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

Law Commons

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

Selected Works

1999

Supreme Court

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Before The Flood: The History Of Baseball’S Antitrust Exemption, Roger Abrams Mar 1999

Before The Flood: The History Of Baseball’S Antitrust Exemption, Roger Abrams

Roger I. Abrams

This article addresses the historical anomaly of baseball’s exemption from the federal antitrust laws. Starting with Justice Holmes’ opinion in the 1922 Federal Baseball case, the article criticizes the Supreme Court’s rigid adherence to stare decisis despite considerable changes in the legal and economic context. Ultimately, in the Curt Flood case the Court acknowledges the error of its previous ways, but stubbornly refuses to correct the law, leaving to Congress the ultimate power to revise a half century of judicial errors.


Taking Justice Thomas Seriously, John Eastman Dec 1998

Taking Justice Thomas Seriously, John Eastman

John C. Eastman

Substantive Review of Scott Gerber's book, First Principles: The Jurisprudence of Clarence Thomas (New York University Press, 1999). This review praises Gerber's recognition that Justice Thomas has articulated a consistent and thoughtful original theory view of the Constitution, distinct from the original practice, most positivist view of constitutional interpretation advanced by Justice Antonin Scalia and the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist. It also applauds the effort to take seriously Justice Thomas's jurisprudence, even while it takes Gerber to task for misunderstanding at times the full depth of that jurisprudence. Most notably, the article challenges Gerber's critique of Justice Thomas's Establishment …


Framers' Intent And Military Power: Has Supreme Court Deference To The Military Gone Too Far?, Kalyani Robbins Dec 1998

Framers' Intent And Military Power: Has Supreme Court Deference To The Military Gone Too Far?, Kalyani Robbins

Kalyani Robbins

One of the sources of the Court's inability to conduct proper constitutional analysis in military cases is its lack of access to complete and unbiased information upon which to base that analysis. In Part III, I will make an effort to suggest methods for addressing this problem alternative to simply letting the military use its special knowledge as a source of power over the Court. Part IV will demonstrate a modern example of where the problem of excessive deference can lead, and present the Court with a suggestion to use this as a context for change. Finally, the Article will …