Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional theory (4)
- Liberty (3)
- Constitution (2)
- Democracy (2)
- Executive power (2)
-
- Originalism (2)
- Appellate jurisdiction (1)
- Aretaic (1)
- Bill of Rights (1)
- Confirmation (1)
- Congressional power (1)
- Consequentialism (1)
- Consequentialist analyses (1)
- Constitutional democracy (1)
- Constitutional duty (1)
- Constitutional education (1)
- Constitutional interpretation (1)
- Counter-terrorism (1)
- Democratic principle (1)
- Due process (1)
- Eleventh Amendment (1)
- Ethics (1)
- Formalism (1)
- Gun control (1)
- Immunity from liability (1)
- Individual rights (1)
- John McCain (1)
- Judicial nomination (1)
- Judicialism (1)
- Legal decision makers (1)
Articles 1 - 15 of 15
Full-Text Articles in Rule of Law
Legal Affairs: Dreyfus, Guantánamo, And The Foundation Of The Rule Of Law, David Cole
Legal Affairs: Dreyfus, Guantánamo, And The Foundation Of The Rule Of Law, David Cole
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The Dreyfus affair reminds us that the rule of law and basic human rights are not self-executing. In a democracy, individual rights and the rule of law are designed to check popular power and protect the individual from the majority. Yet paradoxically, they cannot do so without substantial popular support. Alfred Dreyfus received two trials—or at least the trappings thereof—and was twice wrongly convicted. The rule of law was initially unable to stand between an innocent man and the powerful men who sought to frame him. But the issue of Dreyfus's guilt or innocence was not …
Law, Liberty And The Rule Of Law (In A Constitutional Democracy), Imer Flores
Law, Liberty And The Rule Of Law (In A Constitutional Democracy), Imer Flores
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In the hunt for a better--and more substantial--awareness of the “law,” The author intends to analyze the different notions related to the “rule of law” and to criticize the conceptions that equate it either to the sum of “law” and “rule” or to the formal assertion that “law rules,” regardless of its relationship to certain principles, including both “negative” and “positive” liberties. Instead, he pretends to scrutinize the principles of the “rule of law,” in general, and in a “constitutional democracy,” in particular, to conclude that the tendency to reduce the “democratic principle” to the “majority rule” (or “majority principle”), …
Neo-Democracy, National Security, And Liberty, David Cole
Neo-Democracy, National Security, And Liberty, David Cole
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In his new book, Liberty and Security, Conor Gearty, professor of law at the London School of Economics and one of the United Kingdom’s leading authorities on civil liberties and national security, argues that many Western nations are in effect “neo-democracies” that fail systematically to live up to the fundamental egalitarian premises of true democracy, and that this development is seen in particular in the context of counter-terrorism policy. This review assesses that claim, and maintains that while Gearty is correct that many counter-terrorism measures are predicated on double standards, that critique is insufficient to answer the many difficult questions …
Legal Obligations: The Proper Role Of White House Lawyers, William Michael Treanor
Legal Obligations: The Proper Role Of White House Lawyers, William Michael Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
An opinion issued on Aug. 1, 2002, by Assistant Attorney General Jay S. Bybee of the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel held that the federal statute that makes it a crime to commit torture outside the United States should not be read to “apply to the President’s detention and interrogation of enemy combatants pursuant to his Commander-in-Chief authority.” The opinion further concluded that if the statute did criminalize interrogations ordered by the president, it was unconstitutional.
The memorandum, which has become known as the “torture memo,” figures prominently in the ongoing public debate about whether there should be …
District Of Columbia V. Heller And Originalism, Lawrence B. Solum
District Of Columbia V. Heller And Originalism, Lawrence B. Solum
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
On June 26, 2008, the United States Supreme Court handed down its 5-4 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, striking a District of Columbia statute that prohibits the possession of useable handguns in the home on the ground that it violated the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. Justice Scalia's majority opinion drew dissents from Justice Stevens and Justice Breyer. Collectively, the opinions in Heller represent the most important and extensive debate on the role of original meaning in constitutional interpretation among the members of the contemporary Supreme Court.
This article investigates the relationship between originalist constitutional …
Incorporation And Originalist Theory, Lawrence B. Solum
Incorporation And Originalist Theory, Lawrence B. Solum
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Does the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution incorporate the Bill of Rights contained in the first eight amendments? And how should an originalist answer that question? This paper focuses on the latter question--the issues of originalist theory that are raised by judicial and scholarly debates over what is called "incorporation."
The inquiry proceeds in six parts. Part I answers the questions: "What is incorporation?" and "What is originalism?" Part II examines the theoretical framework for an investigation of incorporation that operates within the narrow confines of interpretation of the linguistic meaning text based on the assumption that the …
Originalism And The Natural Born Citizen Clause, Lawrence B. Solum
Originalism And The Natural Born Citizen Clause, Lawrence B. Solum
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The enigmatic phrase "natural born citizen" poses a series of problems for contemporary originalism. New originalists, like Justice Scalia, focus on the public meaning of the constitutional text, but the notion of a "natural born citizen" was likely a term of art, derived from the idea of a "natural born subject" in English law--a category that most likely did not extend to persons, like John McCain, who were born outside sovereign territory. But the constitution speaks of "citizens" and not "subjects," introducing uncertainties and ambiguities that might (or might not) make McCain eligible for the presidency.
What was the original …
The Supreme Court In Bondage: Constitutional Stare Decisis, Legal Formalism, And The Future Of Unenumerated Rights, Lawrence B. Solum
The Supreme Court In Bondage: Constitutional Stare Decisis, Legal Formalism, And The Future Of Unenumerated Rights, Lawrence B. Solum
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This essay advances a formalist conception of constitutional stare decisis. The author argues that instrumentalist accounts of precedent are inherently unsatisfying and that the Supreme Court should abandon adherence to the doctrine that it is free to overrule its own prior decisions. These moves are embedded in a larger theoretical framework--a revival of formalist ideas in legal theory that he calls "neoformalism" to distinguish his view from the so-called "formalism" caricatured by the legal realists (and from some other views that are called "formalist").
In Part II, The Critique of Unenumerated Constitutional Rights, the author sets the stage by …
We The People's Executive, Rosa Ehrenreich Brooks
We The People's Executive, Rosa Ehrenreich Brooks
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Perhaps to no one’s surprise, a recent survey found that most Americans know far more about television hits than they know about the United States Constitution. For instance, 52% of Americans surveyed could name at least two characters from The Simpsons, and 41% could name at least two judges from American Idol. Meanwhile, a mere 28% could identify more than one of the rights protected by the First Amendment.
Surveys such as this help clear up one of the apparent mysteries of the last five years: How did we change so quickly from a nation in which the …
Judicial Selection: Ideology Versus Character, Lawrence B. Solum
Judicial Selection: Ideology Versus Character, Lawrence B. Solum
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Part I of Judicial Selection: Ideology versus Character sets the stage for an argument that character and not political ideology should be the primary factor in the selection of judges. Political ideology has played an important role in judicial selection, from John Adams's entrenchment of federalists as judges after the election of 1800 to the Roosevelt's selection of progressives, liberals, and New Dealers, the contemporary era, from the failed nominations of Fortas, Haynsworth, Carswell to the defeat of Robert Bork, the narrow confirmation of Clarence Thomas. But until recently, political ideology has played its role behind the scenes--mostly off the …
The Constitutional Duty Of A National Security Lawyer In A Time Of Terror, James E. Baker
The Constitutional Duty Of A National Security Lawyer In A Time Of Terror, James E. Baker
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
National security lawyers are probably not in the forefront of the public’s mind when one refers to government lawyers, but they serve a vital mission within the public sector. This article explores the duties and responsibilities inherent in that mission, and discusses the continuing role of the national security lawyer after the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001.
What Is Eleventh Amendment Immunity?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez
What Is Eleventh Amendment Immunity?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The Supreme Court's Eleventh Amendment decisions give conflicting signals about what the Amendment does. On one view, the Amendment functions as a forum-allocation principle--immunizing states from liability in suits filed in federal court, but leaving open the possibility that states may be compelled to entertain suits against themselves in their own courts. A separate line of cases, however, implies that state courts enjoy an immunity from suit in their own courts and that nothing in the Constitution withdraws such immunity; on this view, the Eleventh Amendment, by protecting the states from suit in the federal courts, effectively immunizes the states …
Unenumerated Constitutional Rights And The Rule Of Law, Randy E. Barnett
Unenumerated Constitutional Rights And The Rule Of Law, Randy E. Barnett
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The rule of law has long been one of the mainstays of liberal thought. John Locke cited its absence--not the absence of rights, which Locke thought existed in the state of nature--as the first reason for forming a government. Essentially, the rule of law says that the requirements of justice must take a form such that persons can know what justice requires of them before they act and can detect abuses by those charged with law enforcement. If the formal and procedural requirements of the rule of law are adhered to, those "good" persons who seek to act properly can …
The Virtues Of Redundancy In Legal Thought, Randy E. Barnett
The Virtues Of Redundancy In Legal Thought, Randy E. Barnett
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Redundancy has a bad reputation among legal intellectuals. When someone says, for example, that the ninth and tenth amendments are redundant, we can be pretty sure that this person attaches little importance to these constitutional provisions. Listen to one of the definitions of redundant provided by the Oxford English Dictionary: "superabundant, superfluous, excessive."' In this essay, the author proposes that legal theorists pay serious attention to the concept of redundancy used by engineers. He explains how redundancy--in this special sense--is essential to any intellectual enterprise in which we try to reach action-guiding conclusions, including the enterprise of law. The author …
Of Chickens And Eggs−−The Compatibility Of Moral Rights And Consequentialist Analyses, Randy E. Barnett
Of Chickens And Eggs−−The Compatibility Of Moral Rights And Consequentialist Analyses, Randy E. Barnett
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Philosophers are accustomed to thinking of moral rights and consequentialist analyses as fundamentally incompatible. They frequently debate cases--both hypothetical and real--in which rights and consequences are in conflict. For example, suppose an innocent child knows the whereabouts of a terrorist who has planted a nuclear bomb in a city. Would it be permissible to violate the child's moral right to be free from torture, if this was the only way to save millions of innocent lives? If this is permissible, then do not moral rights yield to concerns about consequences? Or suppose that a community incorrectly believes that an innocent …