Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Up In Smoke: Fourth Amendment Rights And The Burger Court, Gerald S. Reamey
Up In Smoke: Fourth Amendment Rights And The Burger Court, Gerald S. Reamey
Faculty Articles
When Warren Burger was appointed Chief Justice in 1969, he was expected to lead the Supreme Court away from its liberal, value-laden approach to constitutional adjudication. Indeed, a retrospective of the court’s work during the seventeen years Warren Burger served as Chief Justice reveals the expected conservative trend of the Chief Justice himself, as well as the Supreme Court generally. It does not, however, reflect wholesale rejection of the most controversial civil liberties decisions rendered by the Warren Court. It is also unclear that Chief Justice Burger was responsible for the Court’s retrenchment on civil liberties where it did occur. …
The End Of New York Times V Sullivan: Reflections On Masson V New Yorker Magazine, Lee C. Bollinger
The End Of New York Times V Sullivan: Reflections On Masson V New Yorker Magazine, Lee C. Bollinger
Faculty Scholarship
Virtually every year since New York Times v Sullivan, the Supreme Court has decided at least one or two First Amendment cases involving the press. This now seemingly permanent, annual pageant of media cases undoubtedly has significance for the development of both constitutional law and the character of American journalism, though oddly that significance has been little explored in the scholarly literature. This past year the Court had two cases, both of which received an unusual amount of discussion within the press. It is, of course, understandable, even if not wholly defensible, for the press to give disproportionate coverage …
Republican Revival/Interpretive Turn, Stephen M. Feldman
Republican Revival/Interpretive Turn, Stephen M. Feldman
Stephen M. Feldman
The civic republican revival and the interpretive turn are two leading movements in constitutional jurisprudence. Civic republicanism emphasizes that citizens belong to a political community where they participate in a dialogue about the common good. Interpretivism, meanwhile, holds that all of our practices, including constitutional adjudication, are interpretive; we are always situated within interpretative communities and traditions that simultaneously constrain and enable understanding. Civic republicanism and interpretivism, however, both face serious challenges. Critics of the republican revival charge that it invites oppression and silencing of divergent voices because it emphasizes the community and the common good. Opponents of the interpretive …