Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Law
Toward A Representation-Reinforcing Mode Of Judicial Review, John Hart Ely
Toward A Representation-Reinforcing Mode Of Judicial Review, John Hart Ely
Maryland Law Review
No abstract provided.
Recent Decisions Of The Supreme Court In Labor Law, David S. Bogen
Recent Decisions Of The Supreme Court In Labor Law, David S. Bogen
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Village Of Arlington Heights V. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp., 97 S. Ct. 555 (1977), Karen K. Kinkennon
Village Of Arlington Heights V. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp., 97 S. Ct. 555 (1977), Karen K. Kinkennon
Florida State University Law Review
Zoning- DISCRIMINATORY INTENT MUST BE PROVED BEFORE COURTS MAY REACH FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT EQUAL PROTECTION ISSUES.
Constitutional Law - Fourteenth Amendment - Statute Denying Illegitimates The Right To Inherit By Intestate Succession From Their Fathers Held To Be Invidious Discrimination In Violation Of The Equal Protection Clause Of The Fourteenth Amendment, Lisa S. Hunter
Villanova Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Business Of The Supreme Court Under The Judiciary Act Of 1925: The Plenary Docket In The 1970'S, Arthur D. Hellman
The Business Of The Supreme Court Under The Judiciary Act Of 1925: The Plenary Docket In The 1970'S, Arthur D. Hellman
Articles
During the last decade, the Supreme Court has been deciding 65 to 70 cases a Term after oral argument. That represents a sharp decline from the 1970s and 1980s, the era of the Burger Court, when the Court was deciding about 150 cases a Term. The Burger Court’s docket, in turn, reflected a shift from the 1960s, when the docket was smaller. In short, what is “normal” for the plenary docket varies from one era to another. The period of the Burger Court retains a special interest in that regard because that was the only period after World War II …
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
Cleveland State Law Review
The United States Supreme Court, in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, had a magnificent opportunity to either begin the process of defining first amendment limitations on the scope of the authority of the FCC to regulate the content of broadcast expression, explicate a rational ground for the differential status of broadcasting, or perhaps both. The purpose of this article is not to debate the wisdom of the use of sensitive language on the electronic media or elsewhere. Nor is it our purpose to debate the substantive question of whether the Court reached the proper result in Pacifica, although we will necessarily …
Bakke Revisited - What The Court's Decision Means - And Doesn't Mean, Douglas D. Scherer
Bakke Revisited - What The Court's Decision Means - And Doesn't Mean, Douglas D. Scherer
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress
Cleveland State Law Review
The United States Supreme Court, in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, had a magnificent opportunity to either begin the process of defining first amendment limitations on the scope of the authority of the FCC to regulate the content of broadcast expression, explicate a rational ground for the differential status of broadcasting, or perhaps both. The purpose of this article is not to debate the wisdom of the use of sensitive language on the electronic media or elsewhere. Nor is it our purpose to debate the substantive question of whether the Court reached the proper result in Pacifica, although we will necessarily …
Federal Habeas Corpus And Ineffective Representation Of Counsel: The Supreme Court Has Work To Do, Peter W. Tague
Federal Habeas Corpus And Ineffective Representation Of Counsel: The Supreme Court Has Work To Do, Peter W. Tague
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The availability of federal habeas corpus relief for state criminal defendants has always borne a complex relationship to state rules barring defendants from litigating constitutional claims in state court because of procedural defaults in raising those claims. The Warren Court's landmark attempt to resolve this relationship was the 1963 decision in Fay v. Noia, which asserted that a state procedural forfeiture rule could not bar federal habeas review of a constitutional claim unless the defendant had "deliberately bypassed" the procedural opportunity to raise the claim; the Court defined "deliberate bypass" in terms of a defendant's intentional and voluntary relinquishment of …