Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Implied Wavier After Seminole Tribe, Kit Kinports
Implied Wavier After Seminole Tribe, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
Part I of this Article briefly traces the history of the Supreme Court's Eleventh Amendment jurisprudence, focusing in particular on the opinions developing the doctrines of implied waiver and abrogation. Part II makes the case that the doctrine of implied waiver retains validity after Seminole Tribe, at least with respect to federal statutes passed pursuant to the Spending Clause that condition the receipt of federal funds on the states' waiver of the Eleventh Amendment and statutes passed under Congress's other Article I powers that regulate an activity voluntarily undertaken by the states. Finally, Part III considers other potential constitutional …
Balancing State Sovereignty And Competition: An Analysis Of The Impact Of Seminole Tribe On The Antitrust State Action Immunity Doctrine, Susan Beth Farmer
Balancing State Sovereignty And Competition: An Analysis Of The Impact Of Seminole Tribe On The Antitrust State Action Immunity Doctrine, Susan Beth Farmer
Journal Articles
The great impact of the Seminole Tribe v. Florida decision will likely be felt in the range of federal causes of action that have exclusive remedies in federal court. Antitrust cases are among such causes of action. In seeking to avoid antitrust liability, defendants have invoked the protections of the antitrust state action doctrine, which immunizes only that anticompetitive activity imposed and supervised by states. This immunity bars suits against state and private actors alike. After Seminole Tribe, state defendants will escape all antitrust liability, whether or not the traditional requirements of the state action doctrine have been met. …
A Twentieth Amendment Parable, John C. Nagle
A Twentieth Amendment Parable, John C. Nagle
Journal Articles
The twentieth amendment receives virtually no attention in modern American constitutional law. Adopted in 1933, the primary purpose of the amendment was to eliminate lame-duck Congresses. The proponents of the amendment argued that lame-ducks were subject to nefarious influences and that allowing lame-duck legislation contradicted the voice of the people in the most recent election. But the text of the twentieth amendment simply moved the date on which the newly elected President and Congress took office from March to January, and does not expressly prohibit lame-duck legislation. The framers of the amendment could not conceive of Congress meeting during the …
Qualified Immunity In Section 1983 Cases: The Unanswered Questions, Kit Kinports
Qualified Immunity In Section 1983 Cases: The Unanswered Questions, Kit Kinports
Journal Articles
Part I of this Article describes the general policies underlying qualified immunity and the Court's decisions defining the scope of the defense. Part II then addresses two answered questions concerning Harlow v. Fitzgerald's impact on the substantive content of the qualified immunity defense: Is immunity available to the defendant who actually knows that her conduct is infringing the plaintiff's constitutional rights, even if the law governing those rights is not yet clearly established? And should a court take into account the nature of the defendant's governmental responsibilities and other circumstances surrounding her conduct in determining whether the right she …