Law Commons^™

Essay -- Preemption, Agency Cost Theory, And Predatory Lending By Banking Agents: Are Federal Regulators Biting Off More Than They Can Chew?, Christopher L. Peterson

ExpressO

A pitched battle is currently being waged for control of the American banking industry. For over a hundred years, the federal and state governments have maintained a complex, but relatively stable truce in their contest for power. At the beginning of our republic, state governments were the primary charterers and regulators of banks. In the wake of the Civil War, the National Bank Act created parity between federal and state banks, cementing the notion of a “dual banking system” that endured through the twentieth century. But in the past five years, the federal government has increasingly used its powers under …

The Final Battle For Preemption: The Fda And Prescription Drug Labeling Product Liability Actions, Mary J. Davis

ExpressO

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has promulgated a new regulation which revises the format for prescription drug labeling, and, in the process, has taken the position that the regulation displaces, or preempts, state products liability laws that seek to assess liability on the manufacturer for a label’s warning adequacy. In the FDA’s 100 year history, it has not taken the position that federal prescription drug labeling regulations preempt common law tort claims until the last few years, beginning with Motus v. Pfizer in 2002. This position, radical to many and rational to others, places federal preemption of prescription drug …

Sherman's March (In)To The Sea, Andrew S. Oldham

ExpressO

This Article argues that the Sherman Act is unconstitutional. At the very least, scholars and jurists must not take for granted Congress's ability to statutorily deputize the federal courts with common-lawmaking powers. The federal antitrust statute—which has been described as the Magna Carta of free enterprise—raises serious constitutional questions that have heretofore gone unexplored and unanswered. Specifically, it is difficult (if not impossible) to reconcile the Sherman Act with the separation of powers, the nondelegation doctrine, and the Supremacy Clause.

Discovering The Boundaries: Federal Preemption Of Pharmaceutical Labeling Product Liability Actions, Mary J. Davis

ExpressO

Federally approved prescription drug labeling has not been considered conclusive on the reasonableness or adequacy of the label for assessing tort liability on the manufacturer because federal regulations in this field set a minimum standard rather than an optimal one. That fundamental statement of black-letter tort law is under attack. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has promulgated a regulation which revises the format for prescription drug labeling, and, in the process, has taken the position that the regulation displaces, or preempts, state products liability laws that seek to assess liability on the manufacturer for a label’s warning adequacy. In …

California’S New Ethics Standards: A Hot Bed Of Controversy, Rebecca Callahan

ExpressO

The article examines California’s new ethics rules and examines the cases which have been decided to date challenging and applying those rules. The stated goals of the New Ethics Rules are “to inform and protect participants in arbitration, and to promote public confidence in the arbitration process.” This is a laudable goal since arbitration is a private process that is dependent on public acceptance. The heart of the controversy concerning the New Ethics Rules revolves around the practical inconvenience and cost burden associated with compliance. The enclosed article concludes that such a burden goes hand-in-hand with the privilege of being …

Towards A Basal Tenth Amendment: A Riposte To National Bank Preemption Of State Consumer Protection Laws, Keith R. Fisher

ExpressO

Recent regulations promulgated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency assert a sweeping authority to preempt a broad array of state laws, including consumer protection laws, applicable not only to national banks but to their state-chartered operating subsidiaries. These regulations threaten to disrupt state efforts to combat predatory lending and other abusive practices and to interfere with a state’s sovereign authority over corporations chartered under its laws. Yet federal courts faced with challenges to these initiatives have failed to devote any substantial analysis to claims based on the Tenth Amendment. The problem with such claims is the absence …

Sailing Around Erie:The Emergence Of A Federal General Common Law Of Arbitration, Kenneth Dunham

ExpressO

This paper traces the history of American arbitration from the common law to the FAA. It discusses the FAA as a procedural act prior to Southland v. Keating and as a substantive law act following Southland. It discusses the Erie doctrine as applicable to federal courts and state law preemption. The article concludes that Southland by-passed Erie using the Commerce Clause and the Supremacy Clause to create a federal common law of arbitration.

U.S. Supreme Court Tort Reform: Limiting State Power To Articulate And Develop Its Own Tort Law–Defamation, Preemption, And Punitive Damages, Thomas C. Galligan

ExpressO

U.S. Supreme Court Tort Reform: Limiting State Power to Articulate and Develop Its Own Tort Law–Defamation, Preemption, and Punitive Damages analyzes and critiques the three primary areas in which the U.S. Supreme Court has found federal constitutional limits on a state’s power to articulate, develop, and apply its common law of torts. It is the first piece to consider all three areas together as an emerging body of jurisprudence which Professor Galligan calls U.S. Supreme Court tort reform. After setting forth a modest model of adjudication, the article applies that model to each of the three areas: defamation and related …

Making Federalism Doctrine, Ernest A. Young

ExpressO

This article develops and defends a general approach to constitutional federalism doctrine. My position is probably best described as sympathetic criticism of the Rehnquist Court’s “Federalist Revival.” I think that the Court’s project of reviving a judicial role in enforcing federalism is terribly important, but that many of the Court’s particular measures in that vein are unhelpful or, sometimes, counterproductive.

The article makes three claims. The first is methodological: I argue that courts can and should formulate doctrines to enforce the federal balance, even when those doctrines cannot be tied directly to constitutional text and history. Recognizing that constitutional doctrine …