Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
President/Executive Department Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Law and Politics (6)
- Constitutional Law (5)
- Administrative Law (2)
- International Law (2)
- Supreme Court of the United States (2)
-
- American Politics (1)
- Civil Procedure (1)
- Courts (1)
- Judges (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal History (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Political Science (1)
- Public Administration (1)
- Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration (1)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (1)
- Public Policy (1)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in President/Executive Department
The Political Branches And The Law Of Nations, Bradford R. Clark, Anthony J. Bellia
The Political Branches And The Law Of Nations, Bradford R. Clark, Anthony J. Bellia
Anthony J. Bellia
In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the U.S. Supreme Court went out of its way to follow background rules of the law of nations, particularly the law of state-state relations. As we have recently argued, the Court followed the law of nations because adherence to such law preserved the constitutional prerogatives of the political branches to conduct foreign relations and decide momentous questions of war and peace. Although we focused primarily on the extent to which the Constitution obligated courts to follow the law of nations in the early republic, the explanation we offered rested on an important, …
Law Professors Want Hearing, Vote On Garland, Eric Berger, Kristen M. Blankley, Brian H. Bornstein, Eve M. Brank, Robert C. Denicola, Alan H. Frank, Stephen S. Gealy, Justin Hurwitz, David Landis, Craig M. Lawson, Richard Leiter, William H. Lyons, Richard H. Lawson, Matt Novak, Allen Overcash, Stefanie S. Pearlman, Ross Pesek, Kevin Ruser, Robert F. Schopp, Anthony Schutz, Anna Williams Shavers, Brett C. Stohs, Ryan Sullivan, Richard L. Weiner, Steven L. Willborn, Sandra Zellmer
Law Professors Want Hearing, Vote On Garland, Eric Berger, Kristen M. Blankley, Brian H. Bornstein, Eve M. Brank, Robert C. Denicola, Alan H. Frank, Stephen S. Gealy, Justin Hurwitz, David Landis, Craig M. Lawson, Richard Leiter, William H. Lyons, Richard H. Lawson, Matt Novak, Allen Overcash, Stefanie S. Pearlman, Ross Pesek, Kevin Ruser, Robert F. Schopp, Anthony Schutz, Anna Williams Shavers, Brett C. Stohs, Ryan Sullivan, Richard L. Weiner, Steven L. Willborn, Sandra Zellmer
Nebraska College of Law: Faculty Publications
Dear Senator Fischer and Senator Sasse,
We write this as citizens, but we all teach at the University of Nebraska College of Law. We hold different political viewpoints and disagree frequentIy with each other on political and legal issues. As law professors, however, we share a deep commitment to the rule of law and an impartial judiciary. We therefore urge you to hold confirmation hearings and a vote on President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Chief Judge Merrick B. Garland.
A Remedy For Congressional Exclusion Frm Contemporary International Agreement Making, Ryan Harrington
A Remedy For Congressional Exclusion Frm Contemporary International Agreement Making, Ryan Harrington
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Indefinite Deflection Of Congressional Standing, Nat Stern
The Indefinite Deflection Of Congressional Standing, Nat Stern
Pepperdine Law Review
Recent litigation brought or threatened against the administration of President Obama has brought to prominence the question of standing by Congress or its members to sue the President for nondefense or non-enforcement of federal law. While scholars divide over the normative propriety of such suits, the Court has never issued a definitive pronouncement on their viability. Nevertheless, the Court’s rulings when the issue has arisen have displayed a distinct pattern. While the Court has not formally repudiated suits of this nature, neither has it issued a decision that hinges on the presence of congressional standing. On the contrary, the Court …
Politics And Agencies In The Administrative State: The U.S. Case, Peter L. Strauss
Politics And Agencies In The Administrative State: The U.S. Case, Peter L. Strauss
Faculty Scholarship
The pending American presidential election, culminating a period of extreme political partisanship in our national government generally, gives point to an essay on politics and agencies in the American regulatory state. In our two-party system, it has often been the case in recent times, including the last six years, that the President comes from one of our two major political parties and one or both houses of Congress are controlled by the other. All American agencies (including, in the American case, the so-called independent regulatory bodies) are associated with the President in the executive branch, yet dependent on the Senate …
Making Sense Of Legislative Standing, Matthew I. Hall
Making Sense Of Legislative Standing, Matthew I. Hall
Scholarly Works
Legislative standing doctrine is neglected and under-theorized. There has always been a wide range of opinions on the Supreme Court about the proper contours of legislative standing doctrine and even about whether the Court should adjudicate disputes between the other two branches at all. Perhaps owing to these disagreements, the full Court has never articulated a clear vision of the doctrine. While the Court has managed to resolve some cases, it has not achieved the consensus necessary to provide a comprehensive and coherent account of critical doctrinal issues such as what type of injury can give rise to legislative standing …
How Presidents Interpret The Constitution, Harold H. Bruff
How Presidents Interpret The Constitution, Harold H. Bruff
Publications
No abstract provided.
Agenda-Setting In The Regulatory State: Theory And Evidence, Cary Coglianese, Daniel E. Walters
Agenda-Setting In The Regulatory State: Theory And Evidence, Cary Coglianese, Daniel E. Walters
All Faculty Scholarship
Government officials who run administrative agencies must make countless decisions every day about what issues and work to prioritize. These agenda-setting decisions hold enormous implications for the shape of law and public policy, but they have received remarkably little attention by either administrative law scholars or social scientists who study the bureaucracy. Existing research offers few insights about the institutions, norms, and inputs that shape and constrain agency discretion over their agendas or about the strategies that officials employ in choosing to elevate certain issues while putting others on the back burner. In this article, we advance the study of …