Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Elections (3)
- United States Supreme Court (3)
- Campaign finance (2)
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2)
- Congress (2)
-
- Constitution (2)
- Constitutionality (2)
- Judicial activism (2)
- Political participation (2)
- Presidents (2)
- Roberts Court (2)
- Accidental deaths (1)
- Accidents (1)
- Appointments (1)
- Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett (1)
- Buckley v. Valeo (1)
- Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius (1)
- Congressional findings (1)
- Constitutional interpretation (1)
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (1)
- Corporate personhood (1)
- Corporations (1)
- Corruption (1)
- Crimes (1)
- Death (1)
- Decision making (1)
- Democracy (1)
- Electoral processes (1)
- Executive power (1)
- Federalism (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Political Safeguards Of Horizontal Federalism, Heather K. Gerken, Ari Holtzblatt
The Political Safeguards Of Horizontal Federalism, Heather K. Gerken, Ari Holtzblatt
Michigan Law Review
For decades, we have debated whether “political safeguards” preserve healthy relations between the states and the federal government and thus reduce or eliminate the need for judges to referee state–federal tussles. No one has made such an argument about relations among the states, however, and the few scholars to have considered the question insist that such safeguards don’t exist. This Article takes the opposite view and lays down the intellectual foundations for the political safeguards of horizontal federalism. If you want to know what unites the burgeoning work on horizontal federalism and illuminates the hidden logic of its doctrine, you …
What Will It Take? Terrorism, Mass Murder, Gang Violence, And Suicides: The American Way, Or Do We Strive For A Better Way?, Katherine L. Record, Lawrence O. Gostin
What Will It Take? Terrorism, Mass Murder, Gang Violence, And Suicides: The American Way, Or Do We Strive For A Better Way?, Katherine L. Record, Lawrence O. Gostin
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The assertion that access to firearms makes us safe, rather than increases the likelihood that oneself or a family member will die, is contradicted by a large body of evidence. Gunshots kill more than 30,000 Americans each year. Homicide accounts for approximately one-third of these deaths, with the remainder involving suicides and accidental gun discharges. In fact, firearms put us at greater risk of death than participating in war; in four months, as many Americans were shot dead in the United States as have died fighting in Iraq for an entire decade. Given these grim statistics, it would be reasonable …
Plausible Absurdities And Practical Formalities: The Recess Appointments Clause In Theory And Practice, David Frisof
Plausible Absurdities And Practical Formalities: The Recess Appointments Clause In Theory And Practice, David Frisof
Michigan Law Review
The recent controversy surrounding President Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau while the Senate was holding pro forma sessions illustrates the need to reach a new understanding of the Recess Appointments Clause of the Constitution. For the Recess Appointments Clause to be functional, it must fulfill two essential constitutional purposes: it must act as a fulcrum in the separation of powers, and it must ensure the continued exercise of the executive power. Achieving this functionality depends not only on the formal constructions of the Clause but also on the ways in …
Power Games, Aneil Kovvali
Power Games, Aneil Kovvali
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
According to the traditional account, Congress has the "necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments" by the president. As commentators have recognized, however, the traditional account does not match reality. Individuals in Washington, D.C., are more interested in fighting for their political party than for their branch of government, and the essentially reactive legislative branch lacks the capacity to respond to a rapidly changing policy environment. But the traditional account suffers from a more basic flaw. The president can decide whether or not to cooperate with Congress on a situation-by-situation basis. By contrast, Congress's tools for disciplining the …
Hobby Lobby And The Pathology Of Citizens United, Ellen D. Katz
Hobby Lobby And The Pathology Of Citizens United, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
Four years ago, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission held that for-profit corporations possess a First Amendment right to make independent campaign expenditures. In so doing, the United States Supreme Court invited speculation that such corporations might possess other First Amendment rights as well. The petitioners in Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius are now arguing that for-profit corporations are among the intended beneficiaries of the Free Exercise Clause and, along with the respondents in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, that they also qualify as “persons” under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Neither suggestion follows inexorably from Citizens United, …
Hollowed-Out Democracy, Kate Andrias
Hollowed-Out Democracy, Kate Andrias
Articles
Professors Joseph Fishkin’s and Heather Gerken’s essay for this symposium, The Two Trends That Matter for Party Politics, along with the larger project of which it is a part, marks a notable turn (or return) in the law-of-democracy field. Unlike much recent scholarship, Fishkin’s and Gerken’s work does not offer a comprehensive theory of corruption or equality, but instead analyzes the relationship between campaign finance law and the actual functioning of political parties in our democracy. In brief, Fishkin and Gerken tell us that our contemporary political parties are at once highly polarized and oddly weak. They claim this is …
Election Law's Lochnerian Turn, Ellen D. Katz
Election Law's Lochnerian Turn, Ellen D. Katz
Articles
This panel has been asked to consider whether "the Constitution [is] responsible for electoral dysfunction."' My answer is no. The electoral process undeniably falls well short of our aspirations, but it strikes me that we should look to the Supreme Court for an accounting before blaming the Constitution for the deeply unsatisfactory condition in which we find ourselves.