Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1 - 15 of 15
Full-Text Articles in Law
Marbury Versus Madison: Documents And Commentary, Mark Graber, Michael Perhac
Marbury Versus Madison: Documents And Commentary, Mark Graber, Michael Perhac
Mark Graber
Marbury versus Madison combines documents and analytical essays timed for the bicentennial year (2003) of one of the most important Supreme Court cases. This timely collection will explain: the constitutional, political, philosophical background to judicial review the historical record leading to this landmark case the impact of the decision since 1803 its impact on the world stage, especially for new and emerging democratic nations. Also includes a listing of all the Supreme Court cases citing Marbury an an annotated Marbury v. Madison.
A Comment On "Legisprudence", Vlad F. Perju
Human Rights Adjudication In Contemporary Democracies: Courts’ Specific Moral Insight As A Decisive Advantage Over Legislatures (A Modest And Partial Response To Jeremy Waldron’S Core Case Against Judicial Review), Francisco Verbic
Francisco Verbic
No abstract provided.
The Supreme Court And Judicial Review: Two Views, Thomas A. Schweitzer
The Supreme Court And Judicial Review: Two Views, Thomas A. Schweitzer
Thomas A. Schweitzer
No abstract provided.
But How Will The People Know? Public Opinion As A Meager Influence In Shaping Contemporary Supreme Court Decision Making, Tom Goldstein, Amy Howe
But How Will The People Know? Public Opinion As A Meager Influence In Shaping Contemporary Supreme Court Decision Making, Tom Goldstein, Amy Howe
Michigan Law Review
Chief Justice John Roberts famously described the ideal Supreme Court Justice as analogous to a baseball umpire, who simply "applies" the rules, rather than making them. Roberts promised to "remember that it's my job to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat." At her own recent confirmation hearings, Elena Kagan demurred, opining that Roberts's metaphor might erroneously suggest that "everything is clear-cut, and that there's no judgment in the process." Based on his 2009 book, The Will of the People: How Public Opinion Has Influenced the Supreme Court and Shaped the Meaning of the Constitution, Barry Friedman …
Judicial Review And Diversity, Deseriee A. Kennedy
Judicial Review And Diversity, Deseriee A. Kennedy
Deseriee A. Kennedy
No abstract provided.
Taking War Seriously: A Model For Constitutional Constraints On The Use Of Force, In Compliance With International Law, Craig Martin
Taking War Seriously: A Model For Constitutional Constraints On The Use Of Force, In Compliance With International Law, Craig Martin
Craig Martin
This article develops an argument for increased constitutional control over the decision to use armed force or engage in armed conflict, as a means of reducing the incidence of illegitimate armed conflict. In particular, the Model would involve three elements: a process-based constitutional incorporation of the principles of international law relating to the use of force (the jus ad bellum regime); a constitutional requirement that the legislature approve any use of force rising above a de minimus level; and an explicit provision for limited judicial review of the decision-making process. The Model is not designed with any one country in …
The Japanese Constitution As Law And The Legitimacy Of The Supreme Court’S Constitutional Decisions: A Response To Matsui, Craig Martin
The Japanese Constitution As Law And The Legitimacy Of The Supreme Court’S Constitutional Decisions: A Response To Matsui, Craig Martin
Craig Martin
This article, from a conference at Washington University School of Law on the Supreme Court of Japan, responds to an article by Shigenori Matsui, “Why is the Japanese Supreme Court is so conservative?” Professor Matsui’s article makes the argument that a significant factor is the extent to which the judges fail to view the Constitution as positive law requiring judicial enforcement. It is novel in its emphasis on an explanation grounded in law, and the decision-making process, rather than the political, institutional, and cultural explanations that are so often offered. In this article, Borrowing from Kermit Roosevelt’s arguments on judicial …
Judicial Activism And The Interpretation Of The Voting Rights Act, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer
Judicial Activism And The Interpretation Of The Voting Rights Act, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer
Articles by Maurer Faculty
From the moment the U.S. Supreme Court first confronted the difficult constitutional questions at the heart of the Voting Rights Act, its posture has been one of deference. This posture has continued to this day. In contrast, the Court has interpreted the language of the Act dynamically, often in total disregard to the text of the law or the intent of Congress. But as this Article explains, the Roberts Court appears poised to unsettle this longstanding narrative. The Act is in serious constitutional danger. One way to explain this move on the part of the Court is by invoking the …
Epic Considerations: The Speech That The Supreme Court Would Not Hear In Snyder V. Phelps, Jeffrey Shulman
Epic Considerations: The Speech That The Supreme Court Would Not Hear In Snyder V. Phelps, Jeffrey Shulman
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In declining to consider the “epic” posted by the Westboro Baptist Church on its web site, the Supreme Court took most (but not quite all) of the good constitutional stuff out of Snyder v. Phelps. The Court may have sought to make this an easy case by considering only the contents of the church’s picketing placards. For the Court, the placards highlighted such issues of public import as “the political and moral conduct of the United States and its citizens, the fate of our nation, homosexuality in the military, and scandals involving the Catholic clergy.” On grounds that we …
Looking For A Few Good Philosopher Kings: Political Gerrymandering As A Question Of Institutional Competence, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer
Looking For A Few Good Philosopher Kings: Political Gerrymandering As A Question Of Institutional Competence, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer
Articles by Maurer Faculty
The redistricting season is about to begin in full swing, and with it will come renewed calls for the federal courts, and particularly the U. S. Supreme Court, to aggressively review the work of the political branches. This is an intriguing puzzle. Since the early 1960’s, the federal courts have regulated questions of politics aggressively. They have done this even in the face of difficult questions of political representation. The courts have taken sides, to be sure, but these can only be described as acts of volition and will, not constitutional law. The leading case is Reynolds v. Sims. This …
What Happened In Iowa?, David Pozen
What Happened In Iowa?, David Pozen
Faculty Scholarship
Reply to Nicole Mansker & Neal Devins, Do Judicial Elections Facilitate Popular Constitutionalism; Can They?, 111 Colum. L. Rev. Sidebar 27 (2011).
November 2, 2010 is the latest milestone in the evolution of state judicial elections from sleepy, sterile affairs into meaningful political contests. Following an aggressive ouster campaign, voters in Iowa removed three supreme court justices, including the chief justice, who had joined an opinion finding a right to same-sex marriage under the state constitution. Supporters of the campaign rallied around the mantra, “It’s we the people, not we the courts.” Voter turnout surged to unprecedented levels; the national …
The Supreme Court And Judicial Review: Two Views, Thomas A. Schweitzer
The Supreme Court And Judicial Review: Two Views, Thomas A. Schweitzer
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
The Conflicted Assumptions Of Modern Constitutional Law, H. Jefferson Powell
The Conflicted Assumptions Of Modern Constitutional Law, H. Jefferson Powell
Faculty Scholarship
Contribution to Symposium - The Nature of Judicial Authority: A Reflection on Philip Hamburger's Law and Judicial Duty
The Puzzling Resistance To Judicial Review Of The Legislative Process, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
The Puzzling Resistance To Judicial Review Of The Legislative Process, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
Dr. Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
Should courts have the power to examine the legislature’s enactment process and strike down statutes enacted contrary to procedural lawmaking requirements? This idea remains highly controversial. While substantive judicial review is well-established and often taken for granted, many judges and scholars see judicial review of the legislative process as utterly objectionable. This Article challenges that prevalent position and establishes the case for judicial review of the legislative process. The Article contends that, ironically, some of the major arguments for substantive judicial review in constitutional theory, and even the arguments in Marbury v. Madison itself, are actually more persuasive when applied …