Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (50)
- Courts (32)
- Judges (23)
- Supreme Court of the United States (21)
- Administrative Law (17)
-
- Law and Politics (16)
- State and Local Government Law (15)
- Legislation (14)
- Jurisprudence (13)
- Law and Society (11)
- President/Executive Department (11)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (9)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (8)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (7)
- Arts and Humanities (5)
- Jurisdiction (5)
- Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration (5)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (4)
- Law and Economics (4)
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law (4)
- Public Policy (4)
- Environmental Law (3)
- Environmental Sciences (3)
- Forest Management (3)
- Forest Sciences (3)
- Land Use Law (3)
- Law and Philosophy (3)
- Legal Profession (3)
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (22)
- University of Colorado Law School (10)
- Georgetown University Law Center (7)
- Duke Law (5)
- Pepperdine University (5)
-
- Columbia Law School (4)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (3)
- SelectedWorks (3)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (3)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (3)
- Boston University School of Law (2)
- Seattle University School of Law (2)
- Selected Works (2)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (2)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (2)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (2)
- BLR (1)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- Cleveland State University (1)
- Florida International University College of Law (1)
- St. Mary's University (1)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- University of Georgia School of Law (1)
- Western University (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (16)
- Faculty Scholarship (14)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (7)
- Publications (7)
- Articles (6)
-
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (5)
- All Faculty Scholarship (3)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (3)
- The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Summer Conference, June 6-8) (3)
- Scholarly Works (2)
- Seattle University Law Review (2)
- Touro Law Review (2)
- Andrés Palacios Lleras (1)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (1)
- Craig Martin (1)
- Edsel F Tupaz (1)
- ExpressO (1)
- Faculty Articles (1)
- Faculty Publications (1)
- Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law (1)
- Journal Articles (1)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (1)
- Law Publications (1)
- M. C. Mirow (1)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (1)
- SJD Dissertations (1)
- Sharon Hamby O'Connor (1)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 60 of 86
Full-Text Articles in Legal History
The Conflicted Assumptions Of Modern Constitutional Law, H. Jefferson Powell
The Conflicted Assumptions Of Modern Constitutional Law, H. Jefferson Powell
Faculty Scholarship
Contribution to Symposium - The Nature of Judicial Authority: A Reflection on Philip Hamburger's Law and Judicial Duty
What Happened In Iowa?, David Pozen
What Happened In Iowa?, David Pozen
Faculty Scholarship
Reply to Nicole Mansker & Neal Devins, Do Judicial Elections Facilitate Popular Constitutionalism; Can They?, 111 Colum. L. Rev. Sidebar 27 (2011).
November 2, 2010 is the latest milestone in the evolution of state judicial elections from sleepy, sterile affairs into meaningful political contests. Following an aggressive ouster campaign, voters in Iowa removed three supreme court justices, including the chief justice, who had joined an opinion finding a right to same-sex marriage under the state constitution. Supporters of the campaign rallied around the mantra, “It’s we the people, not we the courts.” Voter turnout surged to unprecedented levels; the national …
On The Incompatibility Of Political Virtue And Judicial Review: A Neo-Aristotelean Perspective, Ralph F. Gaebler
On The Incompatibility Of Political Virtue And Judicial Review: A Neo-Aristotelean Perspective, Ralph F. Gaebler
Articles by Maurer Faculty
Part I of this essay outlines a neo-Aristotelean theory of political virtue, an instance of virtue generally, that serves as the basis of excellent citizenship in the polis. As such, political virtue contributes its share to the achievement of eudaimonia, or the fulfillment of an individual’s natural, human function. In fact, political virtue is especially important because people are political beings, i.e. they seek the good most comprehensively in the context of association with others. Therefore, Aristotle describes politics as the master science of the supreme good, because politics orders the community of the polis and thereby establishes the norms …
Glimmers Of Hope: The Evolution Of Equality Rights Doctrine In Japanese Courts From A Comparative Perspective, Craig Martin
Glimmers Of Hope: The Evolution Of Equality Rights Doctrine In Japanese Courts From A Comparative Perspective, Craig Martin
Craig Martin
There has been little study of the analytical framework employed by the Japanese courts in resolving constitutional claims under the right to be treated as an equal and not be discriminated against. In the Japanese literature the only comparative analysis done focuses on American equal protection jurisprudence. This article examines the development of the equality rights doctrine in the Japanese Supreme Court from the perspective of an increasingly universal “proportionality analysis” approach to rights enforcement, of which the Canadian equality rights jurisprudence is a good example, in contrast to the American approach. This comparative analysis, which begins with a review …
A Tale Of Two Paradigms: Judicial Review And Judicial Duty, Philip A. Hamburger
A Tale Of Two Paradigms: Judicial Review And Judicial Duty, Philip A. Hamburger
Faculty Scholarship
What is the role of judges in holding government acts unconstitutional? The conventional paradigm is "judicial review." From this perspective, judges have a distinct power to review statutes and other government acts for their constitutionality. The historical evidence, however, reveals another paradigm, that of judicial duty. From this point of view, presented in my book Law and Judicial Duty, a judge has an office or duty, in all decisions, to exercise judgment in accord with the law of the land. On this understanding, there is no distinct power to review acts for their constitutionality, and what is called "judicial review" …
Deliberative Democracy And Weak Courts: Constitutional Design In Nascent Democracies, Edsel F. Tupaz
Deliberative Democracy And Weak Courts: Constitutional Design In Nascent Democracies, Edsel F. Tupaz
Edsel F Tupaz
This Article addresses the question of constitutional design in young and transitional democracies. It argues for the adoption of a “weak” form of judicial review, as opposed to “strong” review which typifies much of contemporary adjudication. It briefly describes how the dialogical strain of deliberative democratic theory might well constitute the normative predicate for systems of weak review. In doing so, the Article draws from various judicial practices, from European supranational tribunals to Canadian courts and even Indian jurisprudence. The Article concludes with the suggestion that no judicial apparatus other than the weak structure of judicial review can better incite …
James Buchanan As Savior? Judicial Power, Political Fragmentation, And The Failed 1831 Repeal Of Section 25, Mark A. Graber
James Buchanan As Savior? Judicial Power, Political Fragmentation, And The Failed 1831 Repeal Of Section 25, Mark A. Graber
Faculty Scholarship
James Buchanan is often credited with being the unlikely savior of judicial review in early Jacksonian America. In 1831, Buchanan, then a representative from Pennsylvania, issued a minority report criticizing the proposed repeal of Section 25 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that is generally credited with convincing a skeptical Congress that fundamental constitutional norms required federal judicial oversight of state courts and state legislatures. This paper claims that federalism and political fragmentation were more responsible than James Buchanan for the failed repeal of Section 25, for the maintenance of judicial power in the United States during the transition from …
The Era Of Deference: Courts, Expertise, And The Emergence Of New Deal Administrative Law, Reuel E. Schiller
The Era Of Deference: Courts, Expertise, And The Emergence Of New Deal Administrative Law, Reuel E. Schiller
Michigan Law Review
The first two terms of Franklin Roosevelt's presidency (1933-1941) were periods of great administrative innovation. Responding to the Great Depression, Congress created scores of new administrative agencies charged with overseeing economic policy and implementing novel social welfare programs. The story of the constitutional difficulties that some of these policy innovations encountered is a staple of both New Deal historiography and the constitutional history of twentieth-century America. There has been very little writing, however, about how courts and the New Deal-era administrative state interacted after these constitutional battles ended. Having overcome constitutional hurdles, these administrative agencies still had to interact with …
Charter Dialogue Revisited – Or Much Ado About Metaphors, Wade Wright, Allison Thornton, Peter Hogg
Charter Dialogue Revisited – Or Much Ado About Metaphors, Wade Wright, Allison Thornton, Peter Hogg
Law Publications
This article is a sequel to the 1997 article “The Charter Dialogue Between Courts and Legislatures (Or Perhaps The Charier of Rights Isn't Such A Bad Thing After All).” In the present article, the authors review various academic critiques of their “dialogue” theory, which postulates that Charter decisions striking down laws arc not the last word, but rather the beginning of a “dialogue,” because legislative bodies are generally able to (and generally do) enact sequel legislation that accomplishes the main objective of the unconstitutional law. The authors also examine the Supreme Court of Canada's dicta on the “dialogue” phenomenon, and …
Marbury In Mexico: Judicial Review’S Precocious Southern Migration, M C. Mirow
Marbury In Mexico: Judicial Review’S Precocious Southern Migration, M C. Mirow
Faculty Publications
In attempting to construct United States-style judicial review for the Mexican Supreme Court in the 1880s, Ignacio Vallarta, president of the court, read Marbury in a way that preceded this use of the case in the United States. Using this surprising fact as a central example, this article makes several important contributions to the field of comparative constitutional law. The work demonstrates that through constitutional migration, novel readings of constitutional sources can arise in foreign fora. In an era when the United States Supreme Court may be accused of parochialism in its constitutional analysis, the article addresses the current controversy …
Taking Text Too Seriously: Modern Textualism, Original Meaning, And The Case Of Amar's Bill Of Rights, William Michael Treanor
Taking Text Too Seriously: Modern Textualism, Original Meaning, And The Case Of Amar's Bill Of Rights, William Michael Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Championed on the Supreme Court by Justices Scalia and Thomas and championed in academia most prominently by Professor Akhil Amar, textualism has in the past twenty years emerged as a leading school of constitutional interpretation. Textualists argue that the Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with its original public meaning and, in seeking that meaning, they closely parse the Constitution's words and grammar and the placement of clauses in the document. They have assumed that this close parsing recaptures original meaning, but, perhaps because it seems obviously correct, that assumption has neither been defended nor challenged. This article uses Professor …
Judicial Review And United States Supreme Court Citations To Foreign And International Law, Ronald A. Brand
Judicial Review And United States Supreme Court Citations To Foreign And International Law, Ronald A. Brand
Articles
Recent decisions by the United States Supreme Court and extracurricular discussions between some of the Justices have fueled a debate regarding whether and when it is appropriate for the Court to make reference to foreign law in cases involving the interpretation and application of the United States Constitution. This debate has, to some extent, paralleled the argument over whether the Constitution is best interpreted by looking at the intent of the original drafters - an originalist approach - or by considering it to be a "living" document that must be interpreted to take account of contemporary realities. This article considers …
Popular Sovereignty, Judicial Supremacy, And The American Revolution: Why The Judiciary Cannot Be The Final Arbiter Of Constitutions, William J. Watkins
Popular Sovereignty, Judicial Supremacy, And The American Revolution: Why The Judiciary Cannot Be The Final Arbiter Of Constitutions, William J. Watkins
ExpressO
Key to understanding the connection between popular sovereignty and judicial review is the historical development of the theory of sovereignty in England and America. Section One of this article traces the defeat of divine right theory in England and the emergence of parliamentary sovereignty. Section Two considers the American colonists’ rejection of parliamentary sovereignty during the Revolution and their establishment of popular sovereignty as the cardinal principle of American constitutionalism. Section Three studies English precedent often cited as providing the basis for the American doctrine of judicial review and shows that these English cases were simply exercises in statutory construction …
Las Paradojas De La Democracia Deliberativa / The Paradoxes Of Deliberative Democracy, Andres Palacios Lleras
Las Paradojas De La Democracia Deliberativa / The Paradoxes Of Deliberative Democracy, Andres Palacios Lleras
Andrés Palacios Lleras
Este artículo argumenta por qué la teoría de la democracia deliberativa es problemática y paradójica, y por lo tanto inadecuada para desarrollar las instituciones democráticas contemporáneas, o para reemplazarlas por otras. Es una teoría problemática porque parte de una postura epistemológica difícilmente sostenible. Es paradójica porque a pesar de ser presentada como incluyente a nivel social, la idea de deliberación que presenta y considera como deseable, es demasiado exigente como para ser realizada por toda clase de personas; y es de hecho, elitista en este aspecto. Pero también porque señala que las instancias que están mejor diseñadas para tomar decisiones …
Popular Constitutionalism In The Civil War: A Trial Run, Daniel W. Hamilton
Popular Constitutionalism In The Civil War: A Trial Run, Daniel W. Hamilton
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
A Symposium On The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism And Judicial Review; Introduction, Daniel W. Hamilton
A Symposium On The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism And Judicial Review; Introduction, Daniel W. Hamilton
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Judicial Review Before Marbury, William Michael Treanor
Judicial Review Before Marbury, William Michael Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
While scholars have long probed the original understanding of judicial review and the early judicial review case law, this article presents a study of the judicial review case law in the United States before Marbury v. Madison that is dramatically more complete than prior work and that challenges previous scholarship on the original understanding of judicial review on the two most critical dimensions: how well judicial review was established at the time of the Founding and when it was exercised. Where prior work argues that judicial review was rarely exercised before Marbury (or that it was created in Marbury), …
Why Europe Rejected American Judicial Review - And Why It May Not Matter, Alec Stone Sweet
Why Europe Rejected American Judicial Review - And Why It May Not Matter, Alec Stone Sweet
Michigan Law Review
In this Article, I explore the question of why constitutional review, but not American judicial review, spread across Europe. I will also argue that, despite obvious organic differences between the American and European systems of review, there is an increasing convergence in how review actually operates. I proceed as follows. In Part I, I examine the debate on establishing judicial review in Europe, focusing on the French. In Parts II and III, I contrast the European and the American models of review, and briefly discuss why the Kelsenian constitutional court diffused across Europe. In Part IV, I argue that despite …
Who Was William Marbury?, David F. Forte
Who Was William Marbury?, David F. Forte
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
Of all the disappointed office seekers in American history, only William Marbury has been so honored as to have his portrait hung in the chambers of the United States Supreme Court alongside that of James Madison. The two titular protagonists to the Marbury v. Madison dispute had no idea that their original contretemps would ever find its way to litigation, let alone eventual mythic significance as the foundation stone of judicial review.
Marbury V. Madison And Modern Judicial Review, Robert F. Nagel
Marbury V. Madison And Modern Judicial Review, Robert F. Nagel
Publications
This Article compares the realist critique of Marbury with several revisionist defenses of that decision. Realists claim to see Marbury as essentially political and thus as the fountainhead of modern judicial review. Revisionists claim to see the decision as legalistically justified and thus inconsistent with current practices. Close examination, however, indicates that, despite sharp rhetorical differences, these two accounts are largely complementary rather than inconsistent. Each envisions Marbury as embodying elements of both political realism and legal formalism. Once the false argument about whether Marbury was either political or legal is put aside, it is possible to trace the influence …
Law And Judicial Duty, Philip A. Hamburger
Law And Judicial Duty, Philip A. Hamburger
Faculty Scholarship
Two hundred years ago, in Marbury v. Madison, Chief Justice Marshall delivered an opinion that has come to dominate modern discussions of constitutional law. Faced with a conflict between an act of Congress and the U.S. Constitution, he explained what today is known as "judicial review." Marshall described judicial review in terms of a particular type of "superior law" and a particular type of "judicial duty." Rather than speak generally about the hierarchy within law, he focused on "written constitutions."
He declared that the U.S. Constitution is "a superior, paramount law" and that if "the constitution is superior to any …
Rex E. Lee Conference On The Office Of The Solicitor General Of The United States: Clinton Ii Panel, Seth P. Waxman, Walter E. Dellinger Iii, Barbara D. Underwood, Michael R. Dreeben
Rex E. Lee Conference On The Office Of The Solicitor General Of The United States: Clinton Ii Panel, Seth P. Waxman, Walter E. Dellinger Iii, Barbara D. Underwood, Michael R. Dreeben
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
I will say a few words about Dickerson, both because Michael has made it impossible not to and also because in some ways it represents the very best about how all of the wonderful, tried-and-true processes of the SG's Office ought to work. Dickerson was very much like the other case that Michael talked about (which is one of, I think, two significant privilege controversies which the Independent Counsel laid on our doorstep). These cases may have appeared to the outside world as paradigmatically cases in which we would be hearing from the White House, or talking to the White …
Marbury And Judicial Deference: The Shadow Of Whittington V. Polk And The Maryland Judiciary Battle, Jed Handelsman Shugerman
Marbury And Judicial Deference: The Shadow Of Whittington V. Polk And The Maryland Judiciary Battle, Jed Handelsman Shugerman
Faculty Scholarship
On the 200th anniversary of Whittington and approaching the 200th anniversary of Marbury, this article revisits these two decisions and challenges legal scholars' assumptions that they were such strong precedents for judicial review.5 When one takes into account the broader contexts, both decisions were in fact judicial capitulations to aggressive legislatures and executives. The Maryland General Court asserted its judicial supremacy only in dicta, and the court failed to enforce judicial supremacy when it was legally justified. This article picks apart the court's reasoning step by step, using Whittington to illuminate Marbury and Marbury to illuminate Whittington. …
Judicial Activism: The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly, Arthur D. Hellman
Judicial Activism: The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly, Arthur D. Hellman
Articles
No matter how judges are selected, sooner or later some unfortunate candidate will be labeled a "judicial activist." One has to wonder: Does the term have any identifiable core meaning? Or is it just an all-purpose term of opprobrium, reflecting whatever brand of judicial behavior the speaker regards as particularly pernicious? Implicit in this question are several important issues about the role of courts in our democratic society.
I take my definition from Judge Richard Posner, who describes activist decisions as those that expand judicial power over other branches of the national government or over state governments. Unlike other uses …
The Marbury Mystery: Why Did William Marbury Sue In The Supreme Court?, Susan Low Bloch
The Marbury Mystery: Why Did William Marbury Sue In The Supreme Court?, Susan Low Bloch
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In 1801, when William Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering Secretary of State James Madison to deliver his commission as justice of the peace, he initiated one of the most important cases in the Court's history. But why did Marbury choose the Supreme Court? Was there a lower federal court that could have granted the writ at the time? The short answer is "yes." Rather than making an unsuccessful attempt to invoke the original jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court, I have learned that he could have brought his suit in the then …
Willard Hurst And The Administrative State: From Williams To Wisconsin, Daniel R. Ernst
Willard Hurst And The Administrative State: From Williams To Wisconsin, Daniel R. Ernst
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This article follows Willard Hurst from his undergraduate days at Williams College through the start of his teaching career at Wisconsin in the fall of 1937. During these years Hurst acquired an abiding interest in the rise of the administrative state as well as some of the insights he would use to account for it in his mature work. For the most part, the article proceeds chronologically through four episodes in Hurst's training: (1) his year-long study of Charles and Mary Beard's "Rise of American Civilization" undertaken as an undergraduate at Williams College; (2) his three years as a student …
Establishing New Legal Doctrine In Managed Care: A Model Of Judicial Response To Industrial Change, Peter D. Jacobson, Scott D. Pomfret
Establishing New Legal Doctrine In Managed Care: A Model Of Judicial Response To Industrial Change, Peter D. Jacobson, Scott D. Pomfret
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Courts are struggling with how to develop legal doctrine in challenges to the new managed care environment. In this Article, we examine how courts have responded in the past to new industries or radical transformations of existing industries. We analyze two historical antecedents, the emergence of railroads in the nineteenth century and mass production in the twentieth century, to explore how courts might react to the current transformation of the health care industry.
In doing so, we offer a model of how courts confront issues of developing legal doctrine, especially regarding liability, associated with nascent or dramatically transformed industries. Our …
Revolution And Judicial Review: Chief Justice Holt's Opinion In City Of London V. Wood, Philip A. Hamburger
Revolution And Judicial Review: Chief Justice Holt's Opinion In City Of London V. Wood, Philip A. Hamburger
Faculty Scholarship
In 1702, in an opinion touching upon parliamentary power, Chief Justice Sir John Holt discussed limitations on government in language that has long seemed more intriguing than clear. Undoubtedly, the Chief Justice was suggesting limitations on government – limitations that subsequently have become quite prominent, particularly in America. Yet even the best report of his opinion concerning these constraints has left historians in some doubt as to just what he was saying and why it was significant.
The case in which Chief Justice Holt was so obscure about matters of such importance, City of London v. Wood, revived the …
Initiative Enigmas, Richard Collins
The Aspirational Constitution, Robin West
The Aspirational Constitution, Robin West
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Firmly embedded in every theory of judicial decisionmaking lies an important set of assumptions about the way government is supposed to work. Sometimes these theories about government are made explicit. More often they are not. Moreover, deeply embedded in every theory of government is a theory of human nature. Although these assumptions about human nature generally remain latent within the larger theory, because they provide the underpinnings for our ideas about the way government is supposed to work, they drive our notions about judicial decisionmaking. For example, the theory of government reflected in the United States Constitution reveals what one …