Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Legal Profession
Two Faces Of Judicial Restraint (Or Are There More?) In Mcdonald V. City Of Chicago, Nelson Lund
Two Faces Of Judicial Restraint (Or Are There More?) In Mcdonald V. City Of Chicago, Nelson Lund
Florida Law Review
Since the days of the Warren Court, conservatives have attacked “judicial activism.” Beginning with Judge Robert Bork’s Supreme Court nomination hearings, and lately with increasing frequency, liberals have sought to turn the tables. Critics now charge that conservative judges are activists, especially when they undermine liberal precedents or strike down liberal legislation. Defenders of judicial activism have all but disappeared. One sign of this apparent consensus is that all Supreme Court nominees now promise to be paragons of judicial restraint. Any of the following quotes, for example, could easily have been uttered by any of the four most recent nominees: …
Constitutional Advocacy Explains Constitutional Outcomes, Stephen A. Higginson
Constitutional Advocacy Explains Constitutional Outcomes, Stephen A. Higginson
Florida Law Review
In oral argument in Baker v. Carr, Attorney Z.T. Osborn, Jr., on behalf of Tennessee voters arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court should hold legislative apportionment ajusticiable issue, exclaimed that "the motto of the Supreme Court of Tennessee is Fiat justicia ruat caelum; Let justice be done if the skies should fall." With that exhortation, Osborn remarked to the Court, "We have no other place to go. Weare at the capital of the world.
Reining In Abuses Of Executive Power Through Substantive Due Process, Rosalie Berger
Reining In Abuses Of Executive Power Through Substantive Due Process, Rosalie Berger
Florida Law Review
Although substantive due process is one of the most confusing and controversial areas of constitutional law, it is well established that the Due Process Clause includes a substantive component that “bars certain arbitrary wrongful government actions ‘regardless of the fairness of the procedures used to implement them.’” The Court has recognized substantive due process limitations on law-enforcement personnel, publicschool officials, government employers, and those who render decisions that affect our property rights. Government officials who act with intent to harm or with deliberate indifference to our rights have been found to engage in conduct that “shocks the judicial conscience” contrary …