Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- The University of Akron (79)
- University of Michigan Law School (41)
- Selected Works (37)
- William & Mary Law School (18)
- University of Richmond (12)
-
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (7)
- Notre Dame Law School (7)
- University of Colorado Law School (7)
- University of Georgia School of Law (7)
- St. John's University School of Law (6)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (6)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (6)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (6)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (5)
- University of Dayton (5)
- Columbia Law School (4)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (4)
- Cleveland State University (3)
- Emory University School of Law (3)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (3)
- University of Miami Law School (3)
- University of Nebraska - Lincoln (3)
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
- Boston University School of Law (2)
- Florida International University College of Law (2)
- Loyola University Chicago, School of Law (2)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (2)
- Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University (2)
- New York Law School (2)
- Roger Williams University (2)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (48)
- Supreme Court (41)
- Discrimination (16)
- First Amendment (14)
- Constitution (13)
-
- Constitutional law (10)
- Statutory interpretation (10)
- Privacy (8)
- Standing (8)
- Affirmative action (7)
- Congress (7)
- Federalism (7)
- Race and law (7)
- United States (7)
- Constitutional Law (6)
- Fourteenth Amendment (6)
- History (6)
- Law reform (6)
- Regulation (6)
- SCOTUS (6)
- African Americans (5)
- Campaign finance (5)
- Civil rights (5)
- Courts (5)
- Eighth Amendment (5)
- Establishment Clause (5)
- Federal agencies (5)
- Fourth Amendment (5)
- Judicial review (5)
- Minorities (5)
- Publication
-
- Akron Law Review (79)
- Articles (18)
- Faculty Scholarship (11)
- Supreme Court Preview (10)
- Michigan Law Review (9)
-
- Faculty Publications (8)
- All Faculty Scholarship (7)
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (7)
- Publications (7)
- Samuel R. Olken (7)
- Buffalo Law Review (6)
- University of Richmond Law Review (6)
- Educational Leadership Faculty Publications (5)
- Faculty Articles (5)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (5)
- Law Faculty Publications (5)
- Scholarly Articles (5)
- Journal of Intellectual Property Law (4)
- Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law (4)
- St. John's Law Review (4)
- Book Chapters (3)
- Donald L. Beschle (3)
- Journal Articles (3)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (3)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (3)
- Northwestern University Law Review (3)
- Timothy P. O'Neill (3)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (3)
- Catholic University Law Review (2)
- Court Briefs (2)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 301 - 326 of 326
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Nation Of Widening Opportunities: The Civil Rights Act At 50, Ellen D. Katz, Samuel R. Bagenstos
A Nation Of Widening Opportunities: The Civil Rights Act At 50, Ellen D. Katz, Samuel R. Bagenstos
Books
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was an extraordinary achievement of law, politics, and human rights. On the fiftieth anniversary of the Act's passage, it is appropriate to reflect on the successes and failures of the civil rights project reflected in the statute, as well as on its future directions. This volume represents an attempt to assess the Civil Rights Act's legacy.
On October 11, 2013, a diverse group of civil rights scholars met at the University of Michigan Law School in Ann Arbor to assess the interpretation, development, and administration of civil rights law in the five decades since …
The Ironies Of Affirmative Action, Kermit Roosevelt Iii
The Ironies Of Affirmative Action, Kermit Roosevelt Iii
All Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court’s most recent confrontation with race-based affirmative action, Fisher v. University of Texas, did not live up to people’s expectations—or their fears. The Court did not explicitly change the current approach in any substantial way. It did, however, signal that it wants race-based affirmative action to be subject to real strict scrutiny, not the watered-down version featured in Grutter v. Bollinger. That is a significant signal, because under real strict scrutiny, almost all race-based affirmative action programs are likely unconstitutional. This is especially true given the conceptual framework the Court has created for such programs—the way …
The Derivative Nature Of Corporate Constitutional Rights, Margaret M. Blair, Elizabeth Pollman
The Derivative Nature Of Corporate Constitutional Rights, Margaret M. Blair, Elizabeth Pollman
All Faculty Scholarship
This Article engages the two hundred year history of corporate constitutional rights jurisprudence to show that the Supreme Court has long accorded rights to corporations based on the rationale that corporations represent associations of people from whom such rights are derived. The Article draws on the history of business corporations in America to argue that the Court’s characterization of corporations as associations made sense throughout most of the nineteenth century. By the late nineteenth century, however, when the Court was deciding several key cases involving corporate rights, this associational view was already becoming a poor fit for some corporations. The …
The Roberts Court And Penumbral Federalism, Edward Cantu
The Roberts Court And Penumbral Federalism, Edward Cantu
Faculty Works
For several decades the Court has invoked “state dignity” to animate federalism reasoning in isolated doctrinal contexts. Recent Roberts Court decisions suggest that a focus on state dignity, prestige, status, and similar ethereal concepts — which derive from a “penumbral” reading of the Tenth Amendment — represent the budding of a different doctrinal approach to federalism generally. This article terms this new approach “penumbral federalism,” an approach less concerned with delineating state from federal regulatory turf, and more concerned with maintaining the states as viable competitors for the respect and loyalty of the citizenry.
After fleshing out what “penumbral federalism” …
Commentary: Exploiting Mixed Speech, Caroline Mala Corbin
Commentary: Exploiting Mixed Speech, Caroline Mala Corbin
Articles
The Supreme Court has been taking advantage of mixed speech—that is, speech that is both private and governmental—to characterize challenged speech in a way that ultimately permits the government to sponsor Christian speech. In Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, a free speech case where the government accepted a Christian Ten Commandments monument but rejected a Summum Seven Aphorisms monument, the Court held that privately donated monuments displayed in public parks were government speech as opposed to private speech and therefore not subject to free speech limits on viewpoint discrimination. In Town of Greece v. Galloway, an establishment case …
Corporate Religious Liberty, Caroline Mala Corbin
Evolving Standards Of Domination: Abandoning A Flawed Legal Standard And Approaching A New Era In Penal Reform, Spearit
Articles
This Article critiques the evolving standards of decency doctrine as a form of Social Darwinism. It argues that evolving standards of decency provided a system of review that was tailor-made for Civil Rights opponents to scale back racial progress. Although as a doctrinal matter, evolving standards sought to tie punishment practices to social mores, prison sentencing became subject to political agendas that determined the course of punishment more than the benevolence of a maturing society. Indeed, rather than the fierce competition that is supposed to guide social development, the criminal justice system was consciously deployed as a means of social …
Unearthing The Lost History Of Seminole Rock, Amy J. Wildermuth, Sanne H. Knudsen
Unearthing The Lost History Of Seminole Rock, Amy J. Wildermuth, Sanne H. Knudsen
Articles
In 1945, the Supreme Court blessed a lesser known type of agency deference in Bowles v. Seminole Rock. Also known as Auer deference, it affords deference to agency interpretations of their own regulations. Courts regularly defer to agencies under this doctrine, regardless of where the interpretations first appear or how long-standing they are. Recently members of the Supreme Court have signaled a willingness to reconsider, and perhaps jettison, Seminole Rock. We agree. Seminole Rock has been widely accepted but surprisingly disconnected from any analysis of its origins and justifications. This Article — the first historical explication of Seminole …
No Execution If Four Justices Object, Eric M. Freedman
No Execution If Four Justices Object, Eric M. Freedman
Hofstra Law Faculty Scholarship
I. DRIVING A NAIL WITH A SCREWDRIVER IN CAPITAL CASES
Today’s Supreme Court defines its role as choosing from the thousands of cases pressed upon it annually those very few that will best serve as vehicles for the resolution of legal issues of general importance.
- A. Ordinary Cases
(1) The necessary consequence is that some litigants will seek review and fail to attain it for reasons having nothing to do with the merits of their claims (e.g., the Court desires to have the issue percolate for a while in the lower courts or in the public arena), and will find …
The Supreme Court And The Transformation Of Juvenile Sentencing, Elizabeth S. Scott, Thomas Grisso, Marsha Levick, Laurence Steinberg
The Supreme Court And The Transformation Of Juvenile Sentencing, Elizabeth S. Scott, Thomas Grisso, Marsha Levick, Laurence Steinberg
Faculty Scholarship
In the past decade, the Supreme Court has transformed the constitutional landscape of juvenile crime regulation. In three strongly worded opinions, the Court held that imposing harsh criminal sentences on juvenile offenders violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. In combination, these cases create a special status for juveniles under Eighth Amendment doctrine as a category of offenders whose culpability is mitigated by their youth and immaturity, even for the most serious offenses. The Court also emphasized that juveniles are more likely to reform than adult offenders, and that most should be given a meaningful opportunity to …
Good Faith Discrimination, Girardeau A. Spann
Good Faith Discrimination, Girardeau A. Spann
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The Supreme Court's current doctrinal rules governing racial discrimination and affirmative action are unsatisfying. They often seem artificial, internally inconsistent, and even conceptually incoherent. Despite a long and continuing history of racial discrimination in the United States, many of the problems with the Supreme Court's racial jurisprudence stem from the Court's willingness to view the current distribution of societal resources as establishing a colorblind, race-neutral baseline that can be used to make equality determinations. As a result, the current rules are as likely to facilitate racial discrimination as to prevent it, or to remedy the lingering effects of past discrimination.
Prudential Standing Doctrine Abolished Or Waiting For A Comeback?: Lexmark International, Inc. V. Static Control Components, Inc., Bradford Mank
Prudential Standing Doctrine Abolished Or Waiting For A Comeback?: Lexmark International, Inc. V. Static Control Components, Inc., Bradford Mank
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
In the Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., Justice Scalia writing for a unanimous Court partially achieved his goal of abolishing the prudential standing doctrine. First, the Court concluded that the zone of interests test concerns whether Congress has authorized a particular plaintiff to sue and is not a prudential standing question despite several Court decisions classifying it as such. However, there is a continuing controversy in the D.C. Circuit about applying the test to suits by competitors, especially in environmental cases. The better approach is to allow competitor standing in at least …
Firearm Regionalism And Public Carry: Placing Southern Antebellum Case Law In Context, Eric Ruben, Saul A. Cornell
Firearm Regionalism And Public Carry: Placing Southern Antebellum Case Law In Context, Eric Ruben, Saul A. Cornell
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
In recent years, following the Supreme Court’s landmark originalist opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, courts have been asked to strike down restrictions on the public carrying of handguns on the basis of the original understanding of the Second Amendment. One of the key sources used to justify this outcome is a family of opinions from the antebellum South asserting an expansive right to carry weapons in public. In this essay we explore whether that body of case law reflected a national consensus on the meaning of the right to bear arms or, in the alternative, a narrower regional …
Beyond The Fourth Amendment: Additional Constitutional Guarantees That Mass Surveillance Violates, Nadine Strossen
Beyond The Fourth Amendment: Additional Constitutional Guarantees That Mass Surveillance Violates, Nadine Strossen
Articles & Chapters
The ongoing dragnet communications surveillance programs raise multiple statutory and constitutional problems. Each problem alone, and even more so the whole combination, provides a serious ground at least for vastly curbing such programs, if not ending them. This Article reviews constitutional challenges to these programs to evaluate the likely success of current and future litigants.
The Separation-Of-Powers And The Least Dangerous Branch, Edward Cantu
The Separation-Of-Powers And The Least Dangerous Branch, Edward Cantu
Faculty Works
A snapshot of controversies currently surrounding the President highlights a sobering, even if acceptable, reality: we live in an age of extremely amplified president power. From the executive use of military force with little or no congressional approval, to the use of executive orders to effectively make federal policy without congressional involvement, virtually all of these controversies have a common source: the Court’s relegation of enforcement of the separation-of-powers to the political process.
This Article provides an account of this relegation. It argues that all of the Court’s separation-of-powers decisions — even those seeming to strictly enforce the boundaries of …
Pragmatism Rules, Elizabeth G. Porter
Pragmatism Rules, Elizabeth G. Porter
Articles
The Roberts Court’s decisions interpreting the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are reshaping the litigation landscape. Yet neither scholars, nor the Court itself, have articulated a coherent theory of interpretation for the Rules. This Article constructs a theory of Rules interpretation by discerning and critically examining the two starkly different methodologies the Roberts Court applies in its Rules cases. It traces the roots of both methodologies, explaining how they arise from — and reinforce — structural, linguistic, and epistemological tensions inherent in the Rules and the rulemaking process. Then, drawing from administrative law, it suggests a theoretical framework that accommodates …
Hobby Lobby: Its Flawed Interpretive Techniques And Standards Of Application, Kent Greenawalt
Hobby Lobby: Its Flawed Interpretive Techniques And Standards Of Application, Kent Greenawalt
Faculty Scholarship
At the end of June 2014, the Supreme Court decided one of the most publicized controversies of decades. In a decision covering two cases, widely referred to as Hobby Lobby, the Court held that closely held for-profit corporations, based on their owners' religious convictions, have a right under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) to decline to provide employees with insurance that covers contraceptive devices that may prevent a fertilized egg "from developing any further by inhibiting its attachment to the uterus."
The result has been widely approved by those who favor an extensive scope for religious liberty and …
Robots In The Home: What Will We Have Agreed To?, Margot E. Kaminski
Robots In The Home: What Will We Have Agreed To?, Margot E. Kaminski
Publications
A new technology can expose the cracks in legal doctrine. Sometimes a technology resists analogy. Sometimes, through analogies, it reveals inconsistencies in the law, or basic flaws in framing, or in the fit between different parts of the legal system. This Essay addresses robots in the home, and what they reveal about U.S. privacy law. Household robots might not themselves uproot U.S. privacy law, but they will reveal its inconsistencies, and show where it is most likely to fracture. Just as drones are serving as a legislative “privacy catalyst” — encouraging the enactment of new privacy laws as people realize …
A Pragmatic Approach To Interpreting The Federal Rules, Suzette M. Malveaux
A Pragmatic Approach To Interpreting The Federal Rules, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
No abstract provided.
Anticipatory Remedies For Takings, Thomas W. Merrill
Anticipatory Remedies For Takings, Thomas W. Merrill
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court has rendered two lines of decisions about the remedies available for a violation of the Takings Clause. One line holds that courts have no authority to enter anticipatory decrees in takings cases if the claimant can obtain compensation elsewhere. The other line, which includes three of the Court's most recent takings cases, results in the entry of an anticipatory decree about takings liability. This Essay argues that the second line is the correct one. Courts should be allowed to enter declaratory or other anticipatory judgments about takings liability, as long as they respect the limited nature of …
Active Avoidance: The Modern Supreme Court And Legal Change, Neal Kumar Katyal, Thomas P. Schmidt
Active Avoidance: The Modern Supreme Court And Legal Change, Neal Kumar Katyal, Thomas P. Schmidt
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court in the last few years has resolved some of the most divisive and consequential cases before it by employing the same maneuver: construing statutes to avoid constitutional difficulty. Although the Court generally justifies the avoidance canon as a form of judicial restraint, these recent decisions have used the canon to camouflage acts of judicial aggression in both the statutory and constitutional spheres. In particular, the Court has adopted dubious readings of federal statutes that would have been unthinkable in the canon’s absence. We call this move the “rewriting power.” The canon has also been used to articulate …
The Law's Clock, Frederic Bloom
The Law's Clock, Frederic Bloom
Publications
Time is everywhere in law. It shapes doctrines as disparate as ripeness and retroactivity, and it impacts litigants of every status and type--the eager plaintiff who brings her case too early, the death-row inmate who seeks his stay too late. Yet legal time is still scarcely studied, and it remains poorly understood. This Article makes new and better sense of that time. It begins with an original account of time as a tool of institutional power, tracking the relocation of that power from the first western cathedrals to the earliest Supreme Court. It then links time's revealing past to our …
How Do We Know When Speech Is Of Low Value?, Helen Norton
How Do We Know When Speech Is Of Low Value?, Helen Norton
Publications
No abstract provided.
King, Chevron, And The Age Of Textualism, Abigail R. Moncrieff
King, Chevron, And The Age Of Textualism, Abigail R. Moncrieff
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
In the King v. Burwell oral arguments, Chief Justice John Roberts—usually one of the more active members of the Court—asked only one substantive question, addressed to the Solicitor General: "If you're right about Chevron [deference applying to this case], that would indicate that a subsequent administration could change [your] interpretation?" As it turns out, that question was crucial to Roberts's thinking and to the 6-3 opinion he authored, but almost all commentators either undervalued or misunderstood the question's import (myself included). The result of Roberts's actual thinking was an unfortunate outcome for Chevron—and potentially for the rule of law—despite …
Will Uncooperative Federalism Survive Nfib?, Abigail R. Moncrieff, Jonathan Dinerstein
Will Uncooperative Federalism Survive Nfib?, Abigail R. Moncrieff, Jonathan Dinerstein
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
In the end, the Supreme Court's federalism jurisprudence seems to run contrary to its stated goals. The New Federalism era, up to and including NFIB, creates an incentive for the national government to flex its own muscles more, not less. Maybe that result will be good for voters' clarity and for uniformity of national policy, but it is not good for uncooperative federalism or for states' autonomy—the values that the Supreme Court seems to be trying to protect.
Justice Stevens And His Clerks, Nancy Marder