Law Commons^™

Deterrence And Implied Limits On Arbitral Power, Michael A. Scodro

Duke Law Journal

Employment, brokerage, and other contracts routinely include "predispute" arbitration clauses-provisions requiring the parties to submit any and all future disputes to arbitrators rather than courts. In recent years, courts have come to enforce these clauses in the vast run of cases, requiring parties to arbitrate even when the underlying dispute implicates employment discrimination, antitrust, or other "public law" rights. In response to this trend, interest has grown in the extent of courts' authority to overturn arbitral awards that do not give effect to such rights. At first blush, the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not appear to authorize any such …

Az Alkotmánybíróság És A Közgazdasági Érvelés [Constitutional Courts And Economic Reasoning], Peter Cserne

Péter Cserne

No abstract provided.

Politics And Judgment, Suzanna Sherry

Missouri Law Review

Two hundred years after its most famous invocation in Marbury v. Madison, judicial review has apparently lost its luster. Despite its global spread, it is in disrepute in its country of origin. The mainstream American academic attitude toward judicial review as practiced by the modem Supreme Court ranges from open hostility to a position similar to Winston Churchill's on democracy: It is the worst way to implement a Constitution, except for all the rest. In this essay, I want to explain the source of the hostility, defend judicial review against its critics, and make a few suggestions for improvement.

Examination Of The Constitutional Amendment On Marriage: Hearing Before The Subcomm. On The Constitution, Civil Rights, And Property Rights Of The S. Comm. On The Judiciary, 109th Cong., Oct. 20, 2005 (Statement Of Professor Louis Michael Seidman, Geo. U. L. Center), Louis Michael Seidman

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

How "Mead" Has Muddled Judicial Review Of Agency Action, Lisa S. Bressman

Vanderbilt Law Review

When the Supreme Court decided United States v. Mead Corp. four years ago, Justice Scalia predicted that judicial review of agency action would devolve into chaos. This Article puts that prediction to the test by examining the court of appeals decisions applying the decision. Justice Scalia actually understated the effect of Mead. This Article suggests a remedy for the mess.

In Mead, the Court held that an agency is entitled to deference under Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC only if Congress has delegated to that agency the authority to issue interpretations that carry the force of law, and the agency …

Allocating The Burden Of Proof In Administrative And Judicial Proceedings Under The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, Thomas A. Mayes, Perry A. Zirkel, Dixie Snow Huefner

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Facing A Hobson's Choice? The Constitutionality Of The Epa's Administrative Compliance Order Enforcement Scheme Under The Clean Air Act, Christopher M. Wynn

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Theory In Search Of A Court, And Itself: Judicial Minimalism At The Supreme Court Bar, Neil S. Siegel

Michigan Law Review

According to the prevailing wisdom in academic public law, constitutional theory is a field that seeks to articulate and evaluate abstract accounts of the nature of the United States Constitution. Theorists offer those accounts as guides to subsequent judicial construction of constitutional provisions. As typically conceived, therefore, constitutional theory tends to proceed analytically from the general to the particular; its animating idea is that correct decisions in constitutional cases presuppose theoretical commitments to the methodological principles that should guide constitutional interpretation and the substantive values such interpretation should advance. In its enthusiasm for abstraction, constitutional theory has, at times, generated …

Domesticating The Gerrymander: An Essay On Standards, Fair Representation, And The Necessary Question Of Judicial Will, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Getting A Second Chance: The Need For Tax Court Jurisdiction Over Irs Denials Of Relief Under Section 66, Adrianne Hodgkins

Louisiana Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judging The Law Of Politics, Guy-Uriel Charles

Michigan Law Review

Election law scholars are currently engaged in a vigorous debate regarding the wisdom of judicial supervision of democratic politics. Ever since the Court's 1962 decision in Baker v. Carr, the Court has increasingly supervised a dizzying array of election-related matters. These include the regulation of political parties, access to electoral ballots, partisanship in electoral institutions, the role of race in the design of electoral structures, campaign financing, and the justifications for limiting the franchise. In particular, and as a consequence of the Court's involvement in the 2000 presidential elections in Bush v. Gore, a central task of election …

Against Interpretive Supremacy, Saikrishna Prakash, John Yoo

Michigan Law Review

Many constitutional scholars are obsessed with judicial review and the many questions surrounding it. One perennial favorite is whether the Constitution even authorizes judicial review. Another is whether the other branches of the federal government must obey the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution and what, if anything, the other branches must do to execute the judiciary's judgments. Marbury v. Madison has been a full-employment program for many constitutional law scholars, including ourselves. Larry Kramer, the new Dean of Stanford Law School, shares this passion. He has devoted roughly the last decade of his career, with two lengthy law review …

The Coherentism Of Democracy And Distrust, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

A "Blank Check": Judicial Review And The War Powers In Hamdi V. Rumsfeld, Nicholas G. Green

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Political Question Doctrine: Suggested Criteria, Jesse H. Choper

Duke Law Journal

Whether there should be a political question doctrine and, if so, how it should be implemented continue to be contentious and controversial issues, both within and outside the Court. This Article urges that the Justices should reformulate the detailed definition that they have utilized (at least formally) since 1962, and adopt four criteria to be applied in future cases. The least disputed-textual commitment-is the initial factor listed in Baker v. Carr. The other three are based on functional considerations rather than constitutional language or original understanding. The first of these-structural issues: federalism and separation of powers-has been advanced and developed …

Korematsu: A Mélange Of Military Imperatives, Eugene Gressman

Law and Contemporary Problems

No abstract provided.

Judicial Review Without Judicial Supremacy: Taking The Constitution Seriously Outside The Courts, James E. Fleming

Faculty Scholarship

Larry Sager and Larry Kramer have written important books that, in quite different ways, call for taking the Constitution seriously outside the courts. Sager's Justice in Plainclothes' and Kramer's The People Themselves2 nonetheless join issue in significant ways, and therefore it is illuminating to analyze them as a pair.

To get a handle on the differences between the two Larrys' books, I have concocted the following fanciful hypothetical. Imagine a law school with a faculty that includes Ronald Dworkin: court-centered constitutional theorist extraordinaire and proponent of a liberal moral reading of the American Constitution.3 Further imagine that the faculty includes …

The Unfulfilled Promise Of The Constitution In Executive Hands, Cornelia T.L. Pillard

Michigan Law Review

Many leading constitutional scholars now argue for greater reliance on the political branches to supplement or even supplant judicial enforcement of the Constitution. Responding to our national preoccupation with the judiciary as the mechanism of constitutional enforcement, these scholars stress that the executive and legislature, too, bear responsibility to think about the Constitution for themselves and to take steps to fulfill the Constitution's promise. Joining a debate that goes back at least as far as Marbury v. Madison, current scholars seek to reawaken the political branches to their constitutional potential, and urge the Supreme Court to leave the other …

Reply Brief For Petitioner, Hamdan V. Rumsfeld, No. 04-702 (U.S. Jan. 03, 2005), Neal K. Katyal

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Deferential Review Of Tax Court Decisions Of Law: Promoting Expertise, Uniformity, And Impartiality, Andre L. Smith

Andre L. Smith

This Article continues the debate over whether the federal circuit courts of appeal should deferentially review U.S. Tax Court decisions of law. Some fault this country's tax adjudication system for its nonuniformity. Others criticize it for promoting or allowing bias in favor of the government. Least mentioned is the system's failure to utilize tax experts. All three of these concerns relate to the legitimacy of the tax adjudication system. This article seeks to prove that deferentially reviewing Tax Court decisions of law better addresses these concerns than either the present system, or an oft-proposed national court of tax appeals.

The Majoritarian Difficulty: Affirmative Action, Sodomy, And Supreme Court Politics, Darren L. Hutchinson

Faculty Articles

This Article challenges liberal and conservative assessments of Lawrence, Gratz, and Grutter. Although the outcome of these cases might indeed prove helpful to the agendas of social movements for racial and sexual justice, progressive scholars and activists should not receive these cases with elation. Instead, the research of constitutional theorists, critical legal scholars, and political scientists allows for a more contextualized and guarded account of and reaction to these decisions. Instead of representing extraordinary victories for oppressed classes, these cases reflect majoritarian and moderate views concerning civil rights, and the opinions contain many doctrinal elements that reinforce, …

Dissecting In Re D-J-: The Attorney General, Unchecked Power, And The New National Security Threat Posed By Haitian Asylum Seekers, Judy Amorosa

Cornell International Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Statutory President, Kevin M. Stack

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

American public law has no answer to the question of how a court should evaluate the president's assertion of statutory authority. In this Article, I develop an answer by making two arguments. First, the same framework of judicial review should apply to claims of statutory authority made by the president and federal administrative agencies. This argument rejects the position that the president's constitutional powers should shape the question of statutory interpretation presented when the president claims that a statute authorizes his actions. Once statutory review is separated from consideration of the president's constitutional powers, the courts should insist, as they …

Political Bargaining And Judicial Intervention In Constitutional And Antitrust Federalism, Jim Rossi

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Federal judicial deference to state and local regulation is at the center of contentious debates regarding the implementation of competition policy. This Article invokes a political process bargaining framework to develop a principled approach for addressing the appropriate level of judicial intervention under the dormant commerce clause and state action immunity from antitrust enforcement. Using illustrations from network industries, it is argued that, at core, these two independent doctrines share a common concern with political (not only market) failure by focusing on the incentives faced by powerful stakeholders in state and local lawmaking. More important, they share the common purpose …

Difference And Deference In Treaty Interpetation, Alex Glashausser

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reconsidering The Law Of Democracy: Of Political Questions, Prudence, And The Judicial Role, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In Vieth v. Jubelirer, the U.S. Supreme Court seemed poised to offer the Court's definitive position on political gerrymandering questions. Yet the Court splintered along familiar lines and failed to offer a definitive answer. This Article focuses on the plurality opinion, and particularly its conclusion that judicially manageable standards are wanting in this area. This conclusion is implausible and masks the real question at the heart of the case. The Vieth plurality is best understood by examining the Court's political and prudential concerns, as cabined by the political question doctrine. One understanding is simply that the plurality is making a …

Moving Public Law Out Of The Deference Trap In Regulated Industries, Jim Rossi

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This Article argues that public law has fallen into what I call a deference trap in addressing conflicts in deregulated industries, such as telecommunications and electric power. The deference trap describes a judicial reluctance to intervene in disputes involving political institutions, such as regulatory agencies and states. By reassessing the deference trap across the legal doctrines that are effecting emerging telecommunications and electric power markets, public law can deliver much more for deregulated markets. The deference trap poses a particular cost as markets are deregulated, one that may not have been present during previous regulatory eras in which public and …

Images Of Representation, Elizabeth Magill

All Faculty Scholarship

This paper is one of a series of papers commemorating Richard Stewart’s important article, The Reformation of American Administrative Law. Among other things, Stewart’s 1975 article identified “interest representation” as the central idea that animated a series of important and disparate developments in administrative law doctrine.

This paper unpacks the idea of interest representation and identifies tension in that idea. It does so by asking a simple question: What is the function of representing interests in administrative process? The paper argues that, in Stewart’s work and in the law more generally, there are two distinct answers to that question. One …

How Can It Be Wrong When It Feels So Right - Appellate Review Of Remand Orders Under The Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act, Thomas F. Lamprecht

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Domesticating The Gerrymander: An Essay On Standards, Fair Representation, And The Necessary Question Of Judicial Will, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The U.S. Supreme Court has moved beyond its cautious intervention in Baker v. Carr and now firmly controls the law of democracy. Yet political gerrymandering questions so understood have traditionally proven difficult for the Court to examine properly. The recent Vieth v. Jubelirer is but a further example of this phenomenon. This Essay situates Vieth within the reapportionment revolution and ultimately concludes that the central question in gerrymandering cases is the question of judicial will and whether the Court will choose to exercise its power. This Essay closes with a cautionary note: in light of the Court's general performance in …