Law Commons^™

Congress's Power To Promote The Progress Of Science: Eldred V. Ashcroft, Lawrence B. Solum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay investigates the issues raised by Eldred v. Ashcroft, in which the Supreme Court may decide whether the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) exceeds Congress's authority under that clause. The essay frames the issues in Eldred v. Ashcroft by discussing the history of copyright legislation in general and the CTEA in particular and then summarizing the procedural history of Eldred v. Ashcroft. The essay then undertakes a detailed investigation of the text of the Intellectual Property Clause, with a special emphasis on the interpretation of the clause by the first Congress and early judicial decisions. Three elements …

The Seventh Amendment Right To A Civil Jury Trial: The Supreme Court Giveth And The Supreme Court Taketh Away, Joan E. Schaffner

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This article examines the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence relating to the historic Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. I describe the three-prong analysis that the Court employs, analyze the Court’s decisions that analyze the jury trial, and conclude that the Court’s decisions are consistent with its Seventh Amendment line of cases in which it emphasizes the preservation of the basic right to jury under the first inquiry, while it de-emphasizes the essence and scope of that right under the second and third inquiries.

Justice By The Numbers: The Supreme Court And The Rule Of Four-Or Is It Five?, Ira Robbins

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

INTRODUCTION: In the early hours of April 14, 2000, Robert Lee Tarver died in Alabama's electric chair, even though four Justices of the United States Supreme Court had voted to review the merits of his case. This situation is not unique. Each year, practitioners and pro se litigants alike petition the Supreme Court without fully knowing the rules pursuant to which the Court will decide their client's, or their own, fate. The reason is that the Supreme Court operates under two sets of rules-those that are published and those that are not. The former specify This Article is based on …

Even Before Enron: Banking Regulators, The Income Tax, The S&L Crisis, And Deceptive Accounting At The Supreme Court, Stephen B. Cohen

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Years before the ENRON debacle, the Supreme Court heard a pair of cases involving dishonest financial accounting, Frank Lyon Co. v. U.S. and Cottage Savings Ass'n. v. Commissioner. In both cases, federal bank regulators had encouraged deceptive financial accounting, and the deceptive accounting became the basis for taxpayer claims. The Supreme Court, however, did not comment in either opinion on the deceptive character of the financial accounting that gave rise to tax litigation.

Treaties And The Eleventh Amendment, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court's recent invigoration of federalism doctrine has revived a question that had long lain dormant in constitutional law: whether and to what extent federalism limits apply to exercises of the Treaty Power. In the days before the famous switch in time that saved nine, the Court in Missouri v. Holland upheld a statute passed by Congress to implement a treaty even though it assumed that the statute would exceed Congress's legislative power under Article I in the absence of the treaty. The significance of this holding abated considerably when the Court embraced a broader interpretation of the Commerce …

The New Deal ‘Constitutional Revolution’ As An Historical Problem, Edward A. Purcell Jr.

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

The Contested Right To Vote, Richard Briffault

Faculty Scholarship

For those who believe the United States is a representative democracy with a government elected by the people, the events of late 2000must have been more than a little disconcerting. In the election for our most important public office – our only truly national office – the candidate who received the most popular votes was declared the loser while his second place opponent, who had received some 540,000 fewer votes, was the winner. This result turned on the outcome in Florida, where approximately 150,000 ballots cast were found not to contain valid votes. Further, due to flaws in ballot design, …

Bush V. Gore As An Equal Protection Case, Richard Briffault

Faculty Scholarship

In Bush v. Gore, the United States Supreme Court applied the Equal Protection Clause to the mechanics of state election administration. The Court invalidated the manual recount of the so-called undervote – that is, ballots that vote-counting machinery had found contained no indication of a vote for President – which the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to determine the winner of Florida's vote for presidential electors in the 2000 presidential election. The United States Supreme Court reasoned that the principles it had previously articulated in applying the Equal Protection Clause to the vote were violated by the Florida court's …

Lessons From The Damages Decisions Following United States V. Winstar Corp., Rodger D. Citron

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

New Issues Arising Under Section 1983, Martin A. Schwartz

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

The Irrational Turn In Employment Discrimination Law: Slouching Toward A Unified Approach To Civil Rights Law, John Valery White

Scholarly Works

This Article argues that the Supreme Court's recent disparate treatment decisions under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 represent a trend toward unifying all civil rights law under an approach most closely akin to traditional equity. This trend explains the curious tension between substance and process in the Court's most recent decisions, St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks and Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing. It also explains the Court's uncommon confidence in its yet undefined notions of what constitutes discrimination on the basis of the several protected categories recognized in Title VII and related statutes. The trend toward …

Youngstown: Pages From The Book Of Disquietude, Philip Chase Bobbitt

Faculty Scholarship

The Youngstown holding is widely admired. One reads with pride those passages in which the Supreme Court denies to a president with whom they are in considerable political sympathy the power to enlarge executive authority by militarizing the homeland. And yet one wonders, as we confront in the 21st century a lethal foreign enemy who has demonstrated the ability to infiltrate and assault the domestic environment, precisely what restraints ought to govern a presidential response to that enemy.

Courts Or Tribunals? Federal Courts And The Common Law, Peter L. Strauss

Faculty Scholarship

Every Justice, save perhaps Justice Breyer, has recently subscribed to an opinion raising questions in one or another context about whether federal courts can appropriately exercise common law law-making functions that had, until these questions began to appear, been characteristic of all American courts. To invoke a special class of "federal tribunal" whose actions are not to be confused with those of common law courts suggests broader implications than the long-familiar debates about Erie RR. Co. v. Tompkins, or more recent contentions over when, if ever, it is appropriate to infer privately enforceable judicial remedies in aid of federal statutes; …

Textualism’S Limits On The Administrative State: Of Isolated Waters, Barking Dogs, And Chevron, Michael P. Healy

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) does not have authority under the Clean Water Act (the Act or the CWA) to regulate the filling of “other waters.” This decision demonstrates a major shift in the Court's approach to statutory interpretation, particularly in the context of reviewing an agency’s understanding of a statute. The significance of the case is best gauged by contrasting it with United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes, Inc. There, the Court, acting …

Congress' Section 5 Power And Remedial Rights, Tracy A. Thomas

Akron Law Faculty Publications

There has been continual conflict between the legislative and judicial branches regarding the authority of Congress to enact remedies for the violation of constitutional rights. Armed with the assumption that it has unlimited authority to define remedies, Congress has sought to enact legislation to alter constitutional remedies imposed by the courts. At the same time, the Supreme Court has narrowly interpreted the scope of Congress' so-called “remedial” or enforcement power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. The legal question explored in this article is how to balance this conflict of power and resolve the respective roles of each branch …

A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Multiple-Choice Exam: Or, The Schoolroom Lessons From Bush V. Gore, Marcella David

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court’S Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel

Saint Louis University Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Accountability Solutions In The Consent Search And Seizure Wasteland, José F. Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

The legal and social issues that have emerged out of the doctrine that people in America have a right against unreasonable government instituted searches and seizures have dominated the dialogue and controversy in the American criminal justice system over the last three decades. A large portion of the debate has centered around the controversial exclusionary rule, which frees the sometimes unmistakably guilty because of irregularities in police procedure.

The notion that society suffers when criminals go free because of the constable's blunder has struck a decidedly political note in the discussion over criminal justice reform. Many observers are quick to …

Beyond Counting Votes: The Political Economy Of Bush V. Gore, Michael Abramowicz, Maxwell L. Stearns

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Using § 1983 To Enforce Title Vi's Section 602 Regulations, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

This Article examines the circumstances under which § 1983 suits may be used to enforce agency regulations in general, and Title VI's disparate impact regulations in particular.

Church-State Constitutional Issues: Making Sense Of The Establishment Clause And That Godless Court?: Supreme Court Decision On Church-State Relationships (Book Reviews), Michael Ariens

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

The Education Justice: The Honorable Lewis Franklin Powell, Jr., Victoria J. Dodd

Fordham Urban Law Journal

The Honorable Lewis Franklin Powell, Jr. is “the education Justice” of the United States. During his tenure on the U.S. Supreme Court, from 1971 to 1987, Justice Powell authored at least twenty major opinions in education law, in addition to numerous significant concurrences and dissents. Just a sampling of Justice Powell's majority opinions on education could form the bulk of an education law textbook recognizable by any American law student. This Article will explore some of Justice Powell's major Supreme Court rulings in education law. It will also consider how these rulings may have related to aspects of Justice Powell's …

State Sovereign Immunity And Stare Decisis: Solving The Prisoners’ Dilemma Within The Court, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

This Comment argues that the liberal and conservative blocs on the U.S. Supreme Court are embroiled in a Prisoners' Dilemma with respect to whether they should follow precedent on the question of congressional abrogation of state sovereign immunity. The analytical consequence of this strategic situation within the Court is that, over the long run, all of the Justices would more fully realize their views of the merits of Eleventh Amendment cases by demonstrating more--not less--respect for the independent value of stare decisis. This Comment uses game theory to substantiate this claim, after which it offers a potential, contingent solution to …

Challenges To Racial Redistricting In The New Millennium: Hunt V. Cromartie As A Case Study, Guy-Uriel Charles, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Circularity, Michael B. Abramowicz

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

In supporting the invocation of stare decisis in constitutional cases, the Supreme Court has maintained that its decisions affect how the people conceptualize the government and their rights. Such an argument, which prioritizes contemporary understands of the Constitution over both the intentions of Framers and the nuances of doctrine, suggests that constitutional decisions may affect the meaning of the Constitution itself. In this Article, Professor Abramowicz offers a positive account demonstrating that the Court has used this type of argument, which he dubs “constitutional circularity,” and provides a normative critique. The positive account is relevant not only because it identifies …

The Supreme Court Justice And "Boring" Cases, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

This is a short essay discussing the phenomenon of boring cases at the Supreme Court. It examines two letters written by Supreme Court Justices to sick colleagues–a 1903 letter from Chief Justice E.D. White to William Day, and a 1941 letter from William O. Douglas to Hugo Black. The essay argues that one true and underappreciated measure of the worth of a Supreme Court Justice is not merely their ability to be (or at least appear to be) brilliant in the once-a-decade blockbuster cases. Instead, in selecting Supreme Court Justices, we should look just as much at their ability to …

A Conservative Defense Of Romer V. Evans, Dale Carpenter

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

In his argument for an alternative conservative response to Romer v. Evans, the author outlines the majority and dissenting opinions in Evans to identify what he takes to be the decision's import. Next, he outlines some of the main themes of conservative political and legal thought, concentrating especially on Edmund Burke. He then argues the common conception of Burke as an intransigent defender of the status quo and of present traditions and practices is a misreading of him. Finally, he discusses the conservative underpinnings for Evans in light of this intellectual history, with an emphasis on the profoundly conservative instincts …

Louis Brandeis And The Race Question, Christopher A. Bracey

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

We live in a culture enamored by our heroes. They are celebrated for their extraordinary accomplishments, and canonized by histories that rarely reflect the true texture of their lives. Legal academics share in these tendencies and, as a result, heroes in the law are often viewed with the same rose-colored glasses accorded to their counterparts in popular culture. The late Louis Brandeis was an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1916 to 1939. Born to Jewish immigrant parents, he graduated from Harvard Law School, and gained a reputation as America’s “People’s Attorney.” He pioneered an …

Reconstructing The Rule Of Law, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The action taken in Bush v. Gore by the five conservative Justices on the United States Supreme Court, Bugliosi argued, was not just wrong as a matter of law, but criminal: It was a malem in se, fully intended, premeditated theft of a national election for the Presidency of the United States. Now, as Balkan and Levinson would argue, this seventh, "prosecutorial" response -- that the Court's action was not just wrong but criminal -- is also not available to a devotee of either radical or moderate indeterminacy. Even assuming both criminal intent and severe harm-a wrongful, specific intent to …

Nixon V. Shrink Missouri Government Pac: The Beginning Of The End Of The Buckley Era?, Richard Briffault

Faculty Scholarship

In Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PAC, the Supreme Court emphatically reaffirmed a key element of the campaign finance doctrine first articulated in Buckley v. Valeo a quarter-century earlier that governments may, consistent with the First Amendment, impose limitations on the size of contributions to election campaigns. Shrink Missouri was significant because the Eighth Circuit decision reversed by the Supreme Court had sought to strengthen the constitutional protection provided to contributions and had invalidated limitations on donations to Missouri state candidates that were actually higher than the limits on donations to federal candidates that the Supreme Court had previously …