Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Laying Privileges Or Immunities To Rest: Mcdonald V. City Of Chicago, B. Aubrey Smith
Laying Privileges Or Immunities To Rest: Mcdonald V. City Of Chicago, B. Aubrey Smith
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
No abstract provided.
United States V. Comstock: Justifying The Civil Commitment Of Sexually Dangerous Offenders, Halerie Mahan
United States V. Comstock: Justifying The Civil Commitment Of Sexually Dangerous Offenders, Halerie Mahan
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
No abstract provided.
Briscoe V. Virginia: Reexamining The Scope Of Melendez-Diaz, Caroline Mix
Briscoe V. Virginia: Reexamining The Scope Of Melendez-Diaz, Caroline Mix
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
No abstract provided.
Legal Interpretation: The Window Of The Text As Transparent, Opaque, Or Translucent, George H. Taylor
Legal Interpretation: The Window Of The Text As Transparent, Opaque, Or Translucent, George H. Taylor
Articles
It is a common metaphor that the text is a window onto the world that it depicts. In legal interpretation, the metaphor has been developed in two ways – the legal text as transparent or opaque – and the Article proposes a third – the legal text as translucent. The claim that the legal text is transparent has been associated with more liberal methodological approaches. According to this view (often articulated by critics), the legal text does not markedly delimit meaning. Delimitation comes from the interpreters. By contrast, stress on the opacity of the legal text comes from those who …
The Subjects Of The Constitution, Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz
The Subjects Of The Constitution, Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Two centuries after Marbury v. Madison, there remains a deep confusion about quite what a court is reviewing when it engages in judicial review. Conventional wisdom has it that judicial review is the review of certain legal objects: statutes, regulations. But strictly speaking, this is not quite right. The Constitution prohibits not objects but actions. Judicial review is the review of such actions. And actions require actors: verbs require subjects. So before judicial review focuses on verbs, let alone objects, it should begin at the beginning, with subjects. Every constitutional inquiry should begin with a basic question that has been …
Pluralism In Marbury And Van Gend, Daniel Halberstam
Pluralism In Marbury And Van Gend, Daniel Halberstam
Book Chapters
‘Great cases, like hard cases, make bad law’, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr, famously remarked in his first Supreme Court dissent. For Holmes, ‘great cases are called great, not by reason of their real importance in shaping the law of the future, but because of some accident of immediate overwhelming interest which appeals to the feelings and distorts the judgment’. On this account neither Marbury v Madison70 nor Van Gend en Loos would qualify. Van Gend was a case of great principle without greatly interesting facts. And Marbury was a great political battle that nevertheless produced a case of great principle.