Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Legal Remedies Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Constitutional Law

Selected Works

Remedies

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Legal Remedies

What's A Judge To Do? Remedying The Remedy In Institutional Reform Litigation, Susan Poser Jun 2019

What's A Judge To Do? Remedying The Remedy In Institutional Reform Litigation, Susan Poser

Susan Poser

Democracy by Decree is the latest contribution to a scholarly literature, now nearly thirty-years old, which questions whether judges have the legitimacy and the capacity to oversee the remedial phase of institutional reform litigation. Previous contributors to this literature have come out on one side or the other of the legitimacy and capacity debate. Abram Chayes, Owen Fiss, and more recently, Malcolm Feeley and Edward Rubin, have all argued that the proper role of judges is to remedy rights violations and that judges possess the legitimate institutional authority to order structural injunctions. Lon Fuller, Donald Horowitz, William Fletcher, and Gerald …


“Nationwide” Injunctions Are Really “Universal” Injunctions And They Are Never Appropriate, Howard Wasserman May 2018

“Nationwide” Injunctions Are Really “Universal” Injunctions And They Are Never Appropriate, Howard Wasserman

Howard M Wasserman

Federal district courts are routinely issuing broad injunctions prohibiting the federal government from enforcing constitutionally invalid laws, regulations, and policies on immigration and immigration-adjacent issues. Styled “nationwide injunctions,” they prohibit enforcement of the challenges laws not only against the named plaintiffs, but against all people and entities everywhere.

The first problem with these injunctions is one of nomenclature. “Nationwide” suggests something about the “where” of the injunction, the geographic scope in which it protects. The better term is “universal injunction,” which captures the real controversy over the “who” of the injunction, as courts purport to protect the universe of all …


In Defense Of Implied Injunctive Relief In Constitutional Cases, John F. Preis Feb 2013

In Defense Of Implied Injunctive Relief In Constitutional Cases, John F. Preis

John F. Preis

If Congress has neither authorized nor prohibited a suit to enforce the Constitution, may the federal courts create one nonetheless? At present, the answer mostly turns on the form of relief sought: if the plaintiff seeks damages, the Supreme Court will normally refuse relief unless Congress has specifically authorized it; in contrast, if the plaintiff seeks an injunction, the Court will refuse relief only if Congress has specifi- cally barred it. These contradictory approaches naturally invite arguments for reform. Two common arguments—one based on the historical relationship between law and equity and the other based on separation of powers principles—could …


The New Due Process: Rights And Remedies, Doug R. Rendleman Dec 2012

The New Due Process: Rights And Remedies, Doug R. Rendleman

Doug Rendleman

This article discusses the "new" due process. Perhaps new is a misnomer. Due process was not discovered recently. It has been around a long time protecting varying interests from arbitrary action. The discovery called the "new" due process is merely that procedural protections are not so limited as previously thought. This article will examine the interests encompassed by the new due process and the remedial apparatus now being developed to protect those interests.


Prospective Remedies In Constitutional Adjudication, Doug R. Rendleman Dec 2012

Prospective Remedies In Constitutional Adjudication, Doug R. Rendleman

Doug Rendleman

No abstract provided.


Brief Of Reporter And Advisers To Restatement (Third) Restitution And Unjust Enrichment, As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Doug Rendleman, Douglas Laycock Dec 2012

Brief Of Reporter And Advisers To Restatement (Third) Restitution And Unjust Enrichment, As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Doug Rendleman, Douglas Laycock

Doug Rendleman

Restitution may be a casualty in a collision with the constitutional law of standing. Article III is traditionally said to require an “injury in fact” for standing to be a plaintiff in federal court. Edwards, who alleges that First American paid a bribe or kickback in violation of the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, seeks to recover the statutory penalty. Defendant argues that even if it violated the Act, Edwards suffered no “injury in fact.” Our amicus brief in support of Edwards alerts the Supreme Court to the many restitutionary claims either for a wrongdoer’s profits or to set …