Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 13 of 13

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Constitutionality Of Vicarious Discrimination Claims Under Title Vii, Daniel W. Morton-Bentley Sep 2012

The Constitutionality Of Vicarious Discrimination Claims Under Title Vii, Daniel W. Morton-Bentley

Daniel W Morton-Bentley

Should the law allow a plaintiff to bring a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964 for racial or gender discrimination that he or she observed? This issue – which I refer to as vicarious standing – is an unresolved question in federal courts. Title VII provides that a person who “has been discriminated against based on his or her race [or] gender” may bring a lawsuit. Although this language suggests that one must be a victim of personal discrimination, many courts have allowed white and/or male litigants to sue based on alleged discrimination that was …


Freedom From Fear: International Law As A Constructive Force For Supporting American Foreign Policy, Winston Nagan Aug 2012

Freedom From Fear: International Law As A Constructive Force For Supporting American Foreign Policy, Winston Nagan

Winston P Nagan

This article reveiews the history of the trend in the United States Supreme Court for the strong application of international law as a part of U.S. law. It reviews the judicial practice as well as the influence of extra-judicial factors such as exceptionalism and isolationism. This article reflects on the contemporary problems which have generated a secepticism of international law and seeks to clarify the compatability of the most defensible values of U.S. foreign policy and those of the U.N. Charter.


Dubious Delegation: Article Iii Limits On Mental Health Treatment Decisions, Adam Teitelbaum Jun 2012

Dubious Delegation: Article Iii Limits On Mental Health Treatment Decisions, Adam Teitelbaum

Michigan Law Review

A common condition of supervised release requires a defendant, post-incarceration, to participate in a mental health treatment program. Federal district courts often order probation officers to make certain decisions ancillary to these programs. However Article III delegation doctrine places limits on such actions. This Note addresses the constitutionality of delegating the "treatment program" decision, in which a probation officer decides which type of treatment the defendant must undergo; the choice is often between inpatient treatment and other less restrictive alternatives. The resolution of this issue ultimately depends on whether this decision constitutes a "judicial act." Finding support in lower court …


Standing Lessons: What We Can Learn When Conservative Plaintiffs Lose Under Article Iii Standing Doctrine, Heather Elliott Apr 2012

Standing Lessons: What We Can Learn When Conservative Plaintiffs Lose Under Article Iii Standing Doctrine, Heather Elliott

Indiana Law Journal

The Supreme Court’s Article III standing doctrine has plagued liberal groups for nearly forty years. Recently, however, the doctrine has blocked a number of conservative lawsuits opposing gay marriage, the 2010 health care law, and the expansion of federal funding for stem cell research.

What can we learn from these cases? Because contemporary criticisms of standing doctrine have usually come from the left and defenses from the right, it is commonplace to associate arguments for broad standing with left-wing political agendas.

But, as some scholars have shown, a version of narrow standing helped liberals protect New Deal legislation in the …


The Extension Clause And The Supreme Court's Jurisdictional Independence, Alex Glashausser Mar 2012

The Extension Clause And The Supreme Court's Jurisdictional Independence, Alex Glashausser

Alex Glashausser

This Article challenges the prevailing doctrinal, political, and academic view that the Extension Clause—which provides that “[t]he judicial Power shall extend” to nine types of cases and controversies—justifies legislative attempts to strip the Supreme Court of appellate jurisdiction. Legislators have repeatedly introduced bills seeking to prevent the Court from hearing cases on politically charged topics such as marriage, religion, and abortion. Scholars have relied on the Extension Clause to advance three arguments in support of such jurisdiction-stripping: (1) that “judicial Power” is not jurisdiction, and thus jurisdiction is not constitutionally protected; (2) that “shall” is not mandatory, and thus the …


Congress Giveth, And The Courts Taketh Away: Is Restitutionary Recoupment Of Federal Funds A Proper Remedy When Taxpayers Allege That An Expired Statute Violated The Establishment Clause?, Kendra Williams Mar 2012

Congress Giveth, And The Courts Taketh Away: Is Restitutionary Recoupment Of Federal Funds A Proper Remedy When Taxpayers Allege That An Expired Statute Violated The Establishment Clause?, Kendra Williams

Pepperdine Law Review

The Seventh Circuit recently held in Laskowski v. Spellings that grantees of government funding can be forced by taxpayers to give grant money back to the federal government when the grant has allegedly violated the Establishment Clause - even when the grant statute expired years ago, the funds have long since been spent, and the government does not want the money back. Laskowski's new remedy has the potential for widely impacting Establishment Clause jurisprudence, especially in the areas of government funding for sectarian schools and other religiously-affiliated groups. The ready availability of a recoupment remedy could also have far-reaching and …


Judge Posner’S 'Practical' Theory Of Standing: Closer To Justice Breyer’S Approach To Standing Than Justice Scalia’S, Bradford Mank Jan 2012

Judge Posner’S 'Practical' Theory Of Standing: Closer To Justice Breyer’S Approach To Standing Than Justice Scalia’S, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In American Bottom Conservancy v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Judge Richard Posner of the Seventh Circuit questioned three different grounds articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court for the constitutional doctrine of standing in federal courts and instead argued that the “solidest grounds” for the doctrine of standing are “practical.” In part because of his self-described “pragmatic” approach to legal reasoning, Judge Posner’s maverick views may have led Republican presidents to pass him over for being nominated to the Supreme Court in favor of less brilliant but more predictable conservative judges. Judge Posner’s pragmatic or practical approach to standing …


Article Iii Judicial Power And The Federal Arbitration Act, Roger J. Perlstadt Jan 2012

Article Iii Judicial Power And The Federal Arbitration Act, Roger J. Perlstadt

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.


Kiobel, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, And The Alien Tort Statute, Bradford R. Clark Jan 2012

Kiobel, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, And The Alien Tort Statute, Bradford R. Clark

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

The Supreme Court is currently reviewing the Second Circuit’s decision in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, a case holding that federal courts lack jurisdiction under the Alien Tort Statute (“ATS”) over claims against corporations. Although the parties have focused on issues of corporate liability under the ATS, there is a logically antecedent question of subject matter jurisdiction that the Court should decide before considering corporate liability. All of the parties in Kiobel — whether corporate or individual — are aliens. Understood in its full legal and historical context, the ATS was a jurisdictional statute that did not apply to suits …


The Law Of Nations As Constitutional Law, Anthony J. Bellia, Bradford R. Clark Jan 2012

The Law Of Nations As Constitutional Law, Anthony J. Bellia, Bradford R. Clark

Journal Articles

Courts and scholars continue to debate the status of customary international law in U.S. courts, but have paid insufficient attention to the role that such law plays in interpreting and upholding several specific provisions of the Constitution. The modern position argues that courts should treat customary international law as federal common law. The revisionist position contends that customary international law applies only to the extent that positive federal or state law has adopted it. Neither approach adequately takes account of the Constitution’s allocation of powers to the federal political branches in Articles I and II or the effect of these …


The Law Of Nations As Constitutional Law, Bradford R. Clark, Anthony J. Bellia Jr. Jan 2012

The Law Of Nations As Constitutional Law, Bradford R. Clark, Anthony J. Bellia Jr.

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

Courts and scholars continue to debate the status of customary international law in U.S. courts, but have paid insufficient attention to the role that such law plays in interpreting and upholding several specific provisions of the Constitution. The modern position argues that courts should treat customary international law as federal common law. The revisionist position contends that customary international law applies only to the extent that positive federal or state law has adopted it. Neither approach adequately takes account of the Constitution’s allocation of powers to the federal political branches in Articles I and II or the effect of these …


Alien Tort Claims And The Status Of Customary International Law, Carlos Manuel Vázquez Jan 2012

Alien Tort Claims And The Status Of Customary International Law, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Much of the recent debate about the status of customary international law in the U.S. legal system has revolved around the alien tort provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789, currently section 1350 of Title 28. In Filártiga v. Peńa-Irala, the decision that launched modern human rights litigation in the United States, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit relied on the view that customary international law has the status of federal common law in upholding section 1350’s grant of federal jurisdiction over a suit between aliens. The court’s position that customary international law was federal law was …


Advisory Adjudication, Girardeau A. Spann Jan 2012

Advisory Adjudication, Girardeau A. Spann

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court decision in Camreta v. Greene is revealing. The Court first issues an opinion authorizing appeals by prevailing parties in qualified immunity cases, even though doing so entails the issuance of an advisory opinion that is not necessary to resolution of the dispute between the parties. And the Court then declines to reach the merits of the underlying constitutional claim in the case, because doing so would entail the issuance of an advisory opinion that was not necessary to the resolution of the dispute between the parties. The Court's decision, therefore, has the paradoxical effect of both honoring …