Legislation Commons^™

After The Tiers: Windsor, Congressional Power To Enforce Equal Protection, And The Challenge Of Pointillist Constitutionalism, William D. Araiza

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of Idea Due Process, Mark Weber

College of Law Faculty

Due Process hearing rights under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act are under attack. A major professional group and several academic commentators charge that the hearings system advantages middle class parents, that it is expensive, that it is futile, and that it is unmanageable. Some critics would abandon individual rights to a hearing and review in favor of bureaucratic enforcement or administrative mechanisms that do not include the right to an individual hearing before a neutral decision maker. This Article defends the right to a due process hearing. It contends that some criticisms of hearing rights are simply erroneous, and …

Viva Conditional Federal Spending!, Samuel R. Bagenstos

Articles

From the rise of the New Deal through the constitutional litigation over the Affordable Care Act (ACA), conditional federal spending has been a major target for those who have sought to limit the scope of federal power. There are a couple of reasons for this. First, as the Supreme Court narrowed Congress's power to regulate private primary conduct and state conduct in the last twenty years,' conditional spending looked like the way Congress might be able to circumvent the limitations imposed by the Court's decisions. Thus, members of Congress quickly sought to blunt the impact of the Court's decision to …

Election Law's Lochnerian Turn, Ellen D. Katz

Articles

This panel has been asked to consider whether "the Constitution [is] responsible for electoral dysfunction."' My answer is no. The electoral process undeniably falls well short of our aspirations, but it strikes me that we should look to the Supreme Court for an accounting before blaming the Constitution for the deeply unsatisfactory condition in which we find ourselves.

Flying Into Mecca: When Gender Should Be A Bona Fide Occupational Qualification For Expatriation Assignments In Female-Hostile Host Countries, Richard F. Brueckner

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note examines the tension between preserving cultural identity and navigating the demands of globalization, particularly in the context of employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. It focuses on the "bona fide occupational qualification" (BFOQ) exception, which allows employers to discriminate based on certain qualifications essential to the job. The analysis critiques the narrow interpretation of BFOQ by courts and explores its application in religious and gender discrimination cases, proposing a balanced approach to reconcile business needs with anti-discrimination principles.

Overrides: The Super-Study, Victoria Nourse

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Overrides should be of interest to a far larger group of scholars than statutory interpretation enthusiasts. We have, in overrides, open inter branch encounters between Congress and the Courts far more typically found in the shadows of everyday Washington politics. Interestingly, Christiansen and Eskridge posit the court-congress relationship as more triadic than dyadic given the role played by agencies. One of their more interesting conclusions is that agencie are the big winners in the override game: agencies were present in seventy percent of the override cases and the agency view prevailed with Congress and against the Supreme Court in three-quarters …

Bond V. United States: Concurring In The Judgment, Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Bond v. United States presented the deep constitutional question of whether a treaty can increase the legislative power of Congress. Unfortunately, a majority of the Court managed to sidestep the constitutional issue by dodgy statutory interpretation. But the other three Justices—Scalia, Thomas, and Alito—all wrote important concurrences in the judgment, grappling with the constitutional issues presented. In particular, Justice Scalia’s opinion (joined by Justice Thomas), is a masterpiece, eloquently demonstrating that Missouri v. Holland is wrong and should be overruled: a treaty cannot increase the legislative power of Congress.

The Judicial Duty To Scrutinize Legislation, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Declaration of Independence famously declared, “[w]e hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” It then affirmed “[t]hat to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed.” This last sentence has proven to be problematic.

If “consent of the governed” means the consent of a majority of “We the people,” then the “consent of the governed” can be used to violate the unalienable …

Elementary Statutory Interpretation: Rethinking Legislative Intent And History, Victoria Nourse

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article argues that theorists and practitioners of statutory interpretation should rethink two very basic concepts—legislative intent and legislative history. Textualists urge that to look to legislative history is to seek an intent that does not exist. This article argues we should put this objection to bed because, even if groups do not have minds, they have the functional equivalent of intent: they plan by using internal sequential procedures allowing them to project their collective actions forward in time. What we should mean by legislative “intent” is legislative “context.” For a group, context includes how groups act—their procedures. Once one …

The Constitution And Legislative History, Victoria Nourse

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this article, the author provides an extended analysis of the constitutional claims against legislative history, arguing that, under textualists’ own preference for constitutional text, the use of legislative history should be constitutional to the extent it is supported by Congress’s rulemaking power, a constitutionally enumerated power.

This article has five parts. In part I, the author explains the importance of this question, considering the vast range of cases to which this claim of unconstitutionality could possibly apply—after all, statutory interpretation cases are the vast bulk of the work of the federal courts. She also explains why these claims should …

Legislative Diplomacy, Ryan M. Scoville

Michigan Law Review

A traditional view in legal scholarship holds that the U.S. Constitution assigns the president exclusive power to carry on official diplomatic communications with foreign governments. But in fact, Congress and its members routinely engage in communications of their own. Congress, for example, receives heads of state and maintains official contacts with foreign parliaments. And individual members of the House and Senate frequently travel overseas on congressional delegations (“CODELs”) to confer with foreign leaders, investigate problems that arise, promote the interests of the United States and constituents, and even represent the president. Moreover, many of these activities have occurred ever since …

State Session Freeze Laws—Potential Solution Or Unconstitutional Restriction?, Dru Swaim

Seattle University Law Review

Since the Citizens United decision in 2010 reduced Congress’s ability to constitutionally regulate money in elections, proponents of campaign finance reform have looked for alternative ways to achieve the goals of greater transparency and reduce the amount of money spent in federal elections. In the three years since Citizens United, the amount of money spent in federal campaigns has increased exponentially. In fact, the total amount of money spent in federal elections has nearly doubled since 2000. Citizens United represents a serious blow to the traditional methods used to restrict the amount of money in politics: limitations on the amounts …

The Undersigned Attorney Hereby Certifies -- The Washington Supreme Court Rule On Standards And Its Implications, Justice Sheryl Gordon Mccloud, Justice Susan Owens, Marc Boman, Joanne Moore

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

G Forces: Gideon V. Wainwright And Matthew Adler's Move Beyond Cost-Benefit Analysis, Janet Moore

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Dark Medicine: How The National Research Act Has Failed To Address Racist Practices In Biomedical Experiments Targeting The African-American Community, Anietie Maureen-Ann Akpan

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Do We Have It Right This Time? An Analysis Of The Accomplishments And Shortcomings Of Washington's Indian Child Welfare Act, Karen Gray Young

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Securing Food Justice, Sovereignty & Sustainability In The Face Of The Food Safety Modernization Act (Fsma), Eve Kerber

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Driving While License Suspended - Third Degree, A Framework For Requesting Alternative Sentences, Sahar Fathi

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

About The Authors

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Introduction, Jacqueline Mcmurtrie

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Gideon At Fifty -- Golden Anniversary Or Mid Life Crisis, Kim Taylor-Thompson

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Fifty Years After Gideon: It Is Long Past Time To Provide Lawyers For Misdemeanor Defendants Who Cannot Afford To Hire Their Own, Robert C. Boruchowitz

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Gideon: Looking Backward, Looking Forward, Looking In The Mirror, Steven Zeidman

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Legal Financial Obligations: Fulfilling The Promise Of Gideon By Reducing The Burden, Travis Stearns

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Does The Right To Counsel On Appeal End As You Exit The Court Of Appeals?, Nancy P. Collins

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Improving Access To Justice: Plain Language Family Law Court Forms In Washington State, Charles R. Dyer, Joan E. Fairbanks, M. Lynn Greiner, Kirsten Barron, Janet L. Skreen, Josefina Cerrillo-Ramirez, Andrew Lee, Bill Hinsee

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Congress' Encroachment On The President's Power In Indian Law And Its Effect On Executive-Order Reservations, Mark R. Carter Jd, Phd

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Authority Statements In Congress, Hanah Metchis Volokh

Florida Law Review

The structure of this Article is as follows. Part I discusses Congress’s authority and institutional capacity to interpret the Constitution. Part II situates constitutional authority statements within existing debates over constitutional interpretation outside the courts. Congress must necessarily make decisions about constitutional meaning when it legislates. Most scholars believe Congress has at least some independent authority to interpret the Constitution, while others think Congress should follow Supreme Court doctrine even when Congress disagrees. Regardless of which theory is correct, Congress needs to consider constitutionality (however defined) when legislating. CASs increase Congress’s capacity to do so by creating an institutional mechanism …

Preemption And Textualism, Daniel J. Meltzer

Michigan Law Review

In the critically important area of preemption, the Supreme Court’s approach to statutory interpretation differs from the approach it follows elsewhere. Whether in politically salient matters, like challenges to Arizona’s immigration laws, or in more conventional cases, such as those in which state tort liability overlaps with federal regulation, the Court’s preemption decisions reflect a highly purposive approach to reading statutes, most notably through the application of “obstacle preemption” analysis. Recently, however, Justice Thomas has objected to the Court’s failure in preemption cases to respect its more textualist approach to issues of statutory interpretation, and he has urged that obstacle …