Law Commons^™

Brief Amicus Curiae Of Joseph R. Grodin As Amicus Curiae Supporting Neither Party (Vacatur), Elk Grove Unified School District V. Newdow, No. 02-1624 (U.S. Dec. 19, 2003), ., Neal K. Katyal

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

America After 9/11: Freedom Preserved Or Freedom Lost: Hearing Before The S. Comm. On The Judiciary, 108th Cong., Nov. 18, 2003 (Statement Of Viet D. Dinh, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Viet D. Dinh

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Gao's Recent Report On The Implementation Of Exec. Order 12630 And The State Of Federal Agency Protections Of Private Property Rights: Hearing Before The H. Subcomm. On The Judiciary, 108th Cong., Oct. 16, 2003 (Statement Of John D. Echeverria, Exec. Dir., Georgetown Environmental Law & Policy Inst., Geo. U. L. Center), John D. Echeverria

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Lbj's Ghost: A Contextual Approach To Targeting Decisions And The Commander In Chief, James E. Baker

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The moral imperative and relevance of the Law of Armed Conflict (“LOAC”) is more apparent today than before September 11, 2001. Law distinguishes democratic societies from the terrorists who attack them; nowhere is this more apparent than in the methods and means of warfare. Indeed, part of our revulsion and contempt for terrorism lies in the terrorists' indiscriminate, disproportionate, and unnecessary violence against civilians. In contrast, the enduring strength of the LOAC is its reliance on the principles of proportionality, necessity, and discrimination, which protect civilians and minimize combatant suffering. For these reasons, we should not begrudge the LOAC's limitations …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Judith Areen Et Al., Grutter V. Bollinger, No. 02-241 (U.S. Feb. 19, 2003), Judith C. Areen, Neal K. Katyal

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of 13,922 Current Law Students At Accredited American Law Schools As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondants, Grutter V. Bollinger, No. 02-241 (U.S. Feb. 18, 2003), Julie R. O'Sullivan, Peter J. Rubin

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

The Original Meaning Of The Necessary And Proper Clause, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this Article, I present the evidence of the original public meaning of the Necessary and Proper Clause." These findings will, of course, be of interest to originalists. But, they should also be of interest to the many constitutional scholars who consider original meaning to be one among several legitimate modes of constitutional analysis, or who consider original meaning the starting point of a process by which this meaning is translated into contemporary terms. By either account, it is important to find the correct original meaning, even if it is not dispositive of today's cases and controversies. I will show …

Suing The Federal Government: Sovereignty, Immunity, And Judicial Independence, Vicki C. Jackson

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

As I suggest below in Part I, federal sovereign immunity was a doctrine of limited effect in the early years of this republic and allowed for a number of remedies for governmental wrongdoing. Moreover, the constitutional provenance of federal "sovereign immunity" is obscure, and was a matter of genuine uncertainty in early years. Over time the doctrine developed, drawing support from some aspects of constitutional architecture as well as from unreasoning and mistaken extensions of other versions of "sovereign immunity." Among the strands of constitutional structure behind federal "sovereign immunity" are Congress' powers over appropriations and the jurisdiction of the …

Tom Paine's Constitution, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Common Sense, our brief for the American Revolution, the pamphleteer Tom Paine famously declared that “in America the law is king.” What, precisely, is the “law” that Paine declared to have dethroned the king? Does the phrase, penned by the advocate not only of our revolution but also of the rights of man everywhere, presage our modern practice of rights-based constitutionalism? This reading – in America, constitutional law is king – might also make Paine an early friend of judicial review, as he was unquestionably also a friend of United States constitutionalism, both federal and state. Paine’s manifesto can …

Are Foreign Nationals Entitled To The Same Constitutional Rights As Citizens?, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Are foreign nationals entitled only to reduced rights and freedoms? The difficulty of the question is reflected in the deeply ambivalent approach of the Supreme Court, an ambivalence matched only by the alternately xenophobic and xenophilic attitude of the American public toward immigrants. On the one hand, the Court has insisted for more than a century that foreign nationals living among us are "persons" within the meaning of the Constitution, and are protected by those rights that the Constitution does not expressly reserve to citizens. Because the Constitution expressly limits to citizens only the rights to vote and to run …

Remarks Of Seth P. Waxman At The Memorial Observance For Justice Byron R. White, United States Supreme Court, Seth P. Waxman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Members of the Court, members of the family, and friends of Justice White- Alone among today's speakers, I met Justice White only late in his life. Growing up in the law, my relationship with him was the one many kids today have with Michael Jordan - I wanted to be "like White" -like the kind of man he was. I still have that aspiration. Like Byron White, I served in the Department of Justice and was altered forever by that honorable institution. And - like Justice White, in my own lesser way, I strove within the walls of this institution …

Eldred And Lochner: Copyright Term Extension And Intellectual Property As Constitutional Property, Paul M. Schwartz, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Since the ratification of the constitution, intellectual property law in the United States has always been, in part, constitutional law. Among the enumerated powers that Article I of the Constitution vests in Congress is the power to create certain intellectual property rights. To a remarkable extent, scholars who have examined the Constitution's Copyright Clause have reached a common position. With striking unanimity, these scholars have called for aggressive judicial review of the constitutionality of congressional legislation in this area. The champions of this position--we refer to them as the IP Restrictors--represent a remarkable array of constitutional and intellectual property scholars. …

Constitutional Legitimacy, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The problem of constitutional legitimacy is to establish why anyone should obey the command of a constitutionally-valid law. A lawmaking system is legitimate if there is a prima facie duty to obey the laws it makes. Neither "consent of the governed" nor "benefits received" justifies obedience. Rather, a prima facie duty of obedience exists either (a) if there is actual unanimous consent to the jurisdiction of the lawmaker or, in the absence of consent, (b) f laws are made by procedures which assure that they are not unjust. In the absence of unanimous consent, a written constitution should be assessed …

The National Security Presidency In Constitutional Context: Reflections On Terrorism And The Presidency From The Last Ten Years, James E. Baker

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this time of terrorist threat, there is no more important institution to study than the national security presidency. That is because the president is singularly situated to command the instruments to counter terrorism. He is also singularly situated to ensure that such instruments are used effectively, lawfully, and in a manner consistent with constitutional values. I believe I have a duty, based on where I have been, to help others observe and understand the institution of the presidency. I do so because I want the national security presidency to succeed in providing for our physical security and in upholding …

Self-Historicism, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Among the contributors to this symposium, I may be the person with the longest acquaintance with Sandy Levinson. I want to begin, therefore, with a recollection of the period of my earliest contacts with Sandy - a recollection that, as I hope to show, has some bearing on some of the aspects of Sandy's work that most interest me . . . I use these examples to introduce an argument connected to Sandy's longstanding interest in historical memory. The casebook of which he is a co-author is organized historically-relentlessly so, I would put it, to the point where I personally …

Justice Kennedy's Libertarian Revolution: Lawrence V. Texas, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This brief article explains why Lawrence v. Texas could be a revolutionary case if the Supreme Court follows Justice Kennedy's reasoning in the future. As in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Justice Kennedy finds a statute to be unconstitutional, not because it infringes a right to privacy (which is mentioned but once), but because it infringes "liberty" (a word he uses at least twenty-five times). In addition, Justice Kennedy's opinion protects liberty without any finding that the liberty being restricted is a "fundamental right." Instead, having identified the conduct prohibited as liberty, he turns to the purported justification for the …

The Imperative Of Natural Rights In Today's World, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

If there is any group that really needs to understand the concept of natural rights, it is professors of constitutional law. The document they teach was written by a generation who uniformly believed in natural rights, used the concept to justify a violent revolution from their mother country, and professed their continued commitment to natural rights long after the separation—a commitment that only intensified in the years that culminated in the Civil War and the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Yet few constitutional law professors know much, if anything, about this fundamental concept even as a historical matter, much less …

Alternative Forms Of Judicial Review, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The invention in the late twentieth century of what I call weak-form systems of judicial review provides us with the chance to see in a new light some traditional debates within U.S. constitutional law and theory, which are predicated on the fact that the United States has strong-form judicial review. Strong- and weak-form systems operate on the level of constitutional design, in the sense that their characteristics are specified in constitutional documents or in deep-rooted constitutional traditions. After sketching the differences between strong- and weak-form systems, I turn to design features that operate at the next lower level. Here legislatures …

New Forms Of Judicial Review And The Persistence Of Rights - And Democracy-Based Worries, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Recent developments in judicial review have raised the possibility that the debate over judicial supremacy versus legislative supremacy might be transformed into one about differing institutions to implement judicial review. Rather than posing judicial review against legislative supremacy, the terms of the debate might be over having institutions designed to exercise forms of judicial review that accommodate both legislative supremacy and judicial implementation of constitutional limits. After examining some of these institutional developments in Canada, South Africa, and Great Britain, this Article asks whether these accommodations, which attempt to pursue a middle course, have characteristic instabilities that will in the …

New Evidence Of The Original Meaning Of The Commerce Clause, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this paper, the author advances the debate on the original meaning, interpretation, and usage of the word "commerce" in the context of the Commerce Clause. First, he distinguishes between terms that are vague and those that are ambiguous. He contends that realizing the dispute is over the ambiguity rather than the vagueness of "commerce" helps resolve the conflict between interpretations. Second, he presents the results of new empirical research into the original public meaning of "commerce" that extends well beyond the sources immediately surrounding the Constitution. Finally, the author reports the results of a similar survey of the use …

Non-Judicial Review, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Professor Mark Tushnet challenges the view that democratic constitutionalism requires courts to dominate constitutional review. He provides three diverse examples of non-judicial institutions involved in constitutional review and examines the institutional incentives to get the analysis" right." Through these examples, Professor Tushnet argues that non-judicial actors may perform constitutional review that is accurate, effective, and capable of gaining public acceptance. Professor Tushnet recommends that scholars conduct further research into non-judicial review to determine whether ultimately more or less judicial review is necessary in constitutional democracies.

A New Constitutionalism For Liberals?, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

It has been apparent for at least a decade that liberal constitutional theory is in deep trouble. Of course there are many versions of liberal constitutional theory, but they have essentially no connection to existing practices of constitutional law, considering as practices of constitutional law all the activities of our institutions of government that implicate - interpret, advance, deal with, whatever - fundamental principle. Instead, liberal constitutional theory's vision of the future is nostalgia for the past. For liberal constitutional theorists the Warren Court, or Justice Brennan, basically got everything right, at least in their approach to identifying constitutional law. …

Their Liberties, Our Security: Democracy And Double Standards, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Some maintain that a "double standard" for citizens and noncitizens is perfectly justified. The attacks of September 11 were perpetrated by nineteen Arab noncitizens, and we have reason to believe that other Arab noncitizens are associated with the attackers and will seek to attack again. Citizens, it is said, are presumptively loyal; noncitizens are not. Thus, it is not irrational to focus on Arab noncitizens. Moreover, on a normative level, if citizens and noncitizens were treated identically, citizenship itself might be rendered meaningless. The very essence of war involves the drawing of lines in the sand between citizens of our …

Looking Ahead: The Future Of Affirmative Action, Susan Low Bloch

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, race is still a serious issue in this country. Fortunately, we no longer debate whether it is legal for the government to operate segregated schools or to treat blacks as second-class citizens. We finally answered that question correctly—it is unconstitutional for the law to segregate and to treat blacks worse than whites.

Today, we face the more difficult question of ascertaining the constitutionality of “affirmative action” or “benign discrimination” programs. The Supreme Court first addressed this issue in 1978 in the landmark case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke …

The Effect Of The Supreme Court's Eleventh Amendment Jurisprudence On Environmental Citizen Suits: Gotcha!, Hope M. Babcock

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The current Supreme Court has substantially expanded the scope of protection from lawsuits accorded to states by the Eleventh Amendment and narrowed the exceptions to its application. As a result, many people are finding they are unable to vindicate federal rights in any court when the defendant is a state or a state agency. The most recent example of this is the Court's decision in South Carolina State Ports Authority v. Federal Maritime Commission, in which the Court extended the reach of the Eleventh Amendment to private administrative enforcement actions against states, thus forsaking completely any connection to the …