Jurisprudence Commons^™

The Boundary Of Personal Jurisdiction: The "Effects Test" And The Protection Of Crazy Horse's Name, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 381 (2004), Scott Fruehwald

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Finding Religion For The First Amendment, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 469 (2004), Troy L. Booher

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Sovereign Immunity And The Plaintiff State: Does The Eleventh Amendment Bar Removal Of Actions Filed In State Court?, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 513 (2004), Virginia F. Milstead

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rethinking Campaign-Finance Reform: The Pressing Need For Deregulation And Disclosure, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 633 (2004), Cecil C. Kuhne Iii

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Remaining Silent: A Right With Consequences, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 649 (2004), Jeffrey D. Waltuck

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Permitted But Not Intended: Boub V. Township Of Wayne, Municipal Tort Immunity In Illinois, And The Right To Local Travel, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 545 (2004), Bruce Epperson

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Hardball, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 523 (2004), Mark Tushnet

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Constitution At The Threshold Of Life And Death: A Suggested Approach To Accommodate An Interest In Life And A Right To Die, Michael P. Allen

American University Law Review

In the past fifteen years, the United States Supreme Court has decided three cases in which it tentatively began to explore what the United States Constitution has to say about issues that are popularly described as the "right to die." In this article, I suggest that the current state of constitutional analysis does not provide for an effective mechanism for securing an individual's "right to die," at least not without undervaluing a state's interest in the preservation of human life should a state choose to take such a position. In the article, I suggest that it is possible to adopt …

Response To State Action And A New Birth Of Freedom, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

I have just a few comments. The first comment is a contribution to the ''analytic" question posed by Professor Black's work and made explicit by Professors Peller and Tushnet's paper. To make the case for the constitutional status of welfare rights, I do not think it is sufficient-although it may well be necessary-to show that the "state action" problem is merely a pseudo-problem, whatever the reason for finding it not to be a problem. I do not agree with one of the claims put forward by Peller and Tushnet,' that Black's perceptive analysis of the state action problem in his …

Resorting To External Norms And Principles In Constitutional Decision-Making, Alvin L. Goldman

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Given the very significant role of constitutional law in the American political system and the fact that Supreme Court Justices are appointed through a political process, it is understandable that the appropriate judicial approach to resolving constitutional issues often is the subject of political commentary. Unfortunately, discourse by politicians concerning this issue seldom rises to the deserved level of wisdom. One of President George W. Bush's public mantras is illustrative of political commentary respecting federal judicial appointments: "I'm going to put strict constructionists on the bench." On its face, and as understood by politically naive audiences, the statement appears to …

Governance And Anarchy In The S.2(B) Jurisprudence: A Comment On Vancouver Sun And Harper V. Canada, Jamie Cameron

Articles & Book Chapters

The article identifies and explains a double standard in the Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence. The contrast is between the open court jurisprudence, which is a model of good constitutional governance – or principled decision making – and the Court’s s.2(b) methodology, which is “anarchistic” or capricious and undisciplined, in the sense of this article. Two landmark cases decided in 2004 illustrate the double standard: the first is Re Vancouver Sun, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 332, which dealt with the open court principle under Parliament’s anti-terrorism provision for investigative hearings, it represents a high water mark for open court and s.2(b) …

The Aretaic Turn In Constitutional Theory, Lawrence B. Solum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The author argues that the aretaic turn in constitutional theory is an institutional approach to theories of constitutional interpretation ought to be supplemented by explicit focus on the virtues and vices of constitutional adjudicators. Part I, The Most Dysfunctional Branch, advances the speculative hypothesis that politicization of the judiciary has led the political branches to exclude consideration of virtue from the nomination and confirmation of Supreme Court Justices and to select Justices on the basis of the strength of their commitment to particular positions on particular issues and the fervor of their ideological passions.

Part II, Institutionalism and Constitutional …

Sunsetting Judicial Opinions, Neal K. Katyal

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Contemporary constitutional law, in its quest for judicial restraint, has primarily focused on "the how" of judging - what interpretive methods will constrain the decisionmaker? This Article, by contrast, focuses on the "when"- if there are reasons to think that today's judicial decisions might later prove to be problematic, then are there methods that alter the timing of those decisions' impact to produce better outcomes? This Article outlines one new method for judicial decisionmaking in the post-9/11 world. Informed by pervasive legislative practices, I contend that the Supreme Court should prospectively declare that some of its national security opinions will …

The Secret Life Of The Political Question Doctrine, Louis Michael Seidman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

"Questions, in their nature political, or which are, by the constitution and laws, submitted to the executive, can never be made in this court."

The irony, of course, is that Marbury v. Madison, itself, "made" a political question, and the answer the Court gave was deeply political as well. As everyone reading this essay knows, the case arose out of a bitter political controversy, and the opinion for the Court was a carefully crafted political document - "a masterwork of indirection," according to Robert McCloskey's well-known characterization, "a brilliant example of Chief Justice Marshall's capacity to sidestep danger while seeming …

Loose Not The Floodgates, Benjamin J. Cooper

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article examines the implications of the Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down sodomy laws, arguing that while the ruling was necessary, it raises concerns about the broader regulation of sexual conduct outside marriage. The author contends that such laws, despite rare enforcement, serve societal functions, including protecting marriage and providing moral boundaries that deter harmful behavior, particularly among young people.

In Defense Of Chief Justice Roy S. Moore, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

The Self-Incrimination Clause Explained And Its Future Predicted, Ronald J. Allen

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Canadian Fundamental Justice And American Due Process: Two Models For A Guarantee Of Basic Adjudicative Fairness, David M. Siegel

ExpressO

This paper traces how the Supreme Courts of Canada and the United States have each used the basic guarantee of adjudicative fairness in their respective constitutions to effect revolutions in their countries’ criminal justice systems, through two different jurisprudential models for this development. It identifies a relationship between two core constitutional structures, the basic guarantee and enumerated rights, and shows how this relationship can affect the degree to which entrenched constitutional rights actually protect individuals. It explains that the different models for the relationship between the basic guarantee and enumerated rights adopted in Canada and the United States, an “expansive …

The Perils Of "Consensus": Hans Kelsen And The Legal Philosophy Of The United Nations, J. Peter Pham

ExpressO

Recently the United States and a number of its traditional allies have clashed over a variety of foreign policy issues that are profoundly juridical: the authority for war and peace, the International Criminal Court, etc. The source of these recent tensions is to be located at a level deeper than that of narrow national interests and specific policies. Rather, they arise from significant differences concerning the nature of "consensus" and, ultimately, legal philosophy. While the United Nations and many other international organizations derive their legal visions from the philosophy of law of Hans Kelsen (1881-1973), one of the most important …

Arkansas's Entry Into The Not-So-New Judicial Federalism, Ka Tina R. Hodge

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Legal Indeterminacy And Institutional Design, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Memorandum Of Argument, Supreme Court Of Canada, In Re James R. Demers, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

Justice Scalia's Tax Jurisprudence, Stephen T. Black, Katherine D. Black

Law Faculty Scholarship

Justice Scalia is an outspoken conservative acclaimed for his remarkable intellect and scholarship, and is noted for his adherence to the principle of judicial restraint. He pursues what he insists is an "originalist" path that relies on the Constitution's actual text in decision-making. He works hard to try to maintain constitutional interpretation that does not change from case to case.

So what happens when an "originalist"--concerned that Congress writes imprecise legislation and then leaves its interpretation and application in the hands of administrative agencies or, worse yet, the courts-is forced to deal with tax issues? This article takes a look …

A Matter Of Constitutional Luck: The General Applicability Requirement In Free Exercise Jurisprudence, Christopher C. Lund

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Thinking Like A Lawyer, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

Interpretation And Institutions, Cass R. Sunstein, Adrian Vermeule

Michigan Law Review

Suppose that a statute, enacted several decades ago, bans the introduction of any color additive in food if that additive "causes cancer" in human beings or animals. Suppose that new technologies, able to detect low-level carcinogens, have shown that many potential additives cause cancer, even though the statistical risk is often tiny - akin to the risk of eating two peanuts with governmentally-permitted levels of aflatoxins. Suppose, finally, that a company seeks to introduce a certain color additive into food, acknowledging that the additive causes cancer, but urging that the risk is infinitesimal, and that if the statutory barrier were …

Reply: The Institutional Dimension Of Statutory And Constitutional Interpretation, Richard A. Posner

Michigan Law Review

Cass Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule argue in Interpretation and lnstitutions that judicial interpretation of statutes and constitutions should take account both of the institutional framework within which interpretation takes place and of the consequences of different styles of interpretation; they further argue that this point has been neglected by previous scholars. The first half of the thesis is correct but obvious; the second half, which the authors state in terms emphatic to the point of being immodest, is incorrect. Moreover, the authors offer no feasible suggestions for how the relation between interpretation and the institutional framework might be studied better …

In The Wake Of Kyllo V. United States: The Future Of Thermal Imaging Cameras, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 507 (2003), Paul Kleppetsch

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Behind The Words: Interpreting The Hobbs Act Requirement Of "Obtaining Of Property From Another", 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 295 (2003), Kristal S. Stippich

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Twenty-Eighth Amendment: Why The Constitution Should Be Amended To Grant Congress The Power To Legislate In Furtherance Of The General Welfare, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 327 (2003), Casey L. Westover

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.