Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Supreme Court (3)
- Appellate jurisdiction (1)
- Armstrong Principle (1)
- Clear law (1)
- Compensation statutes (1)
-
- Congressional self-discipline (1)
- Constitutional doctrine (1)
- Crime (1)
- Crimes of passion (1)
- Criminal justice (1)
- Defense (1)
- Domestic violence (1)
- Due process (1)
- Eleventh Amendment (1)
- Feminist legal theory (1)
- Formalism (1)
- Immunity from liability (1)
- Intimate homicide (1)
- Legal reform (1)
- Manslaughter (1)
- Model penal code (1)
- Murder (1)
- Property rights (1)
- Provocation (1)
- Realism (1)
- Sovereignty (1)
- Supermajority rules (1)
- Supremacy Clause (1)
- Takings Clause (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Making Constitutional Doctrine In A Realist Age, Victoria Nourse
Making Constitutional Doctrine In A Realist Age, Victoria Nourse
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In this article the author considers three examples of modern constitutional doctrine that show how judges have stolen bits and pieces from popularized skepticisms about the job of judging and have molded this stolen rhetoric into doctrine. In the first example, she asks whether constitutional law's recent penchant for doctrinal rules based on "clear law" could have existed without the modern age's obsession with legal uncertainty. In the second, the author considers whether our contemporary rhetoric of constitutional "interests" and "expectations" reflects modern critiques of doctrine as failing to address social needs. In the third, she asks how an offhand …
Passion's Progress: Modern Law Reform And The Provocation Defense, Victoria Nourse
Passion's Progress: Modern Law Reform And The Provocation Defense, Victoria Nourse
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Based on a systematic study of fifteen years of passion murder cases, this article concludes that reform challenges our conventional ideas of a "crime of passion" and, in the process, leads to a murder law that is both illiberal and often perverse. If life tells us that crimes of passion are the stuff of sordid affairs and bedside confrontations, reform tells us that the law's passion may be something quite different. A significant number of the reform cases the author has studied involve no sexual infidelity whatsoever, but only the desire of the killer's victim to leave a miserable relationship. …
Congressional Self-Discipline: The Constitutionality Of Supermajority Rules, Susan Low Bloch
Congressional Self-Discipline: The Constitutionality Of Supermajority Rules, Susan Low Bloch
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Congress needs to be more disciplined. It has at times become sloppy and even cavalier. When, for example, Congress enacted the federal Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1990, it was asking for trouble. Neither the legislation nor the legislative history said anything about any effect on interstate commerce. It was therefore not surprising to see the Supreme Court strike the law down in United States v. Lopez.
The Armstrong Principle, The Narratives Of Takings, And Compensation Statutes, William Michael Treanor
The Armstrong Principle, The Narratives Of Takings, And Compensation Statutes, William Michael Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment is famous for inspiring disagreement. More than one hundred years have passed since the Supreme Court departed from the original understanding of the clause and interpreted regulations as potentially falling within its ambit. Although the passage of time has established the principle that regulations can run afoul of the Takings Clause, the Court has been unable to offer a coherent vision of when compensation is required. Academic commentators also have failed to reach agreement on the issue, offering an enormous range of solutions to the takings question. The newest field of controversy involves …
What Is Eleventh Amendment Immunity?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez
What Is Eleventh Amendment Immunity?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The Supreme Court's Eleventh Amendment decisions give conflicting signals about what the Amendment does. On one view, the Amendment functions as a forum-allocation principle--immunizing states from liability in suits filed in federal court, but leaving open the possibility that states may be compelled to entertain suits against themselves in their own courts. A separate line of cases, however, implies that state courts enjoy an immunity from suit in their own courts and that nothing in the Constitution withdraws such immunity; on this view, the Eleventh Amendment, by protecting the states from suit in the federal courts, effectively immunizes the states …