Law Commons^™

Environmental Law In The Supreme Court: Highlights From The Marshall Papers, Robert V. Percival

Faculty Scholarship

Justice Marshall served on the Court from 1967 until 1991. During that period, Congress passed all of the major federal environmental statutes and environmental regulation mushroomed. As a result, the Marshall papers reveal how the Court reached decisions that have shaped modern environmental law. The author, a former law clerk to former Justice Byron White and an associate professor of law at the University of Maryland, begins by describing the history of the Court's treatment of environmental disputes. He then discusses the steps the Justices take in deciding whether to accept cases for review; in reaching decisions on the merits …

Supreme Court's Tilt To The Property Right: Procedural Due Process Protections Of Liberty And Property Interests, Jack M. Beermann, Barbara A. Melamed, Hugh F. Hall

Faculty Scholarship

The Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution provide important protections against government oppression. They provide that government may not deprive any person of "life, liberty or property" without due process of law. In recent decisions, the Supreme Court has appeared willing to strengthen its protection of traditional property interests yet weaken its protection of liberty interests.

It has long been accepted, albeit with controversy, that due process has both procedural and substantive elements. This essay concerns the procedural elements. Procedural due process analysis asks two questions: first, whether there exists a liberty …

Religious Liberty In The Military: The First Amendment Under "Friendly Fire", Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

This article examines specific restrictions promulgated and practiced during the Persian Gulf War, provides a brief historical analysis of how the United States and other nations have traditionally accommodated the religious activities of their military personnel, and addresses the question of how far we can constitutionally limit the free-exercise rights of the people in the military in light of current Supreme Court jurisprudence.

Property Myths, Judicial Activism, And The Lucas Case, Michael Blumm

Faculty Articles

This edited speech, delivered at a land use conference shortly after the Supreme Court decided Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Commission in 1992, questioned several premises of the decision and criticized Justice Scalia's opinion for the Court. The essay suggested that the Court lost its way in its discussion of nuisance law, its attempt to separate takings of personalty from realty, and seeming to call for strict scrutiny of government regulations that landowners' allege work takings. The essay claimed that Justice Scalia's fundamental error was to equate property rights with development rights.

The Impact Of The Cipollone Case On Federal Preemption Law, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The United States Supreme Court handed down an opinion in the Cipollone case on June 24, 1992. Justice Stevens, writing for the majority, concluded that the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act preempted all tort claims against cigarette manufacturers based on failure to provide adequate warnings about the health risks of smoking. However, the Court also held that claims based on breach of express warranty, misrepresentation, and conspiracy were not preempted by the Act. Thus, although Cipollone represents a clear victory for tobacco companies, it also leaves the door open for future litigation. The first part of this Article will …

Thurgood Marshall: The Lawyer As Judge, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

When Thurgood Marshall took the Oath in 1967, it was the twilight of one of the Court's most brilliant periods: the Warren Court's revolution of criminal and racial justice. He was a part of that alliance for two Terms. When a new Court, and new alliances, moved the Court into the dark shadows, he and his closest colleague, William Brennan, Jr., held staunchly to their vision of the Court's historic function “to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachment thereon.” He remained faithful to that vision to the end when, as a lone …

Habeas After The Revolution, Joseph L. Hoffmann, William J. Stuntz

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Prospective Overruling And The Revival Of ‘Unconstitutional' Statutes, William Michael Treanor, Gene B. Sperling

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court's decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey reshaped the law of abortion in this country. The Court overturned two of its previous decisions invalidating state restrictions on abortions, Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, and it abandoned the trimester analytic framework established in Roe v. Wade. At the time Casey was handed down, twenty states had restrictive abortion statutes on the books that were in conflict with Akron or Thornburgh and which were unenforced. In six of these states, courts had held the statutes unconstitutional. Almost …

The Aspirational Constitution, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Firmly embedded in every theory of judicial decisionmaking lies an important set of assumptions about the way government is supposed to work. Sometimes these theories about government are made explicit. More often they are not. Moreover, deeply embedded in every theory of government is a theory of human nature. Although these assumptions about human nature generally remain latent within the larger theory, because they provide the underpinnings for our ideas about the way government is supposed to work, they drive our notions about judicial decisionmaking. For example, the theory of government reflected in the United States Constitution reveals what one …

Lee V. Weisman: Whither The Establishment Clause And The Lemon V. Kurtzman Three Pronged Test?, Thomas A. Schweitzer

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court's Narrow View On Civil Rights, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

The right to choose abortion, although recently significantly curtailed from its original scope,' is a federally protected liberty interest of women, and is at least protected against the imposition of "undue burdens" by state and local government.² Some of the most serious threats to women's ability to choose abortion have come not from government regulation, but from private, national, organized efforts to prevent abortions. In addition to seeking change through the political system, some of these organizations, most notably Operation Rescue, have focused on the providers of abortion, and have attempted to prevent abortions by forcibly closing abortion clinics …

Book Review Of How To Research The Supreme Court, James S. Heller

Library Staff Publications

No abstract provided.

Chase Court And Fundamental Rights: A Watershed In American Constitutionalism, The , Robert J. Kaczorowski

Faculty Scholarship

Three weeks before he died in May 1873, the frail and ailing Salmon P. Chase joined three of his brethren in dissent in one of the most important cases ever decided by the United States Supreme Court, the Slaughter-House Cases.1 This decision was a watershed in United States constitutional history for several reasons. Doctrinally, it represented a rejection of the virtually unanimous decisions of the lower federal courts upholding the constitutionality of revolutionary federal civil rights laws enacted in the aftermath of the Civil War. Institutionally, it was an example of extraordinary judicial activism in overriding the legislative will of …

Conservatism And The Rehnquist Court, David F. Forte

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Now that the Supreme Court has been overwhelmingly staffed by appointees of Republican Presidents, we can ask: To what extent have they been faithful to the original version of the Constitution as articulated during its early years? How have they revivified the structural protections? How have they communicated an ethical sense of their own role in the structure? The answer, unfortunately, is that the record remains disappointing.