards purging legislative decision-making of …
Balancing Commerce, History, And Geography: Defining The Navigable Waters Of The United States, John F. Baughman
Balancing Commerce, History, And Geography: Defining The Navigable Waters Of The United States, John F. Baughman
Michigan Law Review
This Note develops a simple set of principles useful for defining navigable waters in a contemporary context. Part I considers why federal admiralty jurisdiction exists, and traces the evolution of the phrase navigable waters as a term of art. Part II analyzes the conflicting contemporary definitions of navigable waters. Part III resolves the conflict by proposing guidelines that address the major concerns of all competing definitions. The system advocated is consistent with the goals of admiralty, constitutionally sound, easy to apply, and focuses attention on the nexus test to resolve the issue of whether particular cases "belong" in admiralty.
Section 1983 And Implied Rights Of Action: Rights, Remedies, And Realism, Michael A. Mazzuchi
Section 1983 And Implied Rights Of Action: Rights, Remedies, And Realism, Michael A. Mazzuchi
Michigan Law Review
This Note criticizes the Court's current reconciliation of the implied right of action and section 1983 inquiries, and argues that the availability of lawsuits under section 1983 should be the same as under an implied right of action test. Part I, by offering a working definition of rights, suggests an approach to identifying statutorily created rights. Part II discusses the evolution of the Court's implied right of action ' jurisprudence, and explores several explanations for the Court's hesitancy to create implied rights of action. Part III examines the influence of the Court's implied right of action test on its jurisprudence …