Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Federal Visions Of Private Family Support, Laura A. Rosenbury
Federal Visions Of Private Family Support, Laura A. Rosenbury
Vanderbilt Law Review
The individual states have long played a primary role in defining the legal family in the United States, with states often determining who does and does not enjoy the legal status of spouse, parent, and child. Two recent U.S. Supreme Court cases, Astrue v. Capatol and United States v. Windsor,2 acknowledged and affirmed the diverse definitions of family that flow from this federalist approach. Yet these cases do not solidify the states' place in defining family for purposes of marriage, parentage, divorce, and death. Instead, they foreshadow an increasingly federal conception of family status-a conception that values private family support …
Retained By The People: Federalism, The Ultimate Sovereign, And Natural Limits On Government Power, Stephanie Hall Barclay
Retained By The People: Federalism, The Ultimate Sovereign, And Natural Limits On Government Power, Stephanie Hall Barclay
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Brewing tensions between state governments and the federal government have reached a boiling point unmatched since the civil rights debates of the 1960s. In light of the rapid expansion of federal power combined with colliding views on various policies, the call for states’ rights has increasingly become a rallying cry for lawmakers that has gained traction with groups on varying points along the political spectrum, as well as a frequent theory employed by the Supreme Court. While the system of federalism created by the Constitution certainly has its unique benefits, and while it is true that the federal government was …
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 …
The Failure And Future Of Lake Okeechobee Water Releases: A Quasi-Governmental Solution, Jacquelyn A. Thomas
The Failure And Future Of Lake Okeechobee Water Releases: A Quasi-Governmental Solution, Jacquelyn A. Thomas
Florida State University Law Review
No abstract provided.
“Standing” In The Shadow Of Erie: Federalism In The Balance In Hollingsworth V. Perry, Glenn S. Koppel
“Standing” In The Shadow Of Erie: Federalism In The Balance In Hollingsworth V. Perry, Glenn S. Koppel
Pace Law Review
This Article provides an insight into the Court’s divergent views on the federal standing issue in Hollingsworth by viewing the Justices’ conflicting positions through the lens of the Court’s Erie jurisprudence, which, at its core, focuses on calibrating the proper judicial balance of power in a given case between conflicting federal and state interests in determining vertical choice-of-law issues. Hollingsworth is uniquely positioned at the intersection of federal standing principles and Erie doctrine, confronting the Court with competing balance of power concerns inherent in our federal system. Standing, as a requirement for the limited exercise of federal judicial power under …
Taking States (And Metaphysics) Seriously, Sanford Levinson
Taking States (And Metaphysics) Seriously, Sanford Levinson
Michigan Law Review
Sotirios A. Barber has written many incisive and important books, in addition to coediting an especially interesting casebook on constitutional law and interpretation. He is also a political theorist. An important part of his overall approach to constitutional theory is his philosophical commitment to “moral realism.” He believes in the metaphysical reality of moral and political truths, the most important of which, for any constitutional theorist, involve the meanings of justice and the common good. He not only believes in the ontological reality of such truths — that is, that these truths are more than mere human conventions or social …
Interactive Antitrust Federalism: Antitrust Enforcement In Tennessee Then And Now, Clark L. Hildabrand
Interactive Antitrust Federalism: Antitrust Enforcement In Tennessee Then And Now, Clark L. Hildabrand
Transactions: The Tennessee Journal of Business Law
In light of the recent debates surrounding the proper relationship between federal and state antitrust enforcement, this Paper explores the early years of state antitrust enforcement to see how the Sherman Act impacted state antitrust law. Since Tennessee was the location of the first federal case brought under the Sherman Act and has been involved in recent indirect purchaser action against Microsoft Corporation, this Paper particularly focuses on the development of antitrust law within Tennessee. Before the Sherman Act, Tennessee antitrust enforcement was limited to the narrow confines of common law restraint of trade, but the implementation of the Sherman …
Unbundling Federalism: Colorado's Legalization Of Marijuana And Federalism's Many Forms, Jessica Bulman-Pozen
Unbundling Federalism: Colorado's Legalization Of Marijuana And Federalism's Many Forms, Jessica Bulman-Pozen
University of Colorado Law Review
This short Essay argues that various attributes we associate with federalism should not be deemed necessary components of federalism as a definitional or normative matter. Using Colorado's recent legalization of marijuana as a case study, it shows how two such attributes-an autonomous realm of state action and independent state officials with distinctive interests-can be pulled apart. State officials often further their interests and effectively oppose federal policy when they participate in the same statutory scheme as federal actors instead of operating in a separate, autonomous sphere. At the same time, state officials frequently rely on the autonomous lawmaking and executive …