Law Commons^™

Rules Of The Road: The Struggle For Safety And The Unmet Promise Of Federalism, Sara C. Bronin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

American streets have become increasingly dangerous. 2020 saw the highest year-over-year increase in roadway death rates in 96 years, and the last year for which we have data on non-drivers, 2018, was the was the deadliest year for pedestrians and cyclists in three decades. Though this resurgence of road violence has many complex causes, what makes American roads uniquely deadly are laws that lock in two interrelated design problems: unfriendly streets and unsafe vehicles.

Design standards articulate how streets and vehicles look and function. As they have been enshrined in law, they favor drivers and their passengers over any other …

Procedural Retrenchment And The States, Zachary D. Clopton

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Although not always headline grabbing, the Roberts Court has been highly interested in civil procedure. According to critics, the Court has undercut access to justice and private enforcement through its decisions on pleading, class actions, summary judgment, arbitration, standing, personal jurisdiction, and international law.

While I have much sympathy for the Court's critics, the current discourse too often ignores the states. Rather than bemoaning the Roberts Court's decisions to limit court access-and despairing further developments in the age of Trump-we instead might productively focus on the options open to state courts and public enforcement. Many of the aforementioned decisions are …

Jurisprudence Of A Fledgling Federation: A Critical Analysis Of Pakistan’S Judicial View On Federalism, Umer Akram Chaudhry

Cornell Law School Inter-University Graduate Student Conference Papers

Although the impediments in development of federation in Pakistan can be explored from different facets, this paper aims to critically analyze the constitutional history and judicial interpretation of federalism in Pakistan against the scholarly and conceptual debates over the idea. The paper argues that Pakistan’s judiciary, despite recognizing federalism as cornerstone of the Constitution, has not upheld the principle as strongly as other salient features of the Constitution. The superior judiciary has strengthened the official discourse of a unitary national identity leaving little room for ethnical pluralism and participatory nationalism. The paper shall also review measures introduced by the recent …

Multiplicity In Federalism And The Separation Of Powers, Josh Chafetz

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

By highlighting multiplicity in the federalism context, Alison LaCroix’s new book does constitutional scholarship a great service. Her tracing of the federal idea in the 1760s and 1770s, as well as her tracing of jurisdictional ideas in the early Republic, is thorough and insightful. But it is unclear why her focus suddenly narrows from the federal idea—the idea that multiplicity in levels of government was a virtue rather than a vice—to federal jurisdiction. Certainly, as this Review has endeavored to show, her claim that federalism discourse after 1787 reduced entirely (or even primarily) to jurisdictional debates cannot stand.

And this …

Like A Nation State, Douglas Kysar, Bernadette A. Meyler

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Using California's self-consciously internationalist approach to climate change regulation as a primary example, this Article examines constitutional limitations on state foreign affairs activities. In particular, by focusing on the prospect of California's establishment of a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions trading system and its eventual linkage with comparable systems in Europe and elsewhere, this Article demonstrates that certain constitutional objections to extrajurisdictional linkage of state GHG emissions trading systems and the response that these objections necessitate may be more complicated than previously anticipated. First, successfully combatting the Bush Administration's potential claim that state-level climate change activities interfere with a federal executive …

Whose Ox Is Being Gored? When Attitudinalism Meets Federalism, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Empirical research indicates that factors such as an individual Justice's general political ideology play a substantial role in the decision of Supreme Court cases. Although this pattern holds in federalism cases, views about the proper allocation of authority between the state and federal governments - independent of whether the particular outcome in any given case is "liberal" or "conservative" - can sometimes be decisive, as demonstrated by the 2005 decision in Gonzales v. Raich, in which "conservative" Justices voted to invalidate a strict federal drug provision in light of California's legalization of medical marijuana, and "liberal" Justices voted to uphold …

The 2006 Winthrop And Frances Lane Lecture: The Unintended Legal And Policy Consequences Of The No Child Left Behind Act, Michael Heise

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

No Federalists Here: Anti-Federalism And Nationalism On The Rehnquist Court, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Relevance Of Federal Norms For State Separation Of Powers, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Instrumental And Non-Instrumental Federalism, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Reapportionment Cases: Cognitive Lag, The Malady And Its Cure, E. F. Roberts, Paul T. Shultz Iii

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The reapportionment cases have been considered by many to be the product of a liberal, activist Court which is endeavoring to reshape America’s political life according to its own views. The authors of this article assert that, to the contrary, the Court actually is reacting to the incontrovertible fact of the modern predominance of urban complexities which have rendered inappropriate our older political boundaries. In this sense, they consider the Court’s decisions conservative rather than liberal- because the Court’s purpose is to maintain a version of federalism along state boundaries which may have become outmoded even before the Court entered …