Law Commons^™

The Latest Word From The Supreme Court On Punitive Damages (Symposium: The Thirteenth Annual Supreme Court Review), Leon D. Lazer

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Palazzolo V. Rhode Island: The Supreme Court's Expansion Of Subsequent Owners' Rights Under The Takings Clause (Symposium: The Thirteenth Annual Supreme Court Review), Leon D. Lazer

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

The 2000-2001 Supreme Court Term: Section 1983 Cases, Martin A. Schwartz

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

To Designate Or Not To Designate Under The Family And Medical Leave Act, Tory L. Lucas

Faculty Publications and Presentations

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) entitles eligible employees to take a total of twelve workweeks of leave during any twelve-month period for specifically prescribed circumstances such as a serious health condition or the birth or adoption of a child. Does the FMLA require employers to specifically designate leave as FMLA leave or risk having to provide more than the guaranteed twelve weeks of leave? This precise question created a circuit split in the federal courts before the Supreme Court of the United States answered the question in March 2002. This article, published in 2000, addressed the issue a …

Does The Solicitor General Advantage Thwart The Rule Of Law In The Administrative State?, Jim A. Rossi

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Linda Cohen and Matthew Spitzer's study, "The Government Litigant Advantage," sheds important light on how the Solicitor General's litigation behavior may impact the Supreme Court's decision making agenda and outcomes for regulatory and administrative law cases. By emphasizing how the Solicitor General affects cases that the Supreme Court decides, Cohen and Spitzer's findings confirm that administrative law's emphasis on lower appellate court decisions is not misplaced. Some say that D.C. Circuit cases carry equal-if not more-precedential weight than Supreme Court decisions in resolving administrative law issues. Cohen and Spitzer use positive political theory to provide a novel explanation for some …

After Gardner-Denver, Gilmer And Wright: The Supreme Court’S Next Arbitration Decision, Susan A. Fitzgibbon

Saint Louis University Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Statutory Interpretation And Mr. Justice Rutledge, Nathaniel L. Nathanson

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Citing Of Law Reviews By The Supreme Court:1971-1999, Louis J. Sirico Jr.

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Standing In Environmental Citizen Suits: Laidlaw’S Clarification Of The Injury-In-Fact And Redressability Requirements, Michael P. Healy

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In its first week of business during the new millennium, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc., and provided important clarifications about the law of standing in environmental citizen suits. Specifically, the Court rejected the narrow view of environmental injury-in-fact advocated by Justice Scalia and instead adhered to the broader view of injury-in-fact established in a nonenvironmental context by the Court's decision in Federal Elections Commission v. Akins. As importantly, the Court also addressed the redressability requirement of Article III standing in Laidlaw. Here too, the Court did …

Revolutionary Or Aberrational?: The Status Of The Supreme Court’S Recent Federalism Cases In The Eighth Circuit, Cristian M. Stevens

Saint Louis University Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Excluding The Exclusionary Rule In Driver's License Suspension And Revocation Hearings, Michele L. Hornish

Missouri Law Review

The exclusionary rule is a "judicially created remedy designed to safeguard Fourth Amendment rights," which provides for the suppression of primary and derivative evidence obtained from an illegal search. While often applied in criminal cases, in United States v. Calandra,3 the United States Supreme Court utilized a balancing test to determine whether to apply the rule in non-criminal contexts.4 Suppression of evidence in accordance with the exclusionary rule in both criminal and non-criminal cases has been criticized in many circles,5 with the debate recently resurfacing after the Supreme Court declined to apply the rule in administrative parole revocation proceedings.6 That …

The Supreme Court's "New" Federalism: An Anti-Rights Agenda?, Mitchell F. Crusto

Georgia State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Equity And Settlement Class Actions: Can There Be Justice For All In Ortiz V. Fibreboard , Nikita Malhotra Pastor

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Should State Corporate Law Define Successor Liability - The Demise Of Cercla's Federal Common Law, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

During the 1980s and early 1990s, a series of decisions broadly interpreting the liability provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCIA) appeared destined to transform corporate law practice. CERCIA does not directly address successor liability, but the statute's complex and contradictory legislative history arguably implies that Congress wanted federal courts to apply broad liability principles to achieve the statute's fundamental remedial goal of making polluters and their successors pay for cleaning up hazardous substances.

Notably, a number of courts rejected state corporate law principles that usually limit the liability of successor corporations and instead …

The Reconceptualization Of Legislative History In The Supreme Court, Charles Tiefer

All Faculty Scholarship

In 1995, the Supreme Court began to embrace a approach to interpreting Congressional intent. From that year forward, the Breyers-Stevens model of legislative history, or "institutional legislative history," has seen significant success, emerging in the shadows of the success Justice Scalia's enjoyed while promoting his brand of textualism in the early 1990s. In developing a new way to view Congressional intent, Justices Breyers and Stevens synthesize information gathered from congressional report details, preferably attached to bill drafting choices, thereby renouncing Scalia's reliance on the purposes espoused by the Congressional majority. This new approach, the author contends, rejuvenated the court's approach …

Establishment Of Religion, Robert Gingher

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Congress-Supreme Court Relations: Strategies Of Power, Steven Puro

Saint Louis University Public Law Review

No abstract provided.

The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same: Implications Of Pfaff V. Wells Electronics, Inc. And The Quest For Predictability In The On-Sale Bar, Timothy R. Holbrook

Faculty Articles

This Article posits a two prong approach to the on-sale bar. First, for the anticipatory version, the courts should expressly incorporate the law of enablement under 35 U.S.C. § 112 and of utility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 into the on-sale bar, thus providing a well-known body of law to promote predictability. Procedurally, the courts should establish a hierarchy of evidence, similar to the approach used in claim construction, that considers certain, more readily available information as the most pertinent while eschewing the use of expert testimony and other litigation based evidence. Second, for the obviousness version of the on-sale …

The Section 5 Mystique, Morrison, And The Future Of Federal Antidiscrimination Law, Margaret H. Lemos, Samuel Estreicher

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Rich Kids, Poor Kids, And The Single-Sex Education Debate, Rosemary C. Salomone

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Over the past decade, the subject of publicly supported, single-sex education has generated considerable debate in legal and policy circles. Since 1996, much of that debate has centered around the Supreme Court's decision in the Virginia Military Institute case and how that case intersects with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. In VMI, Justice Ginsburg, speaking for the Court, stated that gender classifications must have "an exceedingly persuasive justification" in order to pass muster under the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection clause. That decision has become a key factor in recent efforts by school districts to establish …

Agreements To Waive Or To Arbitrate Legal Claims: An Economic Analysis, Keith N. Hylton

Faculty Scholarship

As arbitration agreements have grown in use, they have become controversial, with many critics describing them as a disguised form of waiver. This paper presents an economic analysis of waiver and arbitiation agreements and applies this analysis to the evolving arbitration case law in the Supreme Court and elsewhere. The paper examines the conditions under which parties have an incentive to enter into these types of agreement, and their welfare implications. It shows that, if parties are well informed, they will enter into waiver agreements when and only when litigation is socially undesirable, in the sense that the deterrence benefits …

Francis Bacon Takes On The Ghouls: The "First Principles" Of Religious Freedom, Richard W. Garnett

Journal Articles

John Witte, Jr.
Religion and the American Constitutional Experiment:
Essential Rights and Liberties
Westview Press 2000

From the Review

This is a great time for students of the First Amendment's Religion Clauses and of what Professor John Witte calls the American "experiment" with religious freedom. We've been blessed these past few years with an in-print seminar - an upper-division offering, team-taught by faculty heavyweights - on this experiment, its products and prospects, and the values that have shaped it. Our teachers and texts have included, to name just a few, Professor Steven Smith's Foreordained Failure: The Constitutional Quest for a …

Taking Regulatory Takings Personally: The Perils Of (Mis)Reasoning By Analogy, Michael Allan Wolf

Law Faculty Publications

In a troublesome area of the law, it is hard for a legal academic to resist the temptation to attempt to "enlighten" the judiciary. It has not been the author's practice to date, in ruminating on the profound puzzle of regulatory takings, to instruct judges concerning the errors of their ways. Because only an insider can be truly familiar with the nuances of a specific legal challenge and owing to a deep respect for the judicial craft, this writer has resisted the urge to preach. It has been a sufficiently provocative challenge to interpret the meanings and implications of decisions …

When The Wall Has Fallen: Decades Of Failure In The Supervision Of Capital Juries, José F. Anderson

All Faculty Scholarship

Since the return of capital punishment after Furman v. Georgia nearly three decades ago, the Supreme Court of the United States has struggled to control the administration of capital punishment when those decisions are made or recommended by a citizen jury. Although there is no constitutional requirement that a jury participate in the death penalty process, most states do provide, through their capital punishment statutes, that a jury will participate in the decision. The preference for jury sentencing in these circumstances reflects a reluctance to leave power over life solely in the hands of one judge. Still, some scholars have …

Towards A More Perfect Union: Some Thoughts On Amending The Constitution, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Preemption & Human Rights: Local Options After Crosby V. Nftc, Robert Stumberg

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In June 2000, the Supreme Court held in Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC) that federal sanctions against Burma preempted the Massachusetts Burma law. With its "Burma Law," Massachusetts sought to replicate the anti-Apartheid boycott, one of the most successful human rights campaigns in history. Massachusetts' Burma law authorized state agencies to exercise a strong purchasing preference in favor of companies that do not conduct business in Burma unless the preference would impair essential purchases or result in inadequate competition.

In Crosby, the Court held that Congress preempted the Massachusetts Burma law when it adopted federal sanctions on …

Damage Control? A Comment On Professor Neuman’S Reading Of Reno V. Aadc, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This comment responds to an article by Professor Gerald Neuman on the Supreme Court's recent decision in Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (AADC). The Court in AADC rejected a selective prosecution claim by immigrants targeted for deportation based on First Amendment-protected activities, finding that Congress had stripped the federal courts of jurisdiction over such claims, and that in any event the Constitution does not recognize a selective prosecution objection to a deportation proceeding. Professor Neuman argues that the decision should not be read as implying that aliens have less First Amendment protection than citizens, and that the decision can …

Sovereign Immunity, Due Process, And The Alden Trilogy, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Alden v. Maine, the Court held that the principle of sovereign immunity protects states from being sued without their consent in their own courts by private parties seeking damages for the states' violation of federal law. The Court thus rejected the "forum allocation" interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment, under which the Amendment serves merely to channel suits against the states based on federal law into the state courts, which are required by the Supremacy Clause to entertain such suits. The Court held instead that the Eleventh Amendment protects the states from being subjected to private damage liability by …

The Changing Complexion Of Workplace Law: Labor And Employment Decisions Of The Supreme Court's 1999-2000 Term , James J. Brudney

Faculty Scholarship

At the dawn of a new century of Supreme Court workplace law, it seems especially appropriate to offer some perspective on the recent and relatively recent past. Before addressing the seven cases involving labor and employment issues decided by the Supreme Court in the Term just ended, I want briefly to describe (in what I hope are not mechanical terms) how the Court's interests in labor and employment law have evolved from the start of the Burger Era in 1969 to the current, mature stage of the Rehnquist Court.

Public Welfare, Christopher Vatter

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.