Law Commons^™

The Vertical Separation Of Powers, Victoria Nourse

Duke Law Journal

Standard understandings of the separation of powers begin with the concept of function. Professor Nourse argues that function alone cannot predict important changes in structural incentives and thus serves as a poor proxy for assessing real risks to governmental structure. To illustrate this point, the Article returns to proposals considered at the Constitutional Convention and considers difficult contemporary cases such as Morrison v. Olson, Clinton v. Jones, and the Supreme Court's more recent federalism decisions. In each instance, function appears to steer us wrong because it fails to understand separation of powers questions as ones of structural incentive and political …

The Georgia Supreme Court And Local Government Law: Two Sheets To The Wind, R. Perry Sentell Jr.

Georgia State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Meet The Presentment Clause: Clinton V. New York, Thomas Charles Woodworth

Louisiana Law Review

No abstract provided.

Institutional Design And The Lingering Legacy Of Antifederalist Separation Of Powers Ideals In The States, Jim Rossi

Vanderbilt Law Review

In confronting important constitutional issues, state courts face a range of interpretive questions, many unanswered by the texts of state constitutions. Where a constitutional text fails to answer the question posed, a state court, much like its federal counterparts,' must look to extra-textual interpretive tools to aid in its decision- making task. The literature on state constitutional law provides important insights into how interpretation operates within a single state's. system of governance. But rarely does it attempt to under- stand and appreciate how or why the interpretive practices of state and federal constitutional systems differ.

This is unfortunate. Understood through …

Senate Power Of Advice And Consent On Judicial Appointments: An Annotated Research Bibliography, Michael J. Slinger, Lucy Salsbury Payne, James Lloyd Gates

Notre Dame Law Review

No abstract provided.

Invading An Article Iii Court's Inherent Equitable Powers: Separation Of Powers And The Immediate Termination Provisions Of The Prison Litigation Reform Act, Theodore K. Cheng

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Standing Of The United States: How Criminal Prosecutions Show That Standing Doctrine Is Looking For Answers In All The Wrong Places, Edward A. Hartnett

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court insists that Article III of the Constitution requires a litigant to have standing in order for her request for judicial intervention to constitute a "case" or "controversy" within the jurisdiction of a federal court; it also insists that the "irreducible constitutional minimum" of standing requires (1) that the litigant suffer an "injury in fact"; (2) that the person against whom the judicial intervention is sought have caused the injury; and (3) that the requested judicial intervention redress the injury. The requisite injury in fact, the Court repeatedly declares, must be "personal," "concrete and particularized," and "actual or …

Separation Of Powers & Economic Liberties, Bernard H. Siegan

Notre Dame Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Executive Line Item Veto And The Judicial Power To Sever: What's The Difference?, Lars Noah

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.