Courts Commons^™

Alarmism Versus Moderation In Responding To The Rehnquist Court, Mark Tushnet

Indiana Law Journal

Symposium: Congressional Power in the Shadow of the Rehnquist Court: Strategies for the Future held at Indiana University Law School, February 1-2, 2002.

Environmental Law, Congress, And The Court's New Federalism Doctrine, Christopher H. Schroeder

Indiana Law Journal

Symposium: Congressional Power in the Shadow of the Rehnquist Court: Strategies for the Future held at Indiana University Law School, February 1-2, 2002.

Congruence And Proportionality For Congressional Enforcement Powers: Cosmetic Change Or Velvet Revolution?, Elisabeth Zoller

Indiana Law Journal

Symposium: Congressional Power in the Shadow of the Rehnquist Court: Strategies for the Future held at Indiana University Law School, February 1-2, 2002.

Thayerian Deference To Congress And Supreme Court Supermajority Rule: Lessons From The Past, Evan H. Caminker

Indiana Law Journal

Symposium: Congressional Power in the Shadow of the Rehnquist Court: Strategies for the Future held at Indiana University Law School, February 1-2, 2002.

Protecting The Constitution From The People: Juricentric Restrictions On Section Five Power, Robert C. Post, Reva B. Siegel

Indiana Law Journal

Symposium: Congressional Power in the Shadow of the Rehnquist Court: Strategies for the Future held at Indiana University Law School, February 1-2, 2002.

The Law Of Nations And The Offenses Clause Of The Constitution: A Defense Of Federalism, Michael T. Morley

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

A Roundtable Discussion With Stephen L. Carter & Michael J. Gerhardt, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

Transcript of a discussion regarding the United States Supreme Court, the Supreme Court justices and justice nominees, the Senate process for confirming nominees and related issues such as fitness to serve on the court and judicial activism.

Executive Power In Youngstown's Shadows, Patricia L. Bellia

Journal Articles

Fifty years after it was handed down, the Supreme Court's decision in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer is among the most important of the Court's separation of powers cases. This Article explores two quite different legacies of the Youngstown case. First, Youngstown has a symbolic or rhetorical power, in that it stands as an example of a court invalidating the actions of a coordinate branch of government in a politically delicate context. When a court wields this weapon, it can take some cover in Youngstown's shadows, and the possibility of a court exercising this power disciplines the executive …

Foreign Relations And Federal Questions: Resolving The Judicial Split On Federal Court Jurisdiction, Erin E. Terrell

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The federal circuit courts have disagreed concerning a fundamental issue of federal court jurisdiction: whether cases that may implicate or involve the "foreign relations" of the United States, but do not otherwise raise a more traditional "federal question" under federal law, may be removed from state courts to federal courts. This Note examines the cases that have created the split, and proposes two potential resolutions to it, one judicial and the other legislative.

The Ins And Outs, Stops And Starts Of Speedy Trial Rights In Colorado--Part Ii, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

This two-part article reviews the constitutional and statutory right to a speedy trial and discusses the case law interpreting that right. The first part was printed in July 2002.

See Part I at http://scholar.law.colorado.edu/articles/550/.

Privatization And Political Accountability, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

This article is an attempt to draw some general connections between privatization and political accountability. Political accountability is to be understood as the amenability of a government policy or activity to monitoring through the political process. Although the main focus of the article is to examine different types of privatization, specifically exploring the ramifications for political accountability of each type, I also engage in some speculation as to whether there are there situations in which privatization might raise constitutional concerns related to the degree to which the particular privatization reduces political accountability for the actions or decisions of the newly …

Constitutional Revolutions: A New Look At Lower Appellate Review In American Constitutionalism, Robert Justin Lipkin

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

Judicial review allows the Supreme Court of the United States to perform revolutionary constitutional change. The United States Courts of Appeals could also be a vehicle for revolutionary constitutional adjudication.

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.

Comparing Judicial Selection Systems, Lee Epstein, Jack Knight, Olga Shvetsova

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Piercing The Veil: William J. Brennan's Account Of Regents Of The University Of California V. Bakke, Lee Epstein, Jack Knight

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court As A Strategic National Policymaker, Lee Epstein, Jack Knight, Andrew D. Martin

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Nationalized Political Discourse, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

Towards A Constitutional Architecture For Cooperative Federalism, Philip J. Weiser

Publications

In this Article, Professor Weiser calls for a new conception of federal-state relations to justify existing political practice under cooperative federalism regulatory programs. In particular, Professor Weiser highlights how Congress favors cooperative federalism programs--that combine federal and state authority in creative ways--and has rejected the dual federalism model of regulation--with separate spheres of state and federal authority that current judicial rhetoric often celebrates. Given the increasing dissonance between prevailing political practice and judicial rhetoric, courts will ultimately have to confront three fault lines for current cooperative federalism programs: the legal source of authority for state agencies to implement federal law, …

Law's Expression: The Promise And Perils Of Judicial Opinion Writing In Canadian Constitutional Law, Paul Horwitz

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

This article argues that there is a link between one's theory of constitutional law, and one's judgments about style in judicial opinion writing. It identifies several special functions of the constitutional opinion, including the democratic function of responding to the counter-majoritarian difficulty through an act of public justification, and the inter-generational function of provoking a temporally extended dialogue about constitutional values. Drawing on these functions, it argues for an opinion writing style dubbed "open-textured minimalism," that seeks to resolve cases narrowly, articulate fundamental values and principles, and spark long-term debates about the underlying constitutional values supporting each decision. The author …

The Constitutional Legacy Of Chief Justice Brian Dickson, Robert J. Sharpe

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

Chief Justice Brian Dickson played a central role in the elaboration of the fundamental values of the Canadian Constitution. He took a balanced approach to federalism, favouring neither federal nor provincial claims and inviting cooperation through overlapping jurisdiction. Dickson transformed the rule of law from a background value to an operative constitutional principle. His judgments on the rights of minorities reflect a remarkable empathy for the plight of the disadvantaged. Democracy informed all aspects of his constitutional thinking. Dickson rejected the contention that judicial review is anti-democratic, and his constitutional legacy reflects a sustained effort to harmonize all four fundament …

Variations On Some Themes Of A Disporting Gazelle And His Friend: Statutory Interpretation As Seen By Jerome Frank And Felix Frankfurter, Kent Greenawalt

Faculty Scholarship

In 1947, this Review published two lectures on statutory interpretation by Jerome Frank and Felix Frankfurter. Both jurists were concerned with a basic question: How constrained are judges when they interpret legislation? The answers each gives, while similar in some respects, differ strikingly. In arguing that interpretation necessarily involves a creative element, Frank analogizes the role of a judge in interpreting legislation to that of a performer in interpreting a musical composition. Although he argues that judicial creativity is constrained, Frank views statutory interpretation as "a kind of legislation." For Frankfurter, by contrast, in construing a statute, a judge is …

Judicial Intervention In A Twenty-First Century Republic: Shuffling Deck Chairs On The Titanic?, Kristofor J. Hammond

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

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

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court As An Enforcement Agency, Harold J. Krent

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ex Post Facto Laws: Supreme Court New York County People V. Griffin (Decided December 5, 1996

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Introduction, Paul F. Campos

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Failure Of The Criminal Procedure Revolution: A Response, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Preface: Double Jeopardy In Washington And Beyond, Justice Philip A. Talmadge

Seattle University Law Review

The prohibition against double jeopardy is of ancient lineage in western civilization. In a ringing and scholarly dissent that rewards reflection, Justice Hugo Black said:

Fear and abhorrence of governmental power to try people twice for the same conduct is one of the oldest ideas found in western civilization. Its roots run deep into Greek and Roman times. Even in the Dark Ages, when so many other principles of justice were lost, the idea that one trial and one punishment were enough remained alive through the canon law and the teachings of the early Christian writers. By the thirteenth century …

Double Jeopardy—Civil Forfeitures And Criminal Punishment: Who Determines What Punishments Fit The Crime, Barbara A. Mack

Seattle University Law Review

This Article will attempt to distill from this confusion a meaningful double jeopardy policy, applicable to parallel civil and criminal proceedings, that takes into account the history of double jeopardy, recent changes in statutory law, and the contemporary chaotic state of parallel civil and criminal proceedings. Under current law, double jeopardy protects against three abuses: (1) a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal, (2) a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction, and (3) multiple punishments for the same offense. This Article will show that the multiple punishments prong has little basis in law, other than reliance …

The Double Jeopardy Implications Of In Rem Forfeiture Of Crime-Related Property: The Gradual Realization Of A Constitutional Violation, Andrew L. Subin

Seattle University Law Review

Over the past decade, the government has escalated its "war on drugs." Although the "war" has not decreased drug use or limited the availability of drugs on the street, the government continues to sacrifice the constitutional rights of its citizens in an effort to escalate the hostility. Since the "zero tolerance" policy of the Reagan Administration, the government has relied heavily on the forfeiture of property related to drug crimes as a tool to deter and punish the illegal distribution of drugs. The federal forfeiture statute, 21 U.S.C. § 881, allows the government to seize any property used to facilitate …