Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Administrative Law (2)
- Environmental Law (2)
- Legislation (2)
- Supreme Court (2)
- Abortion (1)
-
- Climate change (1)
- Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Environmental regulations (1)
- Federalism (1)
- First amendment (1)
- Free speech (1)
- Judges (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and Medicine (1)
- Law and Philosophy (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Natural Resources Law (1)
- Natural Resoures Law (1)
- President/Executive Department (1)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (1)
- Public accommodations (1)
- Regulation (1)
- Roe v Wade (1)
- Rule of Law (1)
- Sexual orientation (1)
- Statutory interpretation (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Supreme court (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
“We Do No Such Thing”: 303 Creative V. Elenis And The Future Of First Amendment Challenges To Public Accommodations Laws, David Cole
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In 303 Creative v. Elenis, the Supreme Court ruled that a business had a right to refuse to design a wedding website for a same-sex couple. But properly understood, the decision’s parameters are narrow, and the decision should have minimal effect on public accommodations laws.
Fears, Faith, And Facts In Environmental Law, William W. Buzbee
Fears, Faith, And Facts In Environmental Law, William W. Buzbee
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Environmental law has long been shaped by both the particular nature of environmental harms and by the actors and institutions that cause such harms or can address them. This nation’s environmental statutes remain far from perfect, and a comprehensive law tailored to the challenges of climate change is still elusive. Nonetheless, America’s environmental laws provide lofty, express protective purposes and findings about reasons for their enactment. They also clearly state health and environmental goals, provide tailored criteria for action, and utilize procedures and diverse regulatory tools that reflect nuanced choices.
But the news is far from good. Despite the ambitious …
Jazz Improvisation And The Law: Constrained Choice, Sequence, And Strategic Movement Within Rules, William W. Buzbee
Jazz Improvisation And The Law: Constrained Choice, Sequence, And Strategic Movement Within Rules, William W. Buzbee
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This Article argues that a richer understanding of the nature of law is possible through comparative, analogical examination of legal work and the art of jazz improvisation. This exploration illuminates a middle ground between rule of law aspirations emphasizing stability and determinate meanings and contrasting claims that the untenable alternative is pervasive discretionary or politicized law. In both the law and jazz improvisation settings, the work involves constraining rules, others’ unpredictable actions, and strategic choosing with attention to where a collective creation is going. One expects change and creativity in improvisation, but the many analogous characteristics of law illuminate why …
Supreme Court Ruling On The Texas Abortion Law: Beginning To Unravel Roe V Wade, I. Glenn Cohen, Rebecca Reingold, Lawrence O. Gostin
Supreme Court Ruling On The Texas Abortion Law: Beginning To Unravel Roe V Wade, I. Glenn Cohen, Rebecca Reingold, Lawrence O. Gostin
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In 2021, Texas enacted an abortion statute, SB8, stating “a physician may not knowingly perform or induce an abortion on a pregnant woman if the physician detected a fetal heartbeat for the unborn child.” SB8’s prohibition applies broadly against anyone who “knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets the performance or inducement of an abortion.” The law’s design is unprecedented, enforced solely by private lawsuits, providing damages of $10,000 or more for each abortion. SB8 prohibits government enforcement, with the explicit intent of preventing federal judicial review. SB8 clearly violates current Supreme Court precedent creating a constitutional right to …