Law Commons^™

Commissioning The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Jolina C. Cuaresma

Jolina C. Cuaresma

African Courts And Separation Of Powers: A Comparative Study Of Judicial Review In Uganda & South, Joseph M. Isanga

Joseph Isanga

Achieving political stability in a transitional democracy is a fundamental goal, the resoluteness of which is in part maintained by courts of judicial review that are independent from political bias and devoid of deference to traditionally more powerful branches of government. The recent democratic transitions occurring in the African nations of South Africa and Uganda provide a unique, contemporary insight into the formation of a constitutional jurisprudence. This study is an examination of pivotal cases decided by the Constitutional Courts of South Africa and Uganda, the roles that these decisions play in political stability, and the potential for political bias …

Introduction To Constraining The Executive, Tom Campbell

Tom Campbell

The President’S Pen And The Bureaucrat’S Fiefdom, John C. Eastman

John C. Eastman

Who's The Check On Authoritarianism In The Whitehouse?, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

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, …

The Irrepressible Myth Of Klein, Howard M. Wasserman

Howard M Wasserman

The Reconstruction-era case of United States v. Klein remains the object of a “cult” among commentators and advocates, who see it as a powerful separation of powers precedent. In fact, Klein is a myth—actually two related myths. One is that it is opaque and meaninglessly indeterminate because, given its confusing and disjointed language, its precise doctrinal contours are indecipherable; the other is that Klein is vigorous precedent, likely to be used by a court to invalidate likely federal legislation. Close analysis of Klein, its progeny, and past scholarship uncovers three identifiable core limitations on congressional control over the workings of …

The Power To Control Immigration Is A Core Aspect Of Sovereignty, John C. Eastman

John C. Eastman

The Conflict Of Laws In Armed Conflicts And Wars, John C. Dehn

John C. Dehn

After over thirteen years of continuous armed conflict, neither courts nor scholars are closer to a common understanding of whether, or how, international and U.S. law interact to regulate acts of belligerency by the United States. This Article articulates the first normative theory regarding the relationship of customary international law to U.S. domestic law that fully harmonizes Supreme Court precedent. It then applies this theory to customary international laws of war to better articulate the legal framework regulating the armed conflicts of the United States. It demonstrates that the relationship of customary international law to U.S. law differs in cases …

Bring Back The Legislative Veto: A Proposal For A Constitutional Amendment, Rodney A. Smolla

Rod Smolla

None available.

The Scope Of Precedent, Randy J. Kozel

Randy J Kozel

The scope of Supreme Court precedent is capacious. Justices of the Court commonly defer to sweeping rationales and elaborate doctrinal frameworks articulated by their predecessors. This practice infuses judicial precedent with the prescriptive power of enacted constitutional and statutory text. The lower federal courts follow suit, regularly abiding by the Supreme Court’s broad pronouncements. These phenomena cannot be explained by—and, indeed, oftentimes subvert—the classic distinction between binding holdings and dispensable dicta. This Article connects the scope of precedent with recurring and foundational debates about the proper ends of judicial interpretation. A precedent’s forward- looking effect should not depend on the …

Schoolhouses, Courthouses, And Statehouses: Educational Finance, Constitutional Structure, And The Separation Of Powers Doctrine, Michael Heise

Michael Heise

No abstract provided.

Executive Branch Contempt Of Congress, Josh Chafetz

Josh Chafetz

After former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten refused to comply with subpoenas issued by a congressional committee investigating the firing of a number of United States Attorneys, the House of Representatives voted in 2008 to hold them in contempt. The House then chose a curious method of enforcing its contempt citation: it filed a federal lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment that Miers and Bolten were in contempt of Congress and an injunction ordering them to comply with the subpoenas. The district court ruled for the House, although that ruling was subsequently stayed …

Who Speaks For The ‘People’ On Policy?, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

Interpreting Force Authorization, Scott Sullivan

Scott Sullivan

Is The Supreme Court Disabling The Enabling Act, Or Is Shady Grove Just Another Bad Opera?, Robert J. Condlin

Robert J. Condlin

After seventy years of trying, the Supreme Court has yet to agree on whether the Rules Enabling Act articulates a one or two part standard for determining the validity of a Federal Rule. Is it enough that a Federal Rule regulates “practice and procedure,” or must it also not “abridge substantive rights”? The Enabling Act seems to require both, but the Court is not so sure, and the costs of its uncertainty are real. Among other things, litigants must guess whether the decision to apply a Federal Rule in a given case will depend upon predictable ritual, judicial power grab, …

The Senate And The Recess Appointments, David Arkush

David J. Arkush

This Essay offers a new perspective on the recess appointments controversy in Noel Canning v. NLRB. First, contrary to the dominant view, the case does not present a conflict between the President and the Senate. The Senate majority likely wished to authorize the President's recess appointments, and the majority is the relevant body for the purpose of establishing Senate intent. Second, the courts should defer to the Senate's wishes rather than define the term "recess" themselves.

Papers, Please: Does The Constitution Permit The States A Role In Immigration Enforcement?, John C. Eastman

John C. Eastman

Congress' Power Is Properly Vested, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

Holding Enemy Combatants In The Wake Of Hamdan, Ronald D. Rotunda

Ronald D. Rotunda

The article offers, inter alia, a succinct survey of the historical and jurisprudential background for the detainee cases and military commissions cases - including a number of important factual details glossed over in most reporting on the cases (e.g., Padilla has stipulated that he was an enemy spy sent to the United States; it was Hamdan's own defense counsel who had asked to exclude him from the voir dire portion of the proceedings) - as well as legal issues that may still arise.

Confidentiality's Constitutionality: The Incursion On Judicial Powers To Regulate Parties In Court-Connected Mediation, Maureen A. Weston Prof.

Maureen A Weston

This Article explores the interplay between mediation confidentiality legislation and judicial powers to regulate participant conduct in the pretrial process. Part II describes the role of the court in monitoring parties' conduct in distinct settlement-related processes, such as private settlement negotiations, judicial settlement conferences, court-connected arbitration, and court-connected mediation, as well as the corresponding but varied confidentiality protection accorded these processes. Part III examines judicial decisions analyzing the tension between mediation confidentiality and judicial power to monitor and sanction misconduct in a settlement or court-connected mediation setting, specifically comparing the approach used by the California Supreme Court in Foxgate Homeowners’ …