Legislation Commons^™

The Fdic's Fraudulent Conveyance Power Under The Crime Control Act Of 1990: Bank Insolvency Law And The Politics Of The Iron Triangle, Edward J. Janger

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Legal And Political Hermeneutics, Or Principles Of Interpretation And Construction In Law And Politics, With Remarks On Precedents And Authorities, Francis Lieber

Cardozo Law Review

The second edition of the Hermeneutics was published in 1839, and has now been out of print for almost forty years. In 1860 Dr. Lieber carefully revised it, and made additions to both text and notes, expecting to publish a third edition, with a second part, of "Special Hermeneutics, or Legal Rules of Interpretation and Construction," by an eminent member of the New York Bar, Mr. William Curtis Noyes. This plan, however, was not carried out, and Mr. Noyes died December 25, 1863, without having written his proposed part. The text of the present edition, and Dr. Lieber's own notes, …

Growing Pains For The Board Of Patent Appeals And Interferences: A Plan For Restoring Judicial Independence, 29 J. Marshall L. Rev. 171 (1995), Scott E. Baxendale

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Minutemen, The National Guard And The Private Militia Movement: Will The Real Militia Please Stand Up, 28 J. Marshall L. Rev. 959 (1995), Chuck Dougherty

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Emerging Role Of The Quid Pro Quo Requirement In Public Corruption .Prosecutions Under The Hobbs Act, Peter D. Hardy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note discusses the quid pro quo requirement under the Hobbs Act, a federal criminal statute which applies to bribery by public officials. The author first describes two recent decisions by the Supreme Court, McCormick v. United States and Evans v. United States, which established slightly different versions of a quid pro quo requirement in public corruption prosecutions under the Hobbs Act. The author then explains that the lower federal courts interpreting McCormick and Evans have molded the quid pro quo requirement so that a prosecutor must prove in all public corruption cases under the Hobbs Act that the …

Constructing A New Political Process: The Hegemonic Presidency And The Legislature, 28 J. Marshall L. Rev. 787 (1995), John P. Willerton, Alexsei A. Shulus

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

How To Think About The Federal Commerce Power And Incidentally Rewrite United States V. Lopez, Donald H. Regan

Articles

Almost sixty years after the "revolution" of 1937, we still do not have an adequate theory of the commerce power. The Court was right to abandon the theory of dual federalism epitomized by Carter v. Carter Coal Co.;' and it has got the right results in the major cases decided since then. But our post-1937 theory, whether before or after Lopez, is a mess. On the one hand, we have a collection of doctrinal rules that, if we take them seriously, allow Congress to do anything it wants under the commerce power. On the other hand, we continue to pay …

"Use" And The Irresistible Impulse To Legislate, Robert C. Dorf

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judges And Legislators: Enhancing The Relationship L. Ralph Mecham & Federal Courts Administration: A Decade Of Innovation And Progress , Deanell Reece Tacha

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Four Doctrines Of Self-Executing Treaties, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

A distinction has become entrenched in United States law between treaties that are "self-executing" and those that are not. The precise nature of this distinction--indeed, its very existence--is a matter of some controversy and much confusion. More than one lower federal court has pronounced the distinction to be the "most confounding" in the United States law of treaties. A tremendous amount of scholarship has sought to clarify this distinction, but the honest observer cannot but agree with John Jackson's observation that " [t]he substantial volume of scholarly writing on this issue has not yet resolved the confusion" surrounding it. The …

Congressional Commentary On Judicial Interpretations Of Statutes: Idle Chatter Or Telling Response?, James J. Brudney

Michigan Law Review

There are two principal aspects of my thesis. First, it is desirable to consider seriously these legislative signals of approval and disapproval, because a blanket rejection, or even systematic hostility, imposes significant opportunity costs on Congress. If the judiciary refuses to consider these signals, Congress will have to expend extra resources to achieve the same ends. That expense will diminish the institution's ability to enact other laws and in some cases will alter the character of the other laws that it is able to enact. The consequent diminution or depletion of Congress's legislative authority is unhealthy from a democratic perspective …

Management Approaches To Addressing Takings Issues: Endangered Species Protection, I. Michael Heyman

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

15 pages.

Contains footnotes.

Private Property Rights Protection Legislation Across The Nation, Nancie G. Marzulla

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

25 pages (includes 1 map).

Contains footnotes.

Searching For Basinwide Solutions To Endangered Species Problems Of The South Platte Of Colorado, James S. Lochhead

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

42 pages (includes illustrations and map).

Contains endnotes.

Regulatory Taking Of Public Water And Land Resource Development Rights After Lucas, Jerome C. Muys

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

7 pages.

“Takings” And The Endangered Species Act, Oliver A. Houck

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

3 pages.

Mining Regulation(S) And Takings, Lawrence G. Mcbride

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

12 pages.

Contains footnotes.

The Fifth Amendment And The Retained Sovereignty Doctrine: A Study Of The Endangered Species Act And The Central Valley Project Improvement Act As Applied To Central Valley Project Water Service Contracts, Brian E. Gray

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

12 pages.

What A Federal Natural Resource Management Agency Can Do To Avoid Takings, John D. Leshy

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

6 pages.

The Endangered Species Act And Constitutional Takings, Robert Meltz

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

18 pages.

Contains references.

Mining Regulation And Takings, L. Thomas Galloway

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

15 pages.

Property Rights And Public Resources, Mark L. Pollot

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

4 pages.

Regulatory Takings And Resources: What Are The Constitutional Limits?, Virginia S. Albrecht

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

52 pages.

Contains footnotes.

Agenda: Regulatory Takings And Resources: What Are The Constitutional Limits?, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center, Byron R. White Center For The Study Of American Constitutional Law

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

Sponsored by the University of Colorado's Natural Resources Law Center and the Byron R. White Center for American Constitutional Study.

Conference organizers, faculty and/or moderators included University of Colorado School of Law professors David H. Getches, Lawrence J. MacDonnell, Gene R. Nichol, Jr. and Mark Squillace.

Governmental regulation for environmental protection and other important public purposes can affect the manner in which land and natural resources are developed and used. The U.S. constitution (and most state constitutions) prohibit the government from "taking" property without payment of compensation. Originally intended to apply to situations where the government physically seized private property …

Takings And Retroactivity, Jan G. Laitos

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

25 pages.

Contains references.

Floodplain And Wetland Regulatory “Takings”, Jon A. Kusler

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

4 pages.

Background Principles Of Wetlands Law: The Early History, Fred P. Bosselman

Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15)

15 pages.

Contains 3 pages of references.

The Equal Access To Justice Act--Are The Bankruptcy Courts Less Equal Than Others?, Matthew J. Fischer

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that the bankruptcy courts have authority under the BAJA to shift fees against the federal government. Part I discusses the relevant caselaw and examines the basis of the current controversy. Part II examines the statutory language, the legislative history, and the stated purposes of the BAJA and concludes that each of these aspects of the statute demonstrates a congressional intent to grant fee-shifting authority to the bankruptcy courts. Part III considers alternatives to finding bankruptcy court jurisdiction over BAJA disputes, rejecting each as inefficient and unnecessary. This Note concludes that courts should construe the BAJA consistently with …

28 U.S.C. § 1658: A Limitation Period With Real Limitations, Kimberly Jade Norwood

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Reports: Introduction, J. Clark Kelso

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.