Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
2007 National Lawyer’S Convention The Federalist Society And Its Federalism And Separation Of Powers Practice Groups Present A Panel Debate On Federalism: Religion, Early America And The Fourteenth Amendment, John Eastman, Marci Hamilton, William H. Pryor Jr.
2007 National Lawyer’S Convention The Federalist Society And Its Federalism And Separation Of Powers Practice Groups Present A Panel Debate On Federalism: Religion, Early America And The Fourteenth Amendment, John Eastman, Marci Hamilton, William H. Pryor Jr.
University of Massachusetts Law Review
Transcript of the Federalist Society and its Federalism and Separation of Powers Practice Groups panel debate at the 2007 National Lawyers Convention including panelists Dean John Eastman of Chapman University School of Law, Professor Marci Hamilton of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, and moderated by Hon. William H. Pryor Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Closing The Doors To Justice: A Critique Of Pimentel V. Dreyfus And The Application Of Legal Formalism To The Elimination Of Food Assistance Benefits For Legal Immigrants, Hannah Zommick
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment contends that the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Pimentel v. Dreyfus employed a legal formalist approach and that by applying this framework, the court prevented legal immigrants, who were caught between the strict eligibility restrictions of welfare reform, from asserting their rights through the justice system. The legal formalist approach “treats the law as a set of scientific formulae or principles that are derived from the study of case law. These principles create an internal analytical framework which, when applied to a set of facts, leads the decision maker, through logical deduction, to the correct outcome in a case.” …
County Court, Westchester County, People V. Gant, Albert V. Messina Jr.
County Court, Westchester County, People V. Gant, Albert V. Messina Jr.
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Qualified Immunity And Statutory Interpretation, Ilan Wurman
Qualified Immunity And Statutory Interpretation, Ilan Wurman
Seattle University Law Review
Before the 1989 case of Graham v. Connor, excessive force cases were pursued under either state law or the insuperable “shocks the conscience” test of the Fourteenth Amendment. Only after Graham did excessive force cases—now under the Fourth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983—inundate the federal courts, which had by then granted far-reaching immunities to officers for their constitutional torts. As a result of federal qualified immunity doctrine, which many states have adopted for themselves, excessive force cases rarely get to trial, plaintiffs often cannot recover, and courts struggle to find principled distinctions from one qualified immunity case to the …
Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People V. Mcfarley, Erica R. Borgese
Appellate Division, Fourth Department, People V. Mcfarley, Erica R. Borgese
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Importance Of Interpretation: How The Language Of The Constitution Allows For Differing Opinions, Christina J. Banfield
The Importance Of Interpretation: How The Language Of The Constitution Allows For Differing Opinions, Christina J. Banfield
Chancellor’s Honors Program Projects
No abstract provided.
Dark Sarcasm In The Classroom: The Failure Of The Courts To Recognize Students' Severe Emotional Harm As Unconstitutional, Emily Suski
Faculty Publications
Sometimes the very people who are supposed to teach, nurture, and protect students in public schools — the students’ teachers, principals, coaches, and other school officials — are instead the people who harm them. Public school officials have beaten students, causing significant physical harm. They have also left students suffering from depression, suicidal ideation, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. When school officials cause such severe harm to students, all the federal courts of appeals to consider the issue have concluded that the Fourteenth Amendment at least in theory protects them, regardless of whether the form of the harm is emotional or …