Constitutional Law Commons^™

Humenansky V. Regents Of The University Of Minnesota: Questioning Congressional Intent And Authority To Abrogate Eleventh Amendment Immunity With The Adea, Eric Hunter

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Failed Coup On The Judicial Monarchy (Review Of God And Man In The Law, By Robert Lowry Clinton), David D. Garner

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Dynamics And Determinants Of The Decision To Grant En Banc Review, Tracey E. George

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The ability of U.S. Courts of Appeals to control the development of law within their respective circuits has been strained by the practice of divisional sittings, the growing caseload at the circuit court level, the increasing number of judges sitting within each circuit, and the decreasing probability of Supreme Court intervention. The primary method of maintaining coherence and consistency in doctrinal development within a federal circuit is en banc review. Yet, many critics contend that en bane rehearing is a time-consuming, inefficient procedure that fails to serve its intended purpose and too often is abused for political ends. This Article …

Cardozo And The Art Of Biography, Andrew L. Kaufman

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Benjamin Cardozo On The Supreme Court, Andrew L. Kaufman

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

How Imperial Is The Supreme Court? An Analysis Of Supreme Court Abortion Doctrine And Popular Will, Michael Vitiello

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Too Much (Legislation) Is Never Enough: Utilizing A Court's Equity Power To Enjoin Lawful Firearm Sales, 32 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1225 (1999), Edward G. Renner

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Understanding The Limits Of Power: Judicial Restraint In General Jurisdiction Court Systems, Justice Philip A. Talmadge

Seattle University Law Review

This Article draws on my legislative and judicial background to focus both on the tendency of the courts to exceed their core constitutional role and the implications of such judicial activism. This article contend that modern courts of general jurisdiction are too often embroiled in sociopolitical controversies best left to the political branches of government. Part I addresses the concept of judicial restraint in our constitutional system and the need to define the core powers of the judicial branch of government. Part II discusses principles of judicial restraint in the federal courts. Part III, using the example of Washington State …

What Spending Clause? - (Or The President's Paramour): An Examination Of The Views Of Hamilton, Madison, And Story On Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 Of The United States Constitution, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 81 (1999), Jeffrey T. Renz

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Bribery Statute And The Ethics Of Purchasing Testimony, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 209 (1999), Camille Knight

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is The Excessive Fines Clause Excessively Kind To Money Launderers, Drug Dealers, And Tax Evaders, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 243 (1999), Ann Jennings Maron

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Marshall’S Questions, Walter E. Dellinger Iii, H. Jefferson Powell

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Judicial Review Of Initiatives And Referendums In Which Majorities Vote On Minorities’ Citizenship, Sylvia R. Lazos

Scholarly Works

In this Article, Professor Lazos examines initiatives and referendums in which a majority is in a position to vote on the content of a minority's democratic civic standing. Case law fails to set forth a single test for judicial review; consequently, doctrinal and theoretical coherence in this area is nonexistent. Professor Lazos proposes a test that takes into account social dynamics and focuses on the impact of these measures. First, she examines outcomes over the last three decades of approximately eighty such initiatives and referendums, from the anti-integration movement of the sixties to today's ideological and cultural versions, such as …

Democracy And Inclusion: The Role Of The Judge In A Pluralist Polity, Sylvia R. Lazos

Scholarly Works

The Supreme Court plays a critical role in resolving clashes between majority and minority interests and perspectives. The Equal Protection Clause, and at times the Due Process Clause, have become key vehicles for considering the most problematic intergroup conflicts that divide our society. Prior to this article, the Court heard cases dealing with affirmative action in government procurement programs, legislative districts designed to increase minority representation, state sponsored male-only military schooling, and a state constitutional amendment that would have proscribed antidiscrimination legislation protecting gay men and lesbians. While the Court declined to challenge California's anti-affirmative action referendum (Proposition 209) and …

The Constitutional Limits Of Judicial Review: A Structural Interpretive Approach, Jack Wade Nowlin

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Warren Court And The Concept Of A Right, David Luban

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Warren Court is dead. None of its Justices remain on the benchindeed, only Justice White survives-and the recent history of the Supreme Court has been in large part a history of repudiating controversial Warren Court doctrines. Public opinion likewise repudiates Warren-style judicial activism, and constitutional scholarship-which as recently as the mid- 1980s consisted in considerable measure of theoretical defenses for Warren Court-inspired methods of interpreting the Bill of Rights-has grown increasingly skeptical of expansive interpretive strategies. It is quite possible that future constitutional historians will regard the Warren era as an aberration. The Warren Court, after all, was not …

Finding The Constitution: An Economic Analysis Of Tradition's Role In Constitutional Interpretation, Adam C. Pritchard, Todd J. Zywicki

Articles

In this Article, Professor Pritchard and Professor Zywicki examine the role of tradition in constitutional interpretation, a topic that has received significant attention in recent years. After outlining the current debate over the use of tradition, the authors discuss the efficiency purposes of constitutionalism--precommitment and the reduction of agency costs--and demonstrate how the use of tradition in constitutional interpretation can serve these purposes. Rejecting both Justice Scalia's majoritarian model, which focuses on legislative sources of tradition, and Justice Souter's common-law model, which focuses on Supreme Court precedent as a source of tradition, the authors propose an alternative model--the "finding model"-- …

Buried Voices, Dominant Themes: Justice Hans Linde And The Move To Structural Constitutional Interpretation, Marci A. Hamilton

Articles

No abstract provided.

Hopwood, Equal Protection, And Affirmative Action: Can Anyone's Ox Be Gored?, David J. Jannuzzi

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process, Court Of Appeals: People V. Thompson

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg: Extending The Constitution, 32 J. Marshall L. Rev. 197 (1998), Amy Walsh

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Deconstructing Homo[Genous] Americanus: The White Ethnic Immigrant Narrative And Its Exclusionary Effect, Sylvia R. Lazos

Scholarly Works

This Article examines why the assumption of sameness is so pervasive in our society, and why the very idea of diversity is so resisted. The assumption and the corollary mandate to be the same are embedded in American cultural ideology, in how Americans think of themselves, in the stories that we tell regarding who we are and where we come from, in how we construct our values and norms, and in how Americans make sense of our chaotic social world. The assumption and mandate of sameness not only influence American culture, they also guide judges' thinking and decision-making in key …

Authorizing Interpretation, Pierre Schlag

Publications

No abstract provided.

Deciding The Stop And Frisk Cases: A Look Inside The Supreme Court's Conference, John Q. Barrett

Faculty Publications

In our system of constitutional decision-making, the Supreme Court makes law as an institution in its formal written opinions. The Court and its individual members make their official legal marks in the printed pages of the United States Reports. In June 1968, in Terry v. Ohio and Sibron v. New York, the two decisions that approved the constitutionality under the Fourth Amendment of police stop and frisk practices, the Court filled many official pages with rich discussion. Over the ensuing thirty years, these Court and individual opinions have shaped the course of constitutional analysis in our courts and guided the …

Batson Ethics For Prosecutors And Trial Court Judges, Sheri Lynn Johnson

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Scalia Slugs It Out, Gerard V. Bradley

Journal Articles

A Matter of Interpretation
Antonin Scalia, Princeton University Press, 1997, 159 pages, $20

Antonin Scalia, associate justice of the United States Supreme Court, has done more to combat judicial activism than any other living person. Since taking his seat on the High Court in 1986, he has defended and applied a mode of constitutional interpretation - most often called "originalism," sometimes "textualism" - the precise aim of which is to reduce, if not eliminate, judicial lawmaking. Scalia maintains that judges, even Supreme Court Justices, must distinguish what they think law ought to be from what the rule of law in …

Justices At Work: An Introduction, Michel Rosenfeld

Cardozo Law Review

"Justices at Work," a day long conference which took place on September 19, 1995 at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, brought together Justices and constitutional scholars from seven different countries to consider a hypothetical constitutional case dealing with fundamental rights. This issue of the Law Review includes the facts of the hypothetical case, the applicable hypothetical statute, the briefs submitted to the International Moot Courtall of which were the product of a collaborative effort among the seven scholars involved-as well as a transcript of the proceedings and of the deliberations of the seven Justices: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg …

Standing Committee On Discipline V. Yagman: Missing The Point Of Ethical Restrictions On Attorney Criticism Of The Judiciary?, Caprice L. Roberts

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

It Was A Very Good Year - For The Government: The Supreme Court's Major Criminal Rulings Of The 1995-1996 Term, William E. Hellerstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Right To Trial By Jury, Supreme Court, Appellate Division Fourth Department People V. Perkins

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.