Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- COVID-19 (1)
- Contactless (1)
- Coronavirus (1)
- Elections (1)
- Electoral (1)
-
- Essential goods (1)
- Health crisis (1)
- IRB laws (1)
- Institutional review board (1)
- Law (1)
- Lock down (1)
- Main-in ballot (1)
- Negligence law (1)
- No contact (1)
- Northwestern University Law Review (1)
- Novel corona virus (1)
- Obligation of law (1)
- Pandemic (1)
- Public health (1)
- Public health threat (1)
- Public threat (1)
- Quarantine (1)
- Sustainable society (1)
- Three-dimensional law (1)
- Yale Law Journal (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
Covid-19 And The Law: Elections, Richard Briffault
Covid-19 And The Law: Elections, Richard Briffault
Faculty Scholarship
With one Supreme Court decision, lower federal and state court decisions, pending litigation, and proposals around the country for major changes in how elections are conducted, COVID-19 has already had and likely will continue to have a significant impact on election law.
The discussion that follows proceeds in two parts. The first addresses the initial consequences of COVID-19 as an electoral emergency. Voters were due to go to the polls in states around the country just as the pandemic was gathering force and governors and mayors were calling on people to stay at home and avoid large gatherings – which, …
Two-Dimensional Doctrine And Three-Dimensional Law: A Response To Professor Weinstein, Philip A. Hamburger
Two-Dimensional Doctrine And Three-Dimensional Law: A Response To Professor Weinstein, Philip A. Hamburger
Faculty Scholarship
Professor Weinstein examines how the IRB laws would fare under Supreme Court doctrine, and whereas it is my view that these laws should be considered unconstitutional, he reaches largely the opposite conclusion. His article therefore offers a valuable opportunity for further exploration of the constitutional questions, and although there is not sufficient space here to discuss all of his analysis, it seems important at least to draw attention to the major points on which we take different perspectives.
Is There A Future For Future Claimants After Amchem Products, Inc. V. Windsor?, Alex Raskolnikov
Is There A Future For Future Claimants After Amchem Products, Inc. V. Windsor?, Alex Raskolnikov
Faculty Scholarship
In September 1990, the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court appointed an Ad Hoc Committee on Asbestos Litigation in response to what was widely perceived as a "'failure of the federal court system to perform one of its vital roles in our society.'" Less than a year later, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transferred all untried asbestos cases to the eastern district of Pennsylvania for pretrial proceedings. In January 1993, these proceedings produced a global settlement class action of historic proportions, which the district court eventually approved in August 1994. In May 1996, in Georgine v. Amchem Products, …