Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Abrogation (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Economics (1)
- Education Law (1)
-
- Election law, primary ballot access, "politics as markets," natural monopoly, democratic theory, Schumpeter (1)
- Eleventh Amendment (1)
- Employment Practice (1)
- Establishment clause (1)
- FMLA (1)
- Family and Medical Leave Act (1)
- Free exercise clause (1)
- Gender (1)
- Health Law and Policy (1)
- Hibbs (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and Economics (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Nevada (1)
- Religion (1)
- Sexuality and the Law (1)
- Social Welfare (1)
- States' rights (1)
- Vouchers (1)
- Women (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Public Law and Legal Theory
Constitutional Law—State Employees Have Private Cause Of Action Against Employers Under Family And Medical Leave Act—Nevada Department Of Human Resources V. Hibbs, 538 U.S. 721 (2003)., Gabriel H. Teninbaum
Constitutional Law—State Employees Have Private Cause Of Action Against Employers Under Family And Medical Leave Act—Nevada Department Of Human Resources V. Hibbs, 538 U.S. 721 (2003)., Gabriel H. Teninbaum
ExpressO
The Eleventh Amendment of the United States Constitution provides that non-consenting states are not subject to suit in federal court. Congress may, however, abrogate the states’ sovereign immunity by enacting legislation to enforce the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment. In Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs, the Supreme Court of the United States considered whether Congress acted within its constitutional authority by abrogating sovereign immunity under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which allows private causes of action against state employers to enforce the FMLA’s family-leave provision. The Court held abrogation was proper under the FMLA and state …
Rules Of The Game: The "Play In The Joints" Between The Religion Clauses, Sharon Keller
Rules Of The Game: The "Play In The Joints" Between The Religion Clauses, Sharon Keller
ExpressO
Locke v. Davey is an exemplar of the new generation of Establishment clause cases that, particularly in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, have written into law a safe harbor, private choice, for governmental benefits that find their way into the coffers of religious institutions in amounts that are neither incidental nor trivial. In Locke the options presented in the private choice arguably infringed upon Free Exercise rights-- the dilemma that gives rise to the title of this article. Over the vigorous dissent of Justice Scalia, the Locke Court’s analysis of the permissibility of the conditioned benefit was based upon the argument that …
“Politics As Markets” Reconsidered: Economic Theory, Competitive Democracy And Primary Ballot Access , David N. Schleicher
“Politics As Markets” Reconsidered: Economic Theory, Competitive Democracy And Primary Ballot Access , David N. Schleicher
ExpressO
No abstract provided.