Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (9)
- Constitutional Law (3)
- Administrative Law (2)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (2)
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law (2)
-
- Judges (2)
- Labor and Employment Law (2)
- Law and Race (2)
- Agriculture Law (1)
- Animal Law (1)
- Arts and Humanities (1)
- Courts (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Cultural Heritage Law (1)
- Energy and Utilities Law (1)
- Ethics and Political Philosophy (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Human Rights Law (1)
- Immigration Law (1)
- International Law (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Land Use Law (1)
- Law and Gender (1)
- Law and Philosophy (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal Studies (1)
- Legal Theory (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Natural Resources Law (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Brief Of Professor Tobias B. Wolff As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Respondents In U.S. Supreme Court Case 303 Creative Llc V. Elenis, Tobias Barrington Wolff
Brief Of Professor Tobias B. Wolff As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Respondents In U.S. Supreme Court Case 303 Creative Llc V. Elenis, Tobias Barrington Wolff
All Faculty Scholarship
This amicus brief, filed in support of the Colorado anti-discrimination law in 303 Creative v. Elenis, is the product of about ten years of work on these First Amendment issues as a scholar and advocate. Its arguments rest on a core proposition: When a business sells goods and services in the public marketplace, it is not a street corner speaker engaging in a personal act of expression, it is a vendor engaged in commerce. Customers do not pay for the privilege of promoting a commercial vendor’s own personal message, they pay for goods and services chosen by them and …
Original(Ism) Sin, G. Alex Sinha
Original(Ism) Sin, G. Alex Sinha
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
During President Trump’s term in office, the Senate confirmed nearly 250 of his federal judicial nominees, including 3 to the Supreme Court of the United States. That number amounts to nearly a third of the federal judiciary’s roughly 800 active members. By and large, the judges nominated by President Trump purport to apply some form of originalist constitutional interpretation or construction, though the subject of originalism featured perhaps most prominently at the confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett, whom President Trump nominated in October of 2020 to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Whatever one thinks of the vast literature …
Is A Locomotive In Use And Therefore Subject To Locomotive Inspection Act Liability When It Makes A Temporary Stop?, Anne Marie Lofaso
Is A Locomotive In Use And Therefore Subject To Locomotive Inspection Act Liability When It Makes A Temporary Stop?, Anne Marie Lofaso
Law Faculty Scholarship
Case at a Glance: LeDure v. Union Pacific Railroad Company. Bradley LeDure, a long-time locomotive engineer for Union Pacific, slipped on the slick surface of a locomotive while it was idle but powered on, seriously injuring himself. If Union Pacific violated safety regulations under the Locomotive Inspection Act, then it would be negligent per se. But that theory of liability is only available if the locomotive was in use at the time of the accident. The case presents a question of statutory interpretation of the term use.
Preview — Denezpi V. United States (2022). Double Jeopardy In Indian Country, Paul A. Hutton Iii
Preview — Denezpi V. United States (2022). Double Jeopardy In Indian Country, Paul A. Hutton Iii
Public Land & Resources Law Review
On February 22, the Supreme Court of the United States will decide the single issue of whether a Court of Indian Offenses constitutes a federal entity and, therefore, separate prosecutions in federal district court and a Court of Indian Offenses for the same act violates the Double Jeopardy Clause as prosecutions for the same offense.
The Supreme Court Needs Diversity In More Ways Than One, Benjamin H. Barton
The Supreme Court Needs Diversity In More Ways Than One, Benjamin H. Barton
Tennessee Law in the News
Professor Barton recently authored an op-ed, "The Supreme Court Needs Diversity in More Ways Than One," which ran in the January 30th edition of the The Wall Street Journal. The piece is based on his new book The Credentialed Court.
How Practices Make Principles, And How Principles Make Rules, Mitchell N. Berman
How Practices Make Principles, And How Principles Make Rules, Mitchell N. Berman
All Faculty Scholarship
The most fundamental question in general jurisprudence concerns what makes it the case that the law has the content that it does. This article offers a novel answer. According to the theory it christens “principled positivism,” legal practices ground legal principles, and legal principles determine legal rules. This two-level account of the determination of legal content differs from Hart’s celebrated theory in two essential respects: in relaxing Hart’s requirement that fundamental legal notions depend for their existence on judicial consensus; and in assigning weighted contributory legal norms—“principles”—an essential role in the determination of legal rights, duties, powers, and permissions. Drawing …
No [Concrete] Harm, No Foul? Article Iii Standing In The Context Of Consumer Financial Protection, Annefloor J. De Groot
No [Concrete] Harm, No Foul? Article Iii Standing In The Context Of Consumer Financial Protection, Annefloor J. De Groot
Georgia Law Review
In the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, the Court held that a bare procedural violation of a federal consumer protection statute is not enough to satisfy Article III’s standing requirement because the alleged injury is not sufficiently concrete. This decision resulted in a sizeable circuit split regarding standing under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, with some circuit courts interpreting the holding as narrowing the scope of standing for consumer protection claims, and others maintaining a broader interpretation, allowing plaintiffs to obtain redress for violations of consumer financial protections laws.
In its 2021 ruling in …
To Trust Or Not To Trust: Native American Healthcare Improvement In The Supreme Court’S Hands, Katherine Graham
To Trust Or Not To Trust: Native American Healthcare Improvement In The Supreme Court’S Hands, Katherine Graham
Georgia Law Review
The United States federal government’s relationship with Native American tribes has long been tenuous. Despite years of unjust and inhumane treatment of Native Americans by the government, Congress has attempted to rectify or limit the government’s harm to Native American people but has fallen short of upholding all agreements intended to improve United States-tribal relations. In particular, the government has not always followed treaties between the government and tribes, and the United States Supreme Court has failed to protect Native American rights in many cases. Central to this issue is the 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie, in which the United …
Evolving Standards Of Irrelevancy?, Joanmarie Davoli
Evolving Standards Of Irrelevancy?, Joanmarie Davoli
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Facts Versus Discretion: The Debate Over Immigration Adjudication, Jayanth K. Krishnan
Facts Versus Discretion: The Debate Over Immigration Adjudication, Jayanth K. Krishnan
Articles by Maurer Faculty
Justice Amy Coney Barrett recently issued her first majority-led immigration opinion in Patel v. Garland (2022). As background, some immigrants looking to avoid deportation may apply for what is called “discretionary relief’ (e.g., asylum or adjustment of status) initially in an immigration court and then, if they lose, at the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). These immigration forums fall under the Department of Justice. Prior to Patel, immigrants who lost at the BIA could then ask a federal circuit court to review the factual findings of their case. Now, after Justice Barrett’s decision, Article III review is no longer available …
Does U.S. Federal Employment Law Now Cover Caste Discrimination Based On Untouchability?: If All Else Fails There Is The Possible Application Of Bostock V. Clayton County, Kevin D. Brown, Lalit Khandare, Annapurna Waughray, Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt, Theodore M. Shaw
Does U.S. Federal Employment Law Now Cover Caste Discrimination Based On Untouchability?: If All Else Fails There Is The Possible Application Of Bostock V. Clayton County, Kevin D. Brown, Lalit Khandare, Annapurna Waughray, Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt, Theodore M. Shaw
Articles by Maurer Faculty
This article discusses the issue of whether a victim of caste discrimination based on untouchability can assert a claim of intentional employment discrimination under Title VII or Section 1981. This article contends that there are legitimate arguments that this form of discrimination is a form of religious discrimination under Title VII. The question of whether caste discrimination is a form of race or national origin discrimination under Title VII or Section 1981 depends upon how the courts apply these definitions to caste discrimination based on untouchability. There are legitimate arguments that this form of discrimination is recognized within the concept …