Law Commons^™

From "Navigable Waters" To "Constitutional Waters": The Future Of Federal Wetlands Regulation, Mark Squillace

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Wetlands regulation in the United States has a tumultuous history. The early European settlers viewed wetlands as obstacles to development, and they drained and filled wetlands and swamps at an astounding rate, often with government support, straight through the middle of the twentieth century. As evidence of the ecological significance of wetlands emerged over the last several decades, programs to protect and restore wetlands became prominent. Most notable among these is the permitting program under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. That provision prohibits dredging or filling of "navigable waters, " defined by law to mean "waters of the …

Slides: The Future Of Oil And Gas Development On Federal Lands, Mike Chiropolos

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: Mike Chiropolos, Lands Program Director, Western Resource Advocates

44 slides

Tackling The Perplexing Sound Of Statutory Silence: Why Courts Should Imply A Private Right Of Action Under Section 10(A) Of Respa, Seth M. Mott

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Legal Certainty And Legal Methods: A European Alternative To American Legal Indeterminacy?, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

Americans are resigned to a high level of legal indeterminacy. This Article shows that Europeans do not accept legal indeterminacy and instead have made legal certainty a general principle of their law. This Article uses the example of the German legal system to show how German legal methods strive to realize this general European principle. It suggests that these methods are opportunities for Americans to develop their own system to reduce legal indeterminacy and to increase legal certainty.

Running On Empty: Will Exxon Mobil Cause A Breakdown For Chevron And The Administrative State?, Meredith Abernathy

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Only A Sith Thinks Like That: Llewellyn's Dueling Canons, Eight To Twelve, Michael B.W. Sinclair

Articles & Chapters

In this, the second installment in a series of articles planned to examine each of the twenty eight pairs of "dueling canons" having opposite effect left to us in 1950 by Karl N. Llewellyn (Karl N. Llewellyn, "Remarks on the Theory of Appellate Decision and the Rules or Canons About How Statutes Are to Be Construed", 3 VANDERBILT L.REV. 395 (1950)), I examine pairs 8 through 12. I start with Pair 12, Llewellyn's formulation of the Plain Meaning Rule; it is not so much a canon of construction as a condition on construction: unless one or both of its conditions …

The Foundations Of Section 1983 Jurisprudence: A Look From The Concept Of Law, Timothy I. Oppelt

Florida A & M University Law Review

This article uses the theories of H.L.A. Hart to provide an interpretive framework for a vital civil rights statute, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Any interpretation of Sec. 1983 requires some sense of the fundamental nature of law and the ability to identify legal rules. Specifically, this article examines the "under color of" language of Sec. 1983 and the statute's application to municipalities. It is possible that these areas remain partially in flux or undeveloped because the Court lacks an interpretation of the statute that accounts for how rules can confer power, create artificial persons, delegate the ability to act with …

Judicial Deference To Administrative Agencies And Its Limits, Graham G. Martin, David A. Super

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Statutory Interpretation As A Parasitic Endeavor, Stephen F. Ross

Journal Articles

The principal theme of this essay is that statutory interpretation is a project that requires advocates and judges to utilize the insights of three discrete disciplines apart from law: communications and linguistics to understand the way that legislative drafters use words to communicate to others, either in text or in extratextual legislative material; political science to describe the way that legislators behave in enacting statutes; and political theory to provide a normative guide for courts interpreting statutes in a constitutional democracy.

Knox V. United States Department Of Labor: The Potentially Risky Business Of Interpreting Asbestos Statutes, Jessica J. Suh

Villanova Environmental Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Certifying Questions To Congress, Amanda Frost

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

As many academics and some judges have openly admitted, no technique of statutory interpretation can settle every question of statutory ambiguity. Sometimes Congress enacts legislation containing gaps or inconsistencies that cannot be resolved through the application of a canon of construction or other interpretive rule. This article proposes an alternative approach for these hard cases. When a federal court is faced with a statute that leaves important issues about its application unclear - particularly issues that implicate the statute's constitutionality - the court could stay the case and refer the question to Congress, much in the same way that courts …

Bringing Deference Back (But For How Long?), Stephen M. Johnson

Articles

For most of the past decade, the Supreme Court seemed to be gradually eroding the deference accorded to administrative agencies. In Christensen v. Harris County and United States v. Mead Corp. the Court refused to accord Chevron deference to agencies' interpretations of statutes when the agencies adopted those interpretations through informal procedures. The trend appeared to continue when the Court refused to accord Chevron deference to tobacco regulations adopted by the Food and Drug Administration in FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. or to controlled substance regulations adopted by the Attorney General in Gonzales v. Oregon. In addition, …

Judicial Interpretation In The Cost-Benefit Crucible, Jonathan R. Siegel

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This article responds to Professor Adrian Vermeule's new book, Judging Under Uncertainty. Professor Vermeule argues that (1) no one can empirically determine whether judicial use of legislative history or other interpretive methods that go beyond simple enforcement of plain text has any positive net benefits, but (2) we do know that such interpretive methods impose costs, and therefore (3) courts should discard such interpretive methods. This article suggests that (1) it is far from clear how costly these interpretive methods are, (2) it is also not clear that discarding them would result in any cost savings, both because of costs …

Opening The Floodgates: The Roberts Court's Decision In Rapanos V. United States Spells Trouble For The Future Of The Waters Of The United States, Bill Currie

Villanova Environmental Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Interpreting Bills Of Rights: The Value Of A Comparative Approach, Jack Tsen-Ta Lee

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

In certain jurisdictions, among them Malaysia, Singapore, and the United States, the practice of consulting comparative legal materials in interpreting domestic bills of rights has been criticized as illegitimate. This article examines four main concerns: (1) the texts of bills of rights -- the argument that a bill of rights is to be interpreted within its own four walls and not in the light of analogies drawn from other jurisdictions; (2) national identity -- the argument that a bill of rights embodies the values of a nation's people, and it is wrong to refer to foreign experiences to determine such …

Rag Cumberland V. Dep: An Agency's Volte-Face Statutory Interpretation - When Do Courts Stop Deferring And Start Judicial Interpretation, Dennis C. Lumia

Villanova Environmental Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Below The Surface: Comparing Legislative History Usage By The House Of Lords And The Supreme Court , James J. Brudney

Faculty Scholarship

In 1992, the Law Lords (the judicial arm of the House of Lords) overruled more than two centuries of precedent when it decided in Pepper v. Hart that courts could refer to and rely on legislative history to aid in construing enacted laws. The ensuing fourteen years have witnessed a robust debate among British judges and legal scholars as to the scope and propriety of Pepper. This article offers the first empirical and comparative analysis of how Britain's highest court has used previously excluded legislative history materials in its judicial decisions. Although the Law Lords opened the door to reliance …

Making Civil Rico Suave: Congress Must Act To Ensure Consistent Judicial Interpretations Of The Racketeer Influenced And Corrupt Organizations Act, Eric Lloyd

Santa Clara Law Review

No abstract provided.

Intentionalism's Revival , James J. Brudney

Faculty Scholarship

This essay responds to an article by Professors Boudreau, Lupia, McCubbins, and Rodriguez (hereinafter "BLMRod") that was posted in Legislation and Statutory Interpretation Abstracts on July 26, 2007, (http://ssrn.com/abstract=997924) and that will appear in the San Diego Law Review, vol.44, no.2, 2007. The essay situates BLMRod's article in the context of recent efforts by a number of scholars to reclaim foundational legitimacy for intentionalism as an approach to construing statutes. The essay first applauds BLMRod's use of insights from communication theory to conceptualize statutes as compressed substantive or procedural commands that cannot be adequately understood without an appreciation for the …

Solving The "Initiatory Construction" Puzzle (And Improving Direct Democracy) By Appropriate Refocusing On Sponsor Intent, Glenn C. Smith

University of Colorado Law Review

The U.S. Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security has consistently attempted to make the process of becoming a lawful permanent resident of the United States difficult, at best. A 1997 Department of Justice regulation made this process impossible for a certain class of immigrants known as parolees, despite the fact that the Immigration and Nationality Act explicitly allowed these parolees the opportunity to become lawful permanent residents. The Department later withdrew this regulation because of the controversy it created in the federal circuit courts of appeal. However, new proposed regulations threaten to harm the position of immigrants in …