Law Commons^™

The Consequences Of A "War" Paradigm For Counterterrorism: What Impact On Basic Rights And Values?, Laurie R. Blank

Georgia Law Review

Policy makers have used the rhetoric of "war"
throughout the past century to describe a major
governmental or societal effort to combat an evil that
threatens society, national security or other communal

good. It is both a rhetorical tool and a resource
mobilization, and above all a coalescing of authority to
meet the challenge, whether poverty, drugs or-most
recently-terrorism. Soon after 9/11 made al Qaeda a
household word, the Bush Administration characterized
U.S. efforts to defeat al Qaeda as the "War on Terror."
Here, however, the terminology of "war" goes far beyond
rhetoric, resource re-allocation and centralizing of
authority. When …

American Electricpower V. Connecticut: Disaster Averted By Displacing The Federal Common Law Of Nuisance, Damian M. Brychey

Georgia Law Review

Historically, the federal common law of nuisance has
provided a means to regulate interstate pollution. With
the passing of legislative acts such as the Clean Water Act
and the Clean Air Act, however, traditional federal
nuisance lawsuits were displaced. The continued viability
of the federal common law of nuisance to regulate
pollution, specifically greenhouse gases, was brought to
the forefront of American jurisprudence in American
Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut. There, the Supreme
Court held that the Clean Air Act and the EPA actions the
Act authorizes displace any federal common law right to
seek abatement of greenhouse gases-reversing the …

Playing Well With Others-But Still Winning: Chief Justice Roberts, Precedent, And The Possibilities Of A Multi-Member Court, William D. Araiza

Georgia Law Review

This Essay considers methods by which a Supreme
Court Justice inclined to weaken precedent may do so
without explicitly overruling cases. Adding to the
literature examining "stealth overruling" and the

dynamics of multi-judge courts, it examines instances
from the first five years of the Roberts Court where Chief
Justice Roberts acted in a way consistent with that of a
judge who strategically situates himself among his
colleagues so as to erode precedent while appearing to
uphold it. The Essay does not speculate that the Roberts
Court, or Chief Justice Roberts himself, is any more
inclined than past Courts or Justices …

Fatherhood By Conscription: Nonconsensual Insemination And The Duty Of Child Support, Michael J. Higdon

Georgia Law Review

Much of the law relating to child support is based on the
fact that it is typically in a child's best interest to receive
financial support from mothers as well as fathers. In fact,
child support is essentially a form of strict liability with
the justification being that the child is an innocent party,
and thus, even those men who never consented to the
sexual act that caused the pregnancy are nonetheless

liable for the support of the resulting child. These men
include males who become fathers as a result of statutory
rape and also adult males who became fathers …

Remembrance, Rebecca H. White

Georgia Law Review

My thanks to the Georgia Law Review for dedicating this
Volume to my former colleague and close friend, Professor Anne
Dupre.
In her Dedication and Remembrance in the prior issue, Hillary
Miller, the Review's Senior Managing Editor, described Professor
Dupre as a person who "lived a passionate life." Passionate indeed
is the word that comes to mind when remembering Anne Dupre.

Table Of Contents

Georgia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Prisoners' Property Dilemma: The Proper Approach To Determine Prisoners' Protected Property Interests After Sandin And Castle Rock, Corbin R. Kennelly

Georgia Law Review

The Proper approach to determine when prisoners have
property interests protected by the Due Process Clause is
currently uncertain. The Supreme Court addressed
prisoners' liberty interests in Sandin v. Conner, but lower
courts have split over whether to apply the Sandin test to
prisoners' property interests. Further complicating
matters, the Supreme Court recently addressed property
interests generally in Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales.
There, the Court seemed to add additional hurdles to the
finding of protected property interests: A statute must
clearly indicate that it gives rise to an entitlement; the
entitlement must have an ascertainable monetary value;
and, …

Runaway Usance: Limiting The Exercise Of The Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine In The Context Of Wenqin Sun V. Mukasey And Bright V. Holder, Lawrence S. Winsor

Georgia Law Review

The fugitive disentitlement doctrine prevents an evasive
party from obtaining standing in the court whose
authority is evaded. With its 2011 decision in Bright v.
Holder, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals created a circuit
split regarding whether the fugitive disentitlement
doctrine applies to an alien appealing an adverse
immigration decision that maintained the same address
throughout removal proceedings, this address was known
to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and DHS
made no attempt to locate or arrest the alien for failure to
report for removal. Unlike the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals' decision in Wenqin Sun v. Mukasey, …

Supranational Diversity: Why Federal Courts Should Have Diversity Jurisdiction Over Cases Involving Supranational Organizations Like The European Union, John T. Dixon

Georgia Law Review

The federal diversity statute grants alienage jurisdiction
to "foreign citizens" and "foreign statutes," allowing them

to bring state-law claims against U.S. citizens in federal
'court. When the European Community (EC), an
intergovernmental organization of European states, sued
an American corporation for state-law violations, for the
first time a federal court had to determine whether the EC
qualified as a foreign state. The EC argued that it was
essentially a foreign state for the purposes of alienage
jurisdiction. Relying on the definition of foreign state in
the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA),
which the diversity statute references, the court …