Jurisprudence Commons^™

Jurisprudence: Readings And Cases, Dr. Miriam Theresa Rooney

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

Where's The Fire?, Burt Neuborne

Journal of Law and Policy

Freedom of speech is priceless, but distressingly fragile. Life, and law, would be much simpler if we could react to free speech's importance and fragility by granting it absolute legal protection. Since, however, absolute protection of speech is not—and should not be—a serious option, we face the legal realist challenge of erecting a First Amendment legal structure capable of providing real-world protection to highly controversial speech, often by weak speakers, without closing the door to government regulation. Given the uncertainty inherent in applying fact-dependent complex rules in protean factual settings, many potential speakers would avoid being drawn into unpredictable and …

Protecting Hatred Preserves Freedom: Why Offensive Expressions Command Constitutional Protection, Andrew P. Napolitano

Journal of Law and Policy

The First Amendment is not the guardian of taste. Instead, the U.S. Constitution wholeheartedly protects freedom of thought and expression, even if generated and defined by hatred, as long as that expression does not produce immediate lawless violence. Although free speech may lead to tenuous relationships or uncomfortable debates, it must be defended unconditionally. Too many politicians and lawmakers believe that the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment attaches only to those ideas and expressions that they approve of; this is not so. This article argues that the Founders intended the First Amendment's free speech principle as a …

Freedom Of Speech And Equality: Do We Have To Choose?, Nadine Strossen

Journal of Law and Policy

As a lifelong activist on behalf of both equality and free speech, I am convinced, based on actual experience, that these core values are mutually reinforcing, and not, as some have argued, in tension with each other. Moreover, I am convinced that this is true even for offensive or hateful speech that affronts our most cherished beliefs. However, defining hateful or offensive speech is inherently arbitrary and subjective, which raises concerns about what speech should be restricted, and how. Empowering government to punish hateful or offensive expresson necessarily vests officials with enormous discretionary power, which will inevitably lead to arbitrary …

The Academy, Campaign Finance, And Free Speech Under Fire, Bradley A. Smith

Journal of Law and Policy

This article discusses the issue of campaign finance and the impact money has on the political process in the country. The author suggests campaign finance regulations that curb the current threat it poses to the system, as well as the First Amendment itself. Lastly, the author discusses the impact academics have had on the debate and this decline in support of free speech that has resulted from the debate.

Producing Democratic Vibrancy, K. Sabeel Rahman

Journal of Law and Policy

Professor Rahman gives his thoughts and opinions on the impact of Citizens' United v. FEC and the growth of the First Amendment debate since. The comment analyzes the normative udnerstanding of democracy and the ongoing debate campaifgn finance have. Professor Rahman concludes by suggesting that the debate is wrongly focused on the indivudals being consumers of politcal speech rather than the producers of it.

A Balancing Act For American Universities: Anti-Harassment Policy V. Freedom Of Speech, Bridget Hart

Journal of Law and Policy

Legal scholars, educational administrators, journalists, and students have all witnessed a rise in students being disciplined by university officials for speech and conduct deemed inappropriate for college campuses. In endeavoring to explain this trend, some academics point to the disconnect between the Department of Education and university administrators regarding the legal standards for campus anti-harassment policies. The lack of clarity regarding what constitutes harassment on college campuses has resulted in the punishment of students by universities for speech and conduct that is normally considered to be protected speech under the First Amendment. This note first provides an overview of the …

When You Come To A Fork In The Road, Take It: Unifying The Split In New York's Analysis Of In-House Attorney-Client Privilege, Thomas O'Connor

Journal of Law and Policy

As one surveys the vast and ever-changing landscape of law and litigation, few things stand out as so unanimously exalted and carefully guarded as the privilege protecting attorney-client communications. Yet there is today a surprising lack of uniformity and predictability in the reasoning by which New York courts determine whether a communication made by in-house counsel to its corporate client will – or will not – enjoy the protection of that privilege. Rather than follow a single and predictable analysis to resolve the question, New York courts have oscillated between one line of decisions focusing primarily on the purpose of …

Local And State Governments Are Taking The Stage When It Is Fda's Curtain Call - Are Local And State Governments' Safety Warnings Preempted By Federal Law?, Melissa M. Card

Journal of Food Law & Policy

Eliminated from fad diets, sworn off by celebrities, and frantically reformulated out of processed foods, added sugars have been deemed the new nutritional scoundrel. Recent studies from the American Heart Association, the World Health Organization, and the American Cancer Association demonstrate that the consumption of added sugar leads to increased risks of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and gout. While all foods containing added sugar are deemed unhealthy, Sugary-Sweetened Beverages ("SSBs") are said to be especially toxic by the American health community, by virtue of these beverages' being excessively high in added sugar content, low in satiety, and incomplete in compensation …

State-Action Immunity And Section 5 Of The Ftc Act, Daniel A. Crane, Adam Hester

Michigan Law Review

The state-action immunity doctrine of Parker v. Brown immunizes anticompetitive state regulations from preemption by federal antitrust law so long as the state takes conspicuous ownership of its anticompetitive policy. In its 1943 Parker decision, the Supreme Court justified this doctrine, observing that no evidence of a congressional will to preempt state law appears in the Sherman Act’s legislative history or context. In addition, commentators generally assume that the New Deal court was anxious to avoid re-entangling the federal judiciary in Lochner-style substantive due process analysis. The Supreme Court has observed, without deciding, that the Federal Trade Commission might …

The Court Of Appeals As The Middle Child, Raymond Lohier

Fordham Law Review

It’s said that middle children are most likely to be forgotten in the chaos of family life. The same could be said of the U.S. Courts of Appeals, which in 2016, mark their 125th anniversary, and which are the middle child of the federal judicial family. As too few people, even academics, know, the courts of appeals were created in 1891 by the Evarts Act, more than a century after the Constitution and the First Judiciary Act. The history of the courts of appeals has accordingly hovered somewhat uneasily next to that of the U.S. Supreme Court and the district …

Moving Towards Harmonization Of The Food Safety Standards: Role Of The Tpp And Ttip Agreements, Ksenia A. Petrovets

Journal of Food Law & Policy

We are now less dependent on locally available food resources that we have ever been. The continuing industrialization of food production, the advancement in technologies and the rapid development of supply chains granted us the luxury of immediate access to a variety of products originating from local supermarkets all over the world. This, along with the greater level of food production industrialization, inevitably comes the rise of related food safety risks. Because of the enlargement of producing operations, an emerging safety threat in one place may result in a foodborne illness outbreak thousands of miles away from its place of …

Will Consumers Be In The "Dark" About Labels On Genetically Engineered And Modified Foods?, Hilary Nat

Journal of Food Law & Policy

In the 1900s, the United States began to sell genetically engineered foods. One of the first genetically engineered foods sold in the United States and approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was the Flavr Savr tomato. The tomato's genetic structure was modified to prevent softening which allowed it to ripen after being picked. In the United States, statistics demonstrate that 92% of com, 94% of soybeans, and 94% of cotton sold is genetically engineered. In addition, it is estimated that 75% of the processed foods sold in supermarkets around the United States contain ingredients that are products of …

Maximinimalism, Jamal Greene

Cardozo Law Review

The article explores Chief Justice John Roberts' judicial approach, characterizing it as "maximinimalism"—a blend of narrow decision-making with deep, impactful reasoning. While Roberts is often seen as a minimalist for his emphasis on deciding cases narrowly, his rulings in significant cases like Citizens United v. FEC, Shelby County v. Holder, and NFIB v. Sebelius reveal a deeper, more substantive approach that challenges the law, thus embodying maximalist tendencies. This duality allows the Court to influence the law profoundly while maintaining judicial restraint.

Energy Drink Regulations: Why The Time For More Fda Authority Is Not Ripe And How States Can Protect Children Without Unjustly Infringing On Adult Autonomy, Larry D. Treat

Journal of Food Law & Policy

In December of 2011, Anais Fournier ("Anais"), a fourteen-year-old from Maryland, was at the mall with her friends when she drank a twenty-four ounce Monster energy drink. Within twenty-four hours, Anais consumed a second twenty-four ounce energy drink. Together, the two Monster energy drinks Anais consumed contained around 480 milligrams ("mg") of caffeine. A few hours after the second drink, Anais went into cardiac arrest and later died from cardiac arrhythmia. An autopsy found that caffeine toxicity caused Anais's arrhythmia and impeded her heart's ability to pump blood. As it turns out, Anais suffered from a preexisting heart condition called …

2016 China Food Law Update, Michael T. Roberts, Ching-Fu Lin

Journal of Food Law & Policy

This update of China food law builds on a unique feature for the Journal of Food Law & Policy that has been provided since the Journal's inception - separate food law updates for both the United States and European Union. "Recognizing the globalness of the modem food system, these updates have served an invaluable role in keeping scholars and practitioners abreast of the world's leading food regulatory systems." China's emergence as a developed, modem food regulatory system with the potential of being a leading food regulatory system makes sense given its position as a world economic powerhouse. China's role in …

The Roberts Court And The New Textualism, Anton Metlitsky

Cardozo Law Review

The article explores the Roberts Court's approach to statutory interpretation, focusing on its adherence to the "new textualism," a methodology emphasizing the plain meaning of statutory text. While recent cases like King v. Burwell, Bond v. United States, and Yates v. United States appear to prioritize statutory purpose over textual meaning, the Court's reasoning reinforces its commitment to textualism by framing decisions within textualist methodology, even when outcomes seem to depart from strict textual interpretation.

The Core Of An Unqualified Case For Judicial Review: A Reply To Jeremy Waldron And Contemporary Critics, Alexander Kaufman, Michael B. Runnels

Brooklyn Law Review

No abstract provided.

Understanding Wellness International Network, Ltd. V. Sharif: The Problems With Allowing Parties To Impliedly Consent To Bankruptcy Court Adjudication Of Stern Claims, Elizabeth Jackson

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

The 2011 Supreme Court case Stern v. Marshall defined which claims bankruptcy courts had the authority to adjudicate, but it’s complicated holding left lower courts perplexed. Specifically, the Stern decision created “Stern claims”—claims that bankruptcy courts have the statutory, but not the constitutional, authority to adjudicate. Subsequent cases, such as Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison and Wellness International Network, Ltd. v. Sharif, have grappled with whether Stern claims should be treated as “core” claims, which bankruptcy courts can enter final judgments on, or “non-core” claims, which bankruptcy courts can only enter final judgments on if the litigating parties consent. …

Act Of State Doctrine: Actions Of Intervenors Appointed By The Cuban Government And Statements Of Counsel Do Not Constitute Sufficient Acts Of State To Come Within The Doctrine (Alfred Dunhill Of London, Inc. V. Republic Of Cuba, S. Ct. 1976), John C. Stephens

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Trademarks “Lanham Act” Foreign Registrants Need Not Allege Use In The United States And May Waive Filing Requirements Required For Domestic Applications (Scm Corporation V. Langis Foods, Ltd., D.C. Cir. 1976), John A. Cutler

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Jus Cogens In International Law, With A Projected List, Marjorie M. Whiteman

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The World Court And The Peaceful Settlement Of Disputes, Cornelius F. Murphy Jr.

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

In Memoriam: Justice Antonin Scalia And The Constitution's Golden Thread, L. Margaret Harker

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

El Derecho A Abortar Implica La Explotación Y El Abandono De Las Mujeres, Richard Stith

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Rechazos Fundamentales De La Doctina De Roe V. Wade, Richard Stith

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

La Construcción Contra El Desarrollo: Dos Maneras Distintas De Entender La Gestación Humana, Richard Stith

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Superfund Chaos Theory: What Happens When The Lower Federal Courts Don't Follow The Supreme Court, Steven Ferrey

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

There is legal chaos in the national Superfund. The Supreme Court reversed decisions of eleven federal circuit courts in United States v. Atlantic Research Corp. There is no instance in modern Supreme Court history where the Court reversed every federal circuit court in the country, as it did in Atlantic Research. The Supreme Court’s reversal was through a unanimous decision. This was extraordinary: It not only reversed the entire legal interpretation of one of America’s most critical statutes, but also re-allocated billions of dollars among private parties.

The Supreme Court, when it rendered its decision, seemed to be rectifying a …

Defining Ambiguity In Broken Statutory Frameworks And Its Limits On Agency Action, Amanda Urban

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

“The Problem” occurs when a statute’s provisions become contradictory or unworkable in the context of new or unforeseen phenomena, yet the statute mandates agency action. The application of an unambiguous statutory provision may become problematic or unclear. Similarly, unambiguous provisions may become inconsistent given a particular application of the statute. During the same term, in Scialabba and UARG, the Supreme Court performed a Chevron review of agency interpretations of statutes facing three variations of the Problem, which this Note characterizes as direct conflict, internal inconsistency, and unworkability. In each case, the Court defined ambiguity in various, nontraditional ways and …

Inefficient Inequality, Shi-Ling Hsu

Scholarly Publications

For the past several decades, much American lawmaking has been animated by a concern for economic efficiency. At the same time, broad concerns over wealth and income inequality have roiled American politics, and still loom over lawmakers. It can be reasonably argued that a tension exists between efficiency and equality, but that argument has had too much purchase over the past few decades of lawmaking. What has been overlooked is that inequality itself can be allocatively inefficient when it gives rise to collectively inefficient behavior. Worse still, some lawmaking only masquerades as being efficiency-promoting; upon closer inspection, some of this …