Law Commons^™

Agenda: Regulatory Takings And Resources: What Are The Constitutional Limits?, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center, Byron R. White Center For The Study Of American Constitutional Law

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

Sponsored by the University of Colorado's Natural Resources Law Center and the Byron R. White Center for American Constitutional Study.

Conference organizers, faculty and/or moderators included University of Colorado School of Law professors David H. Getches, Lawrence J. MacDonnell, Gene R. Nichol, Jr. and Mark Squillace.

Governmental regulation for environmental protection and other important public purposes can affect the manner in which land and natural resources are developed and used. The U.S. constitution (and most state constitutions) prohibit the government from "taking" property without payment of compensation. Originally intended to apply to situations where the government physically seized private property …

Siberian Tigers And Exotic Birds: Ronald Dworkin's Map Of The Sacred, Hester Lessard

Dalhousie Law Journal

At its most abstract, Life's Dominion: An Argument about Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom is a meditation on the nature of individual freedom. However, as author Ronald Dworkin explains at the end of Chapter One, he believes in doing philosophy in much the same way common law jurists believe in doing law-from the inside out-that is, by starting with a concrete problem and then proceeding to the more general questions raised by that problem. According to Dworkin, this generates a theory that is appropriately tailored to the issue, "Savile Row" so to speak, rather than "Seventh Avenue," and thus a …

Litigation, E. D'Angelo

California Regulatory Law Reporter

No abstract provided.

The U.S. Supreme Court's Explication Of "Federal Plenary Power": An Analysis Of Case Law Affecting Tribal Sovereignty, 1886-1914, David E. Wilkins

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

The concept of tribal sovereignty frequently conflicts with that of congressional plenary power, depending on the definition and basis of plenary power. Analysis of 107 federal court cases between 1886 and 1914 suggests that when plenary power is seen in terms of preemption and exclusivity, it may help to protect tribal sovereignty from private or state incursions. However, if plenary power is defined as absolute and unlimited, tribal rights are not constitutionally protected against federal actions. Although tribes are properly regarded as extra-constitutional entities, they are often treated as inferior in relation to Congress by the courts.

The Court's "Two Model" Approach To The Fourth Amendment: Carpe Diem!, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Conspiracy, Literalism, And Ennui At The Supreme Court: An Examination Of Bankruptcy Cases Decided From 1990- To 1993, Bruce A. Markell

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Diagnosing Power: Postmodernism In Legal Scholarship And Judicial Practice (With An Emphasis On The Teague Rule Against New Rules In Habeas Corpus Cases, Stephen M. Feldman

Stephen M. Feldman

Whereas modernists constantly attempt to reduce the meanings of texts to an essential core or single truth, postmodernists are antifoundationalists and anti-essentialists. According to postmodernists, the meaning of a text is never grounded or stable, and therefore one can always find multiple meanings or truths. Thus, one performs a postmodern flip by taking a segment of a text, event, or concept that apparently has been reduced to a static meaning or truth and suggesting the possible existence of another meaning or truth. The postmodern flip then is completed by exploring how this new meaning or truth of the segment of …