Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Duke Law (5)
- Georgetown University Law Center (5)
- University of Colorado Law School (4)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (4)
- University of Richmond (4)
-
- American University Washington College of Law (3)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (3)
- Cornell University Law School (2)
- Fordham Law School (2)
- Georgia State University College of Law (2)
- Osgoode Hall Law School of York University (2)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (2)
- University of Denver (2)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas (2)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (2)
- Western New England University School of Law (2)
- William & Mary Law School (2)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law (1)
- City University of New York (CUNY) (1)
- Cleveland State University (1)
- Florida State University College of Law (1)
- Golden Gate University School of Law (1)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- Mercer University School of Law (1)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (1)
- St. John's University School of Law (1)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (1)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- Judges (12)
- Jurisprudence (4)
- Constitutional interpretation (3)
- Constitutional theory (3)
- Courts (3)
-
- Statistics (3)
- Supreme Court (3)
- Capital punishment (2)
- Constitutional law (2)
- Court clerk (2)
- Evidence (2)
- Federal Courts (2)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (2)
- Fourth Amendment (2)
- International law (2)
- Judicial clerkship (2)
- Judicial discretion (2)
- Judicial review (2)
- Judicial selection (2)
- Juries (2)
- Law school (2)
- Liberty (2)
- Original intent (2)
- Remedies (2)
- Sturm College of Law (2)
- United States Supreme Court (2)
- Women judges (2)
- AI (1)
- ASIL Dispute Resolution Interest Group (1)
- Abolition (1)
- Publication
-
- Faculty Scholarship (12)
- Articles (5)
- Law Faculty Publications (5)
- Publications (4)
- All Faculty Scholarship (3)
-
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (3)
- Faculty Publications (3)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (3)
- Scholarly Articles (3)
- Articles & Book Chapters (2)
- Faculty Publications By Year (2)
- Journal Articles (2)
- Political Science Faculty Research (2)
- Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (1)
- Book Chapters (1)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers (1)
- Faculty Works (1)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (1)
- NULR Online (1)
- Popular Media (1)
- Publications and Research (1)
- Ronald M. George Distinguished Lecture Series (1)
- SCI Papers & Reports (1)
- Scholarly Publications (1)
- Supreme Court Overviews (1)
- Testimony (1)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (1)
Articles 61 - 67 of 67
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Continuing Battle Over The Second Amendment, Allen K. Rostron
The Continuing Battle Over The Second Amendment, Allen K. Rostron
Faculty Works
No abstract provided.
Judge Posner, Judge Wilkinson, And Judicial Critique Of Constitutional Theory,, Kevin C. Walsh, Marc O. Degirolami
Judge Posner, Judge Wilkinson, And Judicial Critique Of Constitutional Theory,, Kevin C. Walsh, Marc O. Degirolami
Scholarly Articles
Judge Richard Posner's well-known view is that constitutional theory is useless. And Judge J Harvie Wilkinson III has lambasted constitutional theory for the way in which its "cosmic" aspirations threaten democratic self-governance. Many other judges hold similar views. And yet both Posner and Wilkinson-in the popular press, in law review articles, and in books-have advocated what appear to be their own theories of how to judge in constitutional cases. Judicial pragmatism for Posner and judicial restraint for Wilkinson seem to be substitutes for originalism, living constitutionalism, political process theory, and so on. But both Posner and Wilkinson also deny that …
Judge Posner, Judge Wilkinson, And Judicial Critique Of Constitutional Theory, Marc O. Degirolami, Kevin C. Walsh
Judge Posner, Judge Wilkinson, And Judicial Critique Of Constitutional Theory, Marc O. Degirolami, Kevin C. Walsh
Faculty Publications
Judge Richard Posner’s well-known view is that constitutional theory is useless. And Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III has lambasted constitutional theory for the way in which its “cosmic” aspirations threaten democratic self-governance. Many other judges hold similar views. And yet both Posner and Wilkinson — in the popular press, in law review articles, and in books — have advocated what appear to be their own theories of how to judge in constitutional cases. Judicial pragmatism for Posner and judicial restraint for Wilkinson seem to be substitutes for originalism, living constitutionalism, political process theory, and so on. But both Posner and …
Bond V. United States: Concurring In The Judgment, Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz
Bond V. United States: Concurring In The Judgment, Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Bond v. United States presented the deep constitutional question of whether a treaty can increase the legislative power of Congress. Unfortunately, a majority of the Court managed to sidestep the constitutional issue by dodgy statutory interpretation. But the other three Justices—Scalia, Thomas, and Alito—all wrote important concurrences in the judgment, grappling with the constitutional issues presented. In particular, Justice Scalia’s opinion (joined by Justice Thomas), is a masterpiece, eloquently demonstrating that Missouri v. Holland is wrong and should be overruled: a treaty cannot increase the legislative power of Congress.
J. Skelly Wright And The Limits Of Liberalism, Louis Michael Seidman
J. Skelly Wright And The Limits Of Liberalism, Louis Michael Seidman
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This essay, written for a symposium on the life and work of United States Court of Appeals Judge J. Skelly Wright, makes four points. First, Judge Wright was an important participant in the liberal legal tradition. The tradition sought to liberate law from arid formalism and to use it as a technique for progressive reform. However, legal liberals also believed that there were limits on what judges could do–-limits rooted in both its liberalism and its legalism. Second, Wright occupied a position on the left fringe of the liberal legal tradition, and he therefore devoted much of his career to …
The Constitution According To Justices Scalia And Thomas: Alive And Kickin', Eric J. Segall
The Constitution According To Justices Scalia And Thomas: Alive And Kickin', Eric J. Segall
Faculty Publications By Year
No abstract provided.
Rethinking Summary Judgment Empirics: The Life Of The Parties, Jonah B. Gelbach
Rethinking Summary Judgment Empirics: The Life Of The Parties, Jonah B. Gelbach
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.