Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Limits Of Executive Power, Robert J. Reinstein
The Limits Of Executive Power, Robert J. Reinstein
American University Law Review
Justice Jackson’s concurring opinion in The Steel Seizure Case has taken on iconic status among legal scholars and had been adopted by the Supreme Court as the governing framework for evaluating presidential power. But Jackson’s principles are conclusory, do not rest on any historical foundation, and raise as many questions as they answer. He fails to examine, much less justify, the existence or scope of implied presidential powers, nor does he meaningfully explain the extent to which those powers are subject to congressional regulation and override. I apply novel originalist methodologies to answer those unexamined questions, with important consequences to …
Constitutional Solipsism: Toward A Thick Doctrine Of Article Iii Duty; Or Why The Federal Circuits' Nonprecedential Status Rules Are (Profoundly) Unconstitutional, Penelope Pether
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
No abstract provided.
A Limited Defense Of (At Least Some Of) The Umpire Analogy, Michael P. Allen
A Limited Defense Of (At Least Some Of) The Umpire Analogy, Michael P. Allen
Seattle University Law Review
This Essay provides at least a limited defense of some parts of the umpire analogy and ultimately suggests that this analogy may tell us something important about the more general role of courts in the United States. This Essay proceeds in four parts. Part II explores in more depth what those making the umpire analogy appear to mean. At its heart, the analogy principally has been used to address the substantive decision making of judges. This Part will explain that there is more to the analogy than such a narrow decisional focus suggests. Part III builds on Part II. It …
Asymmetric World Jurisprudence, Caprice L. Roberts
Asymmetric World Jurisprudence, Caprice L. Roberts
Seattle University Law Review
This article argues that the Supreme Court should reconsider its prudential justiciability doctrines and their underlying assumptions. As a global theory, this Article offers a judicial dynamism model. It then articulates the relevance of the political question doctrine and the need to view the doctrine as prudential rather than constitutional. First, I discuss the Supreme Court's increased use of judicial minimalism and the political question doctrine to avoid important cases and reduce its docket. Second, I describe my model, in which the court takes a dynamic approach to such issues, dependent upon the political climate, to maintain its appropriate stature …