Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Human Rights Hero: The Supreme Court In Griswold V. Connecticut, Stephen Wermiel
Human Rights Hero: The Supreme Court In Griswold V. Connecticut, Stephen Wermiel
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
Patent Dialogue, Jonas Anderson
Patent Dialogue, Jonas Anderson
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
This Article examines the unique dialogic relationship that exists between the Supreme Court and Congress concerning patent law. In most areas of the law, Congress and the Supreme Court engage directly with each other to craft legal rules. When it comes to patent law, however, Congress and the Court often interact via an intermediary institution: the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In patent law, dialogue often begins when Congress or the Supreme Court acts as a dialogic catalyst, signaling reform priorities to which the Federal Circuit often responds.
Appreciating the unique nature of patent dialogue has important …
Magna Carta In Supreme Court Jurisprudence, Stephen Wermiel
Magna Carta In Supreme Court Jurisprudence, Stephen Wermiel
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
Editor's Note: This article is adapted from "Magna Carta in Supreme Court Jurisprudence," which appears as Chapter 5 in Magna Carta and the Rule of Law, Daniel Magraw et al., eds., published by the American Bar Association in 2014.
Congress As A Catalyst Of Patent Reform At The Federal Circuit, Jonas Anderson
Congress As A Catalyst Of Patent Reform At The Federal Circuit, Jonas Anderson
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is the dominant institution in patent law. The court’s control over patent law and policy has led to a host of academic proposals to shift power away from the court and towards other institutions, including the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and federal district courts. Surprisingly, however, academics have largely dismissed Congress as a potential institutional check on the Federal Circuit. Congress, it is felt, is too slow, too divided, and too beholden to special interests to effectively monitor changes in innovation and respond with appropriate reforms. …
“Bring[Ing] Our Enemies To Justice”: Terrorism And The Court, Anna Elazan
“Bring[Ing] Our Enemies To Justice”: Terrorism And The Court, Anna Elazan
Legislation and Policy Brief
This article focuses on the venue of Mohammad’s trial and is broken into three sections. The first section reviews the historical use of military tribunals. This section begins by looking at the basis for Presidential authority to authorize the use of military commissions. This section then outlines the first use of military commissions since World War II. President George W. Bush’s authorization parallels the provisions in President Franklin Roosevelt’s authorization of the use of commissions in the 1940s. However, following authorization, the military commissions were subject to judicial challenges and significant revision by Congress. Finally, this section tracks recent developments …
Inter-American System, Claudia Martin
Inter-American System, Claudia Martin
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
Justice Stephen Breyer: Purveyor Of Common Sense In Many Forums, Jeffrey Lubbers
Justice Stephen Breyer: Purveyor Of Common Sense In Many Forums, Jeffrey Lubbers
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
Attempting The Impossible: The Emerging Consensus, Ira Robbins
Attempting The Impossible: The Emerging Consensus, Ira Robbins
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
Impossible attempts are situations in which an actor fails to consummate a substantive crime because he is mistaken about attendant circumstances. Professor Robbins divides mistakes regarding circumstances into three categories: mistakes of fact, mistakes of law, and mistakes of mixed fact and law. Courts and commentators disagree primarily over the identification and treatment of mixed fact law cases. Professor Robbins surveys each category of mistake. He then examines the objective, subjective, and hybrid approaches to dealing with the mixed fact/law category. The objective approach requires an objective manifestation of the actor's intent before conviction is allowed. The subjective approach permits …