Law Commons^™

Diamond V. Chakrabarty: Gauging Congress’ Response To Dynamic Statutory Interpretation By The Supreme Court , Anna E. Lumelsky

ExpressO

In this article, I consider the 1980 Supreme Court decision, Diamond v. Chakrabarty, and Congress’ response to it in light of several contemporary views on statutory interpretation. I conclude that in science and technology-related cases in which delay could significantly hamper the advancement of the field, the Supreme Court should interpret federal statutes dynamically in response to a changing social context, but should also attempt to conform its interpretations to legislative preferences in order to avoid a legislative override.

Fuel Efficiency: The Disconnect Between Environmental Policy And Tax Policy, John J. Marciano

ExpressO

The recent high gas prices in America have intensified the debate over oil and gas efficiency, use, and reserves. As the national average for a gallon tops $2.10, Congress and the President strive to find a common position to foster energy independence, protect the environment, and bolster the struggling economy.

President Bush’s energy policy and recent Senate and House bills have not contemplated their effects on the environmental state of our nation or its impact on the internal revenue code. In this time of uncertainty, energy independence and measured use of resources may be at odds, but must we stray …

The Democratic Public Domain: Reconnecting The Modern First Amendment And The Original Progress Clause (A.K.A. Copyright And Patent Clause), Malla Pollack

ExpressO

If the Progress Clause, a.k.a. the Patent and Copyright Clause, of the U.S. Constitution had been construed when its original meaning was still obvious, United States law would be far different. In this area at least, the Drafters’ Constitution was much less aristocratic than the modern (mis)reading. The original meaning of the Progress Clause, furthermore, should have stimulated a more communitarian First Amendment, the type of First Amendment currently being suggested by leading First Amendment scholars such as Jack Balkin.