Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

Does An Administrator's General Interest In Fulfulling Her Duties Meet The Constitution's Requirements For Seeking Judicial Review Of A Decision She Doesn't Like?, Patrick C. Mcginley Dec 1994

Does An Administrator's General Interest In Fulfulling Her Duties Meet The Constitution's Requirements For Seeking Judicial Review Of A Decision She Doesn't Like?, Patrick C. Mcginley

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


To Defer Or Not To Defer: When Must A Court Honor An Administrative Agency's Interpretation Of Its Own Regulations?, Patrick C. Mcginley Oct 1994

To Defer Or Not To Defer: When Must A Court Honor An Administrative Agency's Interpretation Of Its Own Regulations?, Patrick C. Mcginley

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Pathologizing Professional Life: Psycho-Literary Case Stories, James R. Elkins Apr 1994

Pathologizing Professional Life: Psycho-Literary Case Stories, James R. Elkins

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Hate Speech, Offensive Speech, And Public Discourse In America, Edward J. Eberle Jan 1994

Hate Speech, Offensive Speech, And Public Discourse In America, Edward J. Eberle

Law Faculty Scholarship

In this article, Professor Eberle discusses several limitations on governmental power to regulate public discourse. After examining the United States Supreme Court decisions of R.A.V. v. City of St. Paula nd Wisconsin v. Mitchell, Professor Eberle concludes that government should refrain from regulating speech itself. Rather, any restrictions should focus strictly on the problematic conduct underlying the speech which justifies regulation. Professor Eberle also concludes that the Court has implicitly recognized two distinct subcategories of "content" discrimination and viewpoint discrimination. Both subcategories are presumptively unconstitutional and nominally subject to conventional strict scrutiny. The Court, however, finds viewpoint discrimination more dangerous …


Spelling Guilt Out Of A Record? Harmless Error Review Of Conclusive Mandatory Presumptions And Elemental Misdescriptions, John M. Greabe Jan 1994

Spelling Guilt Out Of A Record? Harmless Error Review Of Conclusive Mandatory Presumptions And Elemental Misdescriptions, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

Part I of this Article summarizes the history of harmless-error review. Part II explains more fully the constitutional infirmities generated by conclusive mandatory presumptions and elemental misdescriptions, and demonstrates that the unique nature of these infirmities complicates the question of how courts should review them for harmlessness. It also examines the Supreme Court's attempts to answer the questions of whether, and how, conclusive mandatory presumptions and elemental misdescriptions should be reviewed for harmlessness. In so doing, it focuses particularly on how these attempts have been undermined by the Court's failure to take account of the structural rights undermined by these …


Motor Freight Brokers: A Tale Of Federal Regulatory Pandemonium, Jeffrey S. Kinsler Jan 1994

Motor Freight Brokers: A Tale Of Federal Regulatory Pandemonium, Jeffrey S. Kinsler

Law Faculty Scholarship

Motor freight brokers are the connecting link between shippers and carriers, uniting shippers who have cargo to deliver with carriers who have available motor transportation. Acting as traffic managers for shippers and sales agents for carriers, brokers arrange thousands of transactions each day, many of which either start or end up in the international stream of commerce. If used effectively, brokers can lower the transportation costs of domestic and international shippers and increase the revenue of carriers, which ultimately will stimulate interstate and overseas trade. International shippers must often rely on freight brokers to arrange motor transportation for their freight …


Sensible Application Of Stare Decisis Or A Rewriting Of The Constitution: An Examination Of Helling V. Mckinney, Jeffrey S. Kinsler Jan 1994

Sensible Application Of Stare Decisis Or A Rewriting Of The Constitution: An Examination Of Helling V. Mckinney, Jeffrey S. Kinsler

Law Faculty Scholarship

In Helling v. McKinney, the Supreme Court held that compelled exposure to environmental tobacco smoke ("ETS") may constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Section I of this article explores the medical evidence linking ETS to lung cancer, heart disease and certain other health risks in nonsmokers. Section II examines the history of the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment, particularly as it relates to dangerous or unhealthy prison conditions. Section III analyzes the decision in Helling v. McKinney. Section IV questions whether a judicial ban on smoking would itself constitute cruel and unusual …