Law Commons^™

Do Citizens Care About Federalism? An Experimental Test, Robert Mikos, Cindy D. Kam

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The ongoing debate over the political safeguards of federalism has essentially ignored the role that citizens might play in restraining federal power. Scholars have assumed that citizens care only about policy outcomes and will invariably support congressional legislation that satisfies their substantive policy preferences, no matter the cost to state powers. Scholars thus typically turn to institutions-the courts or institutional features of the political process-to cabin congressional authority. We argue that ignoring citizens is a mistake. We propose a new theory of the political safeguards of federalism in which citizens help to safeguard state authority. We also test our theory …

Religious V. Secular Ideologies And Sex Education: A Response To Professors Cahn And Carbone, Vivian E. Hamilton

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

From Federalism To Intersystemic Governance: The Changing Nature Of Modern Jurisdiction, Robert B. Ahdieh

Faculty Scholarship

At heart, this introductory essay aspires to encourage scholars who write in widely divergent areas, yet share a focus on the changing nature of jurisdiction, to engage one another more closely. From Jackson's study of "convergence, resistance, and engagement" among courts, Kingsbury's study of "global administrative law," and Bermann's analysis of "transatlantic regulatory cooperation," to Resnik's evaluation of "trans-local networks," Weiser's account of "cooperative federalism" in telecommunications law, and Thompson's concept of "collaborative corporate governance," a related set of questions is ultimately at stake: How ought we understand the reach of any given decision-maker's jurisdiction? What are the implications of …

Supreme Court Report 2006-2007: Closing Of The Courthouse Doors?, Julie M. Cheslik, Andrea Mcmurty, Kristin Underwood

Faculty Works

This article reviews the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court for the 2006-2007 term focusing on decisions of particular relevance to state and local government. In reviewing those decisions, we focus on the shifts in the Court over time on those issues.

The expectation that the Supreme Court would shift to the right came to fruition in the 2006-07 term by the sheer lack of clear decisions on the merits. Time and again, the Court decided cases on the standing issue, never reaching the merits and frustrating litigants and citizens attempts to define their rights. Yale law professor Judith Resnick …

Fast-Food Government And Physician-Assisted Death: The Role Of Direct Democracy In Federalism, K.K. Duvivier

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

Modern patients often enter a twilight zone of suspended animation between living and dying that did not exist a generation ago. The majority of Americans believe these terminal patients should have the right to refuse life support and to receive pain relief, even to the point of hastening death. Yet laws addressing the situation are unclear, and physician advocates, like Dr. Kevorkian of Michigan, have faced sanctions and jail time when they responded to patient requests for help to die peacefully. In its 2006 Gonzales v. Oregon decision, the U.S. Supreme Court shifted the physician-assisted death dilemma to the state-side …

Federalism And The Tug Of War Within: Seeking Checks And Balance In The Interjurisdictional Gray Area, Erin Ryan

Faculty Publications

Federalism and the Tug of War Within explores tensions that arise among the underlying values of federalism when state or federal actors regulate within the "interjurisdictional gray area" that implicates both local and national concerns. Drawing examples from the failed response to Hurricane Katrina and other interjurisdictional problems to illustrate this conflict, the Article demonstrates how the trajectory set by the New Federalism's "strict-separationist" model of dual sovereignty inhibits effective governance in these contexts. In addition to the anti-tyranny, pro-accountability, and localism-protective values of federalism, the Article identifies a problem-solving value inherent in the capacity requirement of American federalism's subsidiarity …

Slides: The Future Of Oil And Gas Development On Federal Lands, Mike Chiropolos

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: Mike Chiropolos, Lands Program Director, Western Resource Advocates

44 slides

Agenda: The Future Of Natural Resources Law And Policy, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Foundation

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

The Natural Resources Law Center's 25th Anniversary Conference and Natural Resources Law Teachers 14th Biennial Institute provided an opportunity for some of the best natural resources lawyers to discuss future trends in the field. The conference focused on the larger, cross-cutting issues affecting natural resources policy. Initial discussions concerned the declining role of scientific resource management due to the increased inclusion of economic-cost benefit analysis and public participation in the decision-making process. The effectiveness of this approach was questioned particularly in the case of non-market goods such as the polar bear. Other participants promoted the importance of public participation and …

Federalism And Natural Resources Policy [Outline], Robert L. Fischman

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

2 pages.

"Robert L. Fischman, Indiana University School of Law–Bloomington"

"Outline of Presentation"

Law Casebook Description And Table Of Contents: Constitutional Environmental And Natural Resources Law [Outline], Jim May, Robin Craig

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

6 pages.

"James May, Widener University School of Law" -- Agenda

Federalism And Accountability: State Attorneys General, Regulatory Litigation, And The New Federalism, Timothy L. Meyer

Scholarly Works

This Comment will examine how one particular state institution, state attorneys general (SAGs), has operated within a unique set of institutional and political constraints to create state-based regulation with nationwide impact in policy areas including consumer protection, antitrust, environmental regulation, and securities regulation. This state-based regulation casts doubt on one of the principle rationales advanced in the Supreme Court's anticommandeering line of cases for limiting federal power; namely, that such a move enhances electoral accountability, a concept central to our democracy. If in the absence of federal regulation a series of narrowly accountable state-based actors can create nationwide regulation in …

'There It Is: Take It' Endangered Species And Water Management In The San Francisco Bay Delta, W. David Ball

Faculty Publications

This paper explores endangered species and water management in the San Francisco Bay Delta. Two endangered species, the Delta Smelt and the Winter-run Chinook Salmon, use the Bay Delta for crucial portions of their life cycle. At the same time, California's agricultural industry, as well as population centers to the South, require substantial outflows of Bay-Delta water. The paper explores the multi-jurisdictional regulation of the Bay-Delta's water, takes a hard look at the purported success of the Environmental Water Account (EWA) program, and reports on the tensions between scientists at regulatory agencies and the political appointees who oversee them. We …

Whose Ox Is Being Gored? When Attitudinalism Meets Federalism, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Empirical research indicates that factors such as an individual Justice's general political ideology play a substantial role in the decision of Supreme Court cases. Although this pattern holds in federalism cases, views about the proper allocation of authority between the state and federal governments - independent of whether the particular outcome in any given case is "liberal" or "conservative" - can sometimes be decisive, as demonstrated by the 2005 decision in Gonzales v. Raich, in which "conservative" Justices voted to invalidate a strict federal drug provision in light of California's legalization of medical marijuana, and "liberal" Justices voted to uphold …

Legal Certainty And Legal Methods: A European Alternative To American Legal Indeterminacy?, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

Americans are resigned to a high level of legal indeterminacy. This Article shows that Europeans do not accept legal indeterminacy and instead have made legal certainty a general principle of their law. This Article uses the example of the German legal system to show how German legal methods strive to realize this general European principle. It suggests that these methods are opportunities for Americans to develop their own system to reduce legal indeterminacy and to increase legal certainty.

How Congress Paved The Way For The Rehnquist Court's Federalism Revival: Lessons From The Federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Active Sovereignty, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Third Death Of Federalism, A. Christopher Bryant

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

Federal drug laws proved a stumbling block to the Rehnquist Court's attempted federalism revival. In its final year, the Court's fragile federalism coalition splintered in a pair of cases arising under the Controlled Substances Act ("CSA"). Missing from the emerging legal literature concerning those two decisions is any substantive discussion of the Supreme Court's much earlier, ill-fated efforts to preserve both judicial enforcement of the enumerated powers doctrine and federal narcotics laws. This article fills that gap.

Ninety-odd years ago the Court arrived at the same jurisprudential juncture it now confronts. In the early decades of the twentieth century, the …

Molecular Federalism And The Structures Of Private Lawmaking, David Snyder

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.

The Religion Clauses And The “Really New” Federalism, Martin H. Belsky

Akron Law Faculty Publications

It had been a principle of contemporary constitutional law that once a provision of the Bill of Rights was “fully” incorporated, such as with the First Amendment, it established a constitutional minimum. A state could provide, either by constitutional or statutory provision, additional protections to its citizens, so long as this did not create a conflict with other federal law. Another principle, until recently, was that the federal government had the ability by legislation to provide additional or enhanced rights to Americans, and that these rights applied uniformly to residents of all states.

The application of these two principles?at least …

A Tale Of Two Imperiled Rivers: Reflections From A Post-Katrina World, Sandra Zellmer

Nebraska College of Law: Faculty Publications

Hurricanes are a natural, predictable phenomenon, yet the Gulf Coast communities were devastated by the hurricanes of 2005. One year after Hurricane Katrina struck, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers responded to a congressional request for an accounting by admitting culpability for the destruction of New Orleans. Its structural defenses failed not because Congress had authorized only moderate Category 3 protection, which in turn let floodwaters overtop the city's levees, but because levees and floodwalls simply collapsed. The so-called network of federal and local structures was a haphazard system in name only, where floodwalls and levees of varying heights utilized …

The People Or The State?: Chisholm V. Georgia And Popular Sovereignty, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Lectures and Appearances

Chisholm v. Georgia was the first great constitutional case decided by the Supreme Court. In Chisholm, the Court addressed the fundamental question: Who is Sovereign? The People or the State? It adopted an individual concept of popular sovereignty rather than the modern view that limits popular sovereignty to collective or democratic self-government. It denied that the State of Georgia was a sovereign entitled, like the King of England, to assert immunity from a lawsuit brought by a private citizen. Despite all this, Chisholm is not among the canon of cases that all law students are taught. Why not? In this …

The Changing Climate For United States Law, David M. Driesen

College of Law - Faculty Scholarship

Just a few years ago, the subject of American climate change law would not merit an article like this one, let alone the book that the American Bar Association has recently published on the subject. But the United States has changed, at least somewhat. At the moment, most important United States climate change law consists of state and local law, but there are signs that the federal government may create significant climate change law as well, at least after President Bush leaves office.

This article has two goals. The obvious one is simply to describe some of the American climate …

The 2006 Winthrop And Frances Lane Lecture: The Unintended Legal And Policy Consequences Of The No Child Left Behind Act, Michael Heise

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Federalism And The Tug Of War Within: Seeking Checks And Balance In The Interjurisdictional Gray Area, Erin Ryan

Scholarly Publications

This article explores tensions between the underlying values of federalism that come into conflict when either the federal or State governments regulate within the interjurisdictional gray area that simultaneously implicates important local and national concerns. The piece takes the example of the failed response to Hurricane Katrina to illustrate the conflict between federalism values that arise within this realm, and how the New Federalism's strict separationist model of dual sovereignty inhibits effective governance in interjurisdictional contexts. In addition to the anti-tyranny, pro-accountability, and localism-protective values of federalism, the article identifies a problem-solving value inherent in the capacity requirement of American …

When Worlds Collide: Federal Construction Of State Institutional Competence, Marcia L. Mccormick

All Faculty Scholarship

The federal courts routinely encounter issues of state law. Often a state court will have already analyzed the law at issue, either in a separate case or in the very situation before the federal court. In every one of those cases, the federal courts must decide whether to defer to the state court analysis and, if so, how much. The federal courts will often defer, but many times have not done so, and they rarely explain the reasons for the departures they make. While this lack of transparency gives the federal courts the greatest amount of discretion and power, it …

Adapting To Administrative Law's Erie Doctrine, Kathryn A. Watts

Articles

This Article looks to the federalism context and draws on the federal courts' experience adapting to the Court's landmark decision in Erie Railroad Company v. Tompkins. Much like Brand X, the Court's Erie decision, which commanded federal courts to apply state law in all cases not governed by positive federal law, significantly reduced the lawmaking power of the federal courts by putting the federal courts in the position of interpreting law that they cannot definitively construe. Although Erie seemed simple enough to adhere to when state law provided a clear answer, Erie posed a serious dilemma when federal courts …

Cooperative Localism: Federal-Local Collaboration In An Era Of State Sovereignty Part Ii: Federalism, Nestor M. Davidson

Faculty Scholarship

Direct relations between the federal government and local governments - what this article calls "cooperative localism" - play a significant and underappreciated role in areas of contemporary policy as disparate as homeland security, law enforcement, disaster response, economic development, social services, immigration, and environmental protection. Despite the ubiquity of this practice, a jurisprudential clash is looming that threatens this important facet of intergovernmental relations. Historically, courts have allowed local governments to invoke federal authority as a source of local autonomy, despite the prevailing view of local governments as powerless instrumentalities of the state. The Supreme Court is increasingly suggesting, however, …

Anti-Federalist Procedure, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

"[T]he new federal government will ... be disinclined to invade the rights of the individual States, or the prerogatives of their governments."

"[T]he Constitution of the United States ... recognizes and preserves the autonomy and independence of the States-independence in their legislative and independence in their judicial departments. . . . Any interference with either, except as [constitutionally] permitted, is an invasion of the authority of the State and, to that extent, a denial of its independence."

The understanding expressed by these opening quotes-that the national government was designed to be one of limited powers that would refrain from encroaching …

Constitutional Avoidance And The Roberts Court, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The "Federalism Five" As Supreme Court Nominees, 1971-1991, John Q. Barrett

Faculty Publications

This article looks back at the Senate confirmation hearing testimonies of five Supreme Court nominees. Following their appointments to the Court, these justices—Chief Justice Rehnquist and Associate Justices O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas—generally voted together in path-breaking federalism cases. They reinvigorated constitutional law limits or decreed new ones on national legislative power, supported the "sovereignty" of state governments, and thus came to be known in some circles as the Rehnquist Court's "Federalism Five." As nominees testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, however, these "federalism" justices did not announce, or for the most part even much hint at, what came to …