Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- United states constitution (18)
- New york constitution (10)
- Supreme Court (9)
- Fifth amendment (8)
- New york state constitution (8)
-
- Article I section 6 (7)
- Fourteenth amendment (6)
- Appellate Division (4)
- Article 78 proceeding (4)
- Court of Appeals (4)
- Due process (4)
- Murder (4)
- Sixth amendment (4)
- United States (4)
- Colorado (3)
- Criminal procedure law (3)
- Law reform (3)
- Supreme court (3)
- Article I section 11 (2)
- Article I section 2 (2)
- Article I section 7 (2)
- BLM (2)
- Brady v. united states (2)
- California (2)
- Court of appeals (2)
- Education (2)
- First amendment (2)
- Governmental Takings (2)
- Lucas v. south carolina coastal council (2)
- Matthews v. eldridge (2)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 33 of 33
Full-Text Articles in Legislation
Right To Counsel, Supreme Court, Queens County: People V. Bell
Right To Counsel, Supreme Court, Queens County: People V. Bell
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Dalla Simbologia Giuridica A Una Filosofia Giuridica E Politica Simbolica ? Ovvero Il Diritto E I Sensi, Paulo Ferreira Da Cunha
Dalla Simbologia Giuridica A Una Filosofia Giuridica E Politica Simbolica ? Ovvero Il Diritto E I Sensi, Paulo Ferreira Da Cunha
Paulo Ferreira da Cunha
La prima conseguenza della nostra cultura giuridica dell'audizione che è anche cultura dell'oralità, del discorso e della scrittura (di tutto ciò che serve per parlare e fissare quello che può essere detto) è la volontaria atrofia degli altri sensi: il tatto, il gusto, l'olfatto e la vista. Il Diritto quasi non tocca le cose. Le concepisce mentalmente, le dice, però, anche se con i guanti deve toccare il corpo del delitto.
"Public Use" And The Independent Judiciary: Condemnation In An Interest-Group Perspective, Donald J. Kochan
"Public Use" And The Independent Judiciary: Condemnation In An Interest-Group Perspective, Donald J. Kochan
Donald J. Kochan
This Article reexamines the doctrine of public use under the Takings Clause and its ability to impede takings for private use through an application of public choice theory. It argues that the judicial validation of interest-group capture of the condemnation power through a relaxed public use standard in Takings Clause review can be explained by interest group politics and public choice theory and by institutional tendencies inherent in the independent judiciary. Legislators can sell the eminent domain power to special interests for almost any use, promising durability in the deal given the low probability that the judiciary will invalidate it …