Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (16)
- Employment Discrimination (2)
- Federalism (2)
- Judicial Power (2)
- Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (1)
-
- Campaign Finance Reform (1)
- Church and State (1)
- Civil Rights (1)
- Commercial Law (1)
- Confirmation Hearings (1)
- Constitutional Amendments (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Criminal Procedure (1)
- Election Law (1)
- European Court of Justice (1)
- Frew v. Hawkins (540 U.S. 431 (2004)) (1)
- Gay and Lesbian Rights (1)
- Handicapped Discrimination (1)
- Harold J. Spaeth (1)
- Jeffrey A. Segal (1)
- Judicial Activism (1)
- Judicial Opinions (1)
- Judicial Process (1)
- Judicial Review (1)
- Judicial Selection (1)
- Lawrence v. Texas 539 (U.S. 558 (2003)) (1)
- Legal Citations (1)
- Legal Formalism (1)
- Legislative Power (1)
- Locke v. Davey (540 U.S. 712 (2004)) (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 18 of 18
Full-Text Articles in Law
Retaining Judicial Authority: A Preliminary Inquiry On The Dominion Of Judges, Larry Catá Backer
Retaining Judicial Authority: A Preliminary Inquiry On The Dominion Of Judges, Larry Catá Backer
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Why do the people and institutions of democratic states, and in particular those of the United States, obey judges ? This article examines the foundations of judicial authority in the United States. This authority is grounded on principles of dominance derived from the organization of institutional religion. The judge in Western states asserts authority on the same basis as the priest - but not the priest as conventionally understood. Rather, the authority of the judge in modern Western democratic states is better understood when viewed through the analytical lens of priestly function developed in the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. Focusing …
Rhetorically Reasonable Police Practices: Viewing The Supreme Court's Multiple Discourse Paths, Kathryn R. Urbonya
Rhetorically Reasonable Police Practices: Viewing The Supreme Court's Multiple Discourse Paths, Kathryn R. Urbonya
Faculty Publications
This Article analyzes the United States Supreme Court's numerous and shifting rhetorical discourse paths for declaring whether particular governmental practices constituted unreasonable searches or seizures under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. It examines how the Court has manipulated classic discourse paths arising from text, history, precedent and structure. It reveals that among and within each of these categories, the Court has created conflicting approaches. The Article argues that the Court's construction of Fourth Amendment reasonableness has depended upon which discourse paths it has selected as well as how it has characterized the values embedded within the discourse …
Section 2: Judicial Confirmation Process, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 2: Judicial Confirmation Process, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 1: Moot Court, Locke V. Davey, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 1: Moot Court, Locke V. Davey, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 5: First Amendment & Election Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 5: First Amendment & Election Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 3: Gay Rights After Lawrence, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 3: Gay Rights After Lawrence, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 4: Civil Rights & Employment Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 4: Civil Rights & Employment Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 7: Federalism In The Rehnquist Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 7: Federalism In The Rehnquist Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 10: Also This Term, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 10: Also This Term, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 8: Business Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 8: Business Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 9: Looking Ahead, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 9: Looking Ahead, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Section 6: Criminal Procedure, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 6: Criminal Procedure, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
The Rhetorical Uses Of Marbury V. Madison: The Emergence Of A "Great Case", Davison M. Douglas
The Rhetorical Uses Of Marbury V. Madison: The Emergence Of A "Great Case", Davison M. Douglas
Faculty Publications
Marbury v. Madison is today indisputably one of the "great cases" of American constitutional law because of its association with the principle of judicial review. But for much of its history, Marbury has not been regarded as a seminal decision. Between 1803 and 1887, the Supreme Court never once cited Marbury for the principle of judicial review, and nineteenth century constitutional law treatises were far more likely to cite Marbury for the decision's discussion of writs of mandamus or the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction than for its discussion of judicial review. During the late nineteenth century, however, the exercise of …
Attitudes About Attitudes, Michael J. Gerhardt
Attitudes About Attitudes, Michael J. Gerhardt
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Congress And The Making Of The Second Rehnquist Court, Neal Devins
Congress And The Making Of The Second Rehnquist Court, Neal Devins
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Federalism And Formalism, Allison H. Eid
Federalism And Formalism, Allison H. Eid
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Many commentators have criticized the Supreme Court's New Federalism decisions as "excessively formalistic. " In this Article, Professor Eid argues that this "standard critique" is wrong on both a descriptive and normative level. Descriptively, she argues that the standard critique mistakenly downplays the extent to which the New Federalism decisions consider the values that federalism serves, and contends that they employ the same sort of formalism/functionalism blend that is found in the Court's separation of powers jurisprudence. Professor Eid then contends that the standard critique's normative prescription - a case-by-case balancing test that would weigh the federal interest against the …
Treating The Pen And The Sword As Constitutional Equals: How And Why The Supreme Court Should Apply Its First Amendment Expertise To The Great Second Amendment Debate, David G. Browne
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Disabiling The Ada: Essences, Better Angels, And Unprincipled Neutrality Claims, Aviam Soifer
Disabiling The Ada: Essences, Better Angels, And Unprincipled Neutrality Claims, Aviam Soifer
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.