Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Co. v. United States (1)
- Amalgamated Meat Cutters v. Connally (1)
- American Trucking Ass'ns v. EPA (1)
- Antitrust (1)
- Benefits analysis (1)
-
- Blocked exchange (1)
- Blocking (1)
- Brown v. Board of Education (1)
- Child Online Protection Act (1)
- Civil juries (1)
- Clean Air Act (1)
- Communications Decency Act (1)
- Competition (1)
- Complex litigation (1)
- Complexity (1)
- Congress (1)
- Cyberspace (1)
- Davis (Kenneth Culp) (1)
- Decisionmaking (1)
- Email (1)
- Empiricism (1)
- Environmental Protection Agency (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- Federal Trade Commission (1)
- Federal agencies (1)
- Fraud (1)
- Free speech (1)
- Human behavior (1)
- IP address (1)
- Industrial Union Department v. American Petroleum Institute (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Jury Trial Techniques In Complex Civil Litigation, Ronald S. Longhofer
Jury Trial Techniques In Complex Civil Litigation, Ronald S. Longhofer
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Ronald Longhofer, an experienced litigator, discusses the challenges inherent in trying a complex civil case to a jury. He explores aspects of complex litigation that often impede jurors from effectively hearing such cases. In conclusion, he suggests litigation techniques which have proved successful in overcoming such obstacles and effectively translating complex evidence to jurors.
Zoning Speech On The Internet: A Legal And Technical Model, Lawrence Lessig, Paul Resnick
Zoning Speech On The Internet: A Legal And Technical Model, Lawrence Lessig, Paul Resnick
Michigan Law Review
Speech, it is said, divides into three sorts - (1) speech that everyone has a right to (political speech, speech about public affairs); (2) speech that no one has a right to (obscene speech, child porn); and (3) speech that some have a right to but others do not (in the United States, Ginsberg speech, or speech that is "harmful to minors," to which adults have a right but kids do not). Speech-protective regimes, on this view, are those where category (1) speech predominates; speech-repressive regimes are those where categories (2) and (3) prevail. This divide has meaning for speech …
Is The Clean Air Act Unconstitutional?, Cass R. Sunstein
Is The Clean Air Act Unconstitutional?, Cass R. Sunstein
Michigan Law Review
This Article deals with two linked questions. The first involves the future of the Clean Air Act. The particular concern is how the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") might be encouraged, with help from reviewing courts, to issue better ambient air quality standards, and in the process to shift from some of the anachronisms of 1970s environmentalism to a more fruitful approach to environmental protection. The second question involves the role of the nondelegation doctrine in American public law, a doctrine that shows unmistakable signs of revival. I will suggest that improved performance by EPA and agencies in general, operating in …
Antitrust Enfocement And High-Technology Markets, William J. Baer, David A. Balto
Antitrust Enfocement And High-Technology Markets, William J. Baer, David A. Balto
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Although the antitrust laws apply to all industries, the application must be tempered in each case by the myriad ways in which competition can be modified by structural, behavioral, technological, regulatory, and other characteristics. The Commission applies the antitrust laws with sensitivity to the special characteristics of high-tech industries and of intellectual property, but also with the recognition that--as in other industries--competition plays an important role in spurring innovation and in spreading the benefits of that innovation to consumers. This focus is not new. This balanced approach has roots that go back at least to the 1977 Antitrust Guide to …
Constitutional Fact And Theory: A Response To Chief Judge Posner, Deborah Jones Merritt
Constitutional Fact And Theory: A Response To Chief Judge Posner, Deborah Jones Merritt
Michigan Law Review
In his James Madison Lecture on Constitutional Law, Chief Judge Richard Posner chides both professors and judges for devoting too much attention to constitutional theory and too little time to empiricism. Although I agree with Judge Posner's endorsement of empiricism, I dispute the roles he assigns empiricism and theory. Social science matters when interpreting the Constitution, but not in the way Posner posits. Facts cannot replace constitutional theories, nor can they mechanically resolve questions posed by theory. Instead, empirical knowledge is most useful in unmasking the theoretical assumptions that undergird constitutional law, in focusing those theories, and in contributing to …