Law Commons^™

Should Federalism Shield Corruption?—Mail Fraud, State Law And Post-Lopez Analysis, George D. Brown

George D. Brown

In this Article, Professor Brown examines the issues that federal prosecutions of state and local officials pose. The analysis focuses on prosecutions under the mail fraud statute and considers the general debate over the proper scope of federal criminal law. Professor Brodin addresses the question of whether a re-examination of mail fraud would focus on constitutional or statutory issues and by utilizing the Supreme Court case United States v. Lopez examines the question of internal limits on the mail fraud statute.

The Ideologies Of Forum Shopping - Why Doesn't A Conservative Court Protect Defendants?, George D. Brown

George D. Brown

In this Article, Professor George Brown identifies a seeming inconsistency in the Supreme Court’s treatment of federal-state private law forum shopping and state-state private law forum shopping. Professor Brown notes that the Court has been explicit in its condemnation of federal-state forum shopping, but apparently accepts, and even encourages, state-state private law forum shopping. This is strange behavior from a conservative Court, since forum shopping threatens traditional conservative values such as the desire to curtail the proliferation of lawsuits and a general pro-defendant stance. Furthermore, Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins clearly rejected forum shopping. Professor Brown reconciles these seemingly contrary …

Immigrant Laws, Obstacle Preemption And The Lost Legacy Of Mcculloch, Lauren Gilbert

Lauren Gilbert

Using Congress’ perceived failure to enforce the immigration laws as a backdrop, this paper will explore how the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Chamber of Commerce v.Whiting upholding the Legal Arizona Workers Act exposes some of the tensions and contradictions in modern preemption doctrine. Examining the relationship among express, field, impossibility and obstacle preemption, I explore three emerging trends, all evident in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting. The first is an increasing reluctance of the Court to find implied obstacle preemption. The second related trend is an inclination to expand the scope of impossibility preemption beyond the physical impossibility cases. …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

Delegating Supremacy?, David S. Rubenstein

David S Rubenstein

The Court has held that federal agencies may preempt state law in much the same way as Congress. While the Supremacy Clause clearly empowers Congress to displace state law, administrative preemption rests on the undertheorized assumption that Congress may “delegate supremacy” to agencies. This Article challenges the constitutionality of that premise and imagines an unfolding system where agencies are stripped of the power to create supreme federal law. My proposal will no doubt be controversial because of the significant implications it holds for federalism and the operation of modern government. Some of the more serious implications include the substantive displacement …

The Myth Of Church-State Separation, David E. Steinberg

David E. Steinberg

The Myth Of Church-State Separation

by David E. Steinberg

Abstract

This article asserts that the church-state separation interpretation of Establishment Clause history is simply wrong. When they enacted the First Amendment, the framers were focused on the first five words of the amendment, which read: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . .” The Establishment Clause guaranteed that the federal government would not interfere in state regulation of religion – whatever form that state regulation took. Rather than enacting the Establishment Clause to mandate a separation of church …

Conditional Spending, Coercion, And Commandeering: The Affordable Care Act And The Federal Regulation Of State Taxation, Bradley W. Joondeph

Bradley W. Joondeph

In their constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act (or ACA), the twenty-six states party to Florida v. HHS contend that the ACA’s amendments to Medicaid amount to an impermissible “commandeering” of the states. Specifically, they argue that, though the ACA’s Medicaid provisions are not mandatory in form, they are “in fact”; the sheer volume of the federal funding at stake leaves them with no practical capacity to withdraw from Medicaid. The states’ claim thus poses a very basic question of constitutional law, which the Supreme Court has yet to squarely answer: can conditions imposed on state governments pursuant to …

Supreme Court Section 1983 Developments: October 1998 Term, Martin A. Schwartz

Martin A. Schwartz

No abstract provided.

The Economics Of Horizontal Government Cooperation (Working Paper), Matthew R. Dalsanto Ph.D.

Matthew R. DalSanto, Ph.D.

This paper analyzes the ability of intrastate and interstate cooperative agreements to either minimize or capitalize on interjurisdictional externalities. These agreements are commonly referred to as compacts or joint powers agreements (intrastate compacts). The compact mechanism allows regional governments to enter into contractual agreements with one another to coordinate policy choices and to engage in cooperative endeavors. Given the inter-jurisdictional nature of the issues that affect horizontally situated governments, this mechanism is a powerful tool to achieve welfare-enhancing outcomes for citizens.

A review of the legal case law surrounding compacts is conducted to analyze the legal properties from an economic …

The Bp Oil Spill: Marine Pollution, Admiralty Law And State Police Power Under The Oil Pollution Act Of 1990o, John J. Costonis

John J. Costonis

ABSTRACT

Choice of law issues in marine pollution events engage federal admiralty/general maritime law, federal environmental legislation and the reserved powers of the states to protect their natural resources and economic welfare. Admiralty and general maritime law enjoyed center stage throughout the first two thirds of the last century. Federal marine pollution statutes were few and weak, and state initiatives were typically deemed preempted in all but the so-called “marine but local” cases. The equilibrium began to shift in favor of state police powers and federal environmental values in the mid-1960’s in consequence of the Supreme Court’s solicitude for the …

Federal Governmental Power: Preemption From The October 2008 Term (Twenty-First Annual Supreme Court Review & Selected Excerpts: Practicing Law Institutes Twenty-Sixth Annual Section 1983 Civil Rights Litigation Program), Eileen Kaufman

Eileen Kaufman

No abstract provided.

Jurisdiction, Abstention, And Finality: Articulating A Unique Role For The Rooker-Feldman Doctrine, Dustin Buehler

Dustin Buehler

Federal courts frequently confuse the Rooker-Feldman doctrine with Younger abstention and preclusion law, often using these doctrines interchangeably to dismiss actions that would interfere with state court proceedings. For years, scholars argued that the Supreme Court should alleviate this confusion by abolishing the Rooker-Feldman doctrine altogether. The Court recently refused to so, however. In Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp. and Lance v. Dennis, the Court reaffirmed Rooker-Feldman’s vitality, and held that the doctrine plays a unique role, completely separate from abstention and preclusion rules. And yet these decisions leave a key question unanswered: exactly how does Rooker-Feldman …

Dormancy, Garrick Pursley

Garrick B. Pursley

This article provides a new theoretical account of dormancy, one of the oldest and most controversial concepts in American constitutionalism. Despite familiar and repeated scholarly claims that the dormant commerce clause, dormant admiralty clause, and dormant foreign affairs doctrines are unjustifiable, dormancy has been with us since the beginning and exists in several doctrinal instantiations today. Criticism of these dormancy doctrines—now nearly canonical—has proceeded, surprisingly, without a complete picture of its target. Conventional views tend to assume that each different dormancy doctrine has a distinct constitutional basis and that these doctrines are solely concerned with guaranteeing the unencumbered exercise of …

Dormancy, Garrick B. Pursley

Garrick B. Pursley

This article provides a new theoretical account of dormancy, one of the oldest and most controversial concepts in American constitutionalism. Despite familiar and repeated scholarly claims that the dormant commerce clause, dormant admiralty clause, and dormant foreign affairs doctrines are unjustifiable, dormancy has been with us since the beginning and exists in several doctrinal instantiations today. Criticism of these dormancy doctrines—now nearly canonical—has proceeded, surprisingly, without a complete picture of its target. Conventional views tend to assume that each different dormancy doctrine has a distinct constitutional basis and that these doctrines are solely concerned with guaranteeing the unencumbered exercise of …

Dormancy, Garrick B. Pursley

Garrick B. Pursley

This article provides a new theoretical account of dormancy, one of the oldest and most controversial concepts in American constitutionalism. Despite familiar and repeated scholarly claims that the dormant commerce clause, dormant admiralty clause, and dormant foreign affairs doctrines are unjustifiable, dormancy has been with us since the beginning and exists in several doctrinal instantiations today. Criticism of these dormancy doctrines—now nearly canonical—has proceeded, surprisingly, without a complete picture of its target. Conventional views tend to assume that each different dormancy doctrine has a distinct constitutional basis and that these doctrines are solely concerned with guaranteeing the unencumbered exercise of …

Dormancy, Garrick B. Pursley

Garrick B. Pursley

This article provides a new theoretical account of dormancy, one of the oldest and most controversial concepts in American constitutionalism. Despite familiar and repeated scholarly claims that the dormant commerce clause, dormant admiralty clause, and dormant foreign affairs doctrines are unjustifiable, dormancy has been with us since the beginning and exists in several doctrinal instantiations today. Criticism of these dormancy doctrines—now nearly canonical—has proceeded, surprisingly, without a complete picture of its target. Conventional views tend to assume that each different dormancy doctrine has a distinct constitutional basis and that these doctrines are solely concerned with guaranteeing the unencumbered exercise of …

Immigration Policy Through The Lens Of Optimal Federalism, Dale B. Thompson

Dale Thompson

The controversial immigration bill S.B. 1070 enacted by the Arizona legislature utilizes local police to enforce Arizona's interpretations of immigration rules. Meanwhile, the "Utah Compact" suggests that all aspects of immigration policy should be handled by the federal government, not by states or localities. In the midst of this contentious debate, this article uses an "optimal federalism" framework to examine the appropriate locus for immigration policy. It compares economies and diseconomies of scale across enactment, implementation, and enforcement institutions, in order to determine the appropriate level of government for addressing these institutional aspects of immigration policy. It concludes that due …

Multidimensional Governance And The Bp Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, Hari Osofsky

Hari Osofsky

This Article explores the governance challenges posed by the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and proposes strategies for developing more inclusive, responsive institutions to help meet them. It begins by analyzing the incident through five core dimensions—vertical, horizontal, direction of hierarchy, cooperativeness, and public-private—to demonstrate the multi-level, multi-actor interactions taking place in offshore drilling and oil spill regulation. It then explains the ways in which the complex interactions in these dimensions translate into four core governance challenges: scientific and legal uncertainty, simultaneous overlap and fragmentation, the difficulties of balancing efficiency and inclusion, and inequality and resulting injustice. The Article next …

Immigration Policy Through The Lens Of Optimal Federalism, Dale B. Thompson

Dale Thompson

No abstract provided.

Immigration Policy Through The Lens Of Optimal Federalism, Dale B. Thompson

Dale Thompson

The controversial immigration bill S.B. 1070 enacted by the Arizona legislature utilizes local police to enforce Arizona's interpretations of immigration rules. Meanwhile, the "Utah Compact" suggests that all aspects of immigration policy should be handled by the federal government, not by states or localities. In the midst of this contentious debate, this article uses an "optimal federalism" framework to examine the appropriate locus for immigration policy. It compares economies and diseconomies of scale across enactment, implementation, and enforcement institutions, in order to determine the appropriate level of government for addressing these institutional aspects of immigration policy. It concludes that due …

Immigration Policy Through The Lens Of Optimal Federalism, Dale B. Thompson

Dale Thompson

The controversial immigration bill S.B. 1070 enacted by the Arizona legislature utilizes local police to enforce Arizona's interpretations of immigration rules. Meanwhile, the "Utah Compact" suggests that all aspects of immigration policy should be handled by the federal government, not by states or localities. In the midst of this contentious debate, this article uses an "optimal federalism" framework to examine the appropriate locus for immigration policy. It compares economies and diseconomies of scale across enactment, implementation, and enforcement institutions, in order to determine the appropriate level of government for addressing these institutional aspects of immigration policy. It concludes that due …

Immigration Policy Through The Lens Of Optimal Federalism, Dale B. Thompson

Dale Thompson

The controversial immigration bill S.B. 1070 enacted by the Arizona legislature utilizes local police to enforce Arizona's interpretations of immigration rules. Meanwhile, the "Utah Compact" suggests that all aspects of immigration policy should be handled by the federal government, not by states or localities. In the midst of this contentious debate, this article uses an "optimal federalism" framework to examine the appropriate locus for immigration policy. It compares economies and diseconomies of scale across enactment, implementation, and enforcement institutions, in order to determine the appropriate level of government for addressing these institutional aspects of immigration policy. It concludes that due …