Legislation Commons^™

The Constitutionality Of An Executive Spending Plan, Paul E. Salamanca

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Operation of government in the absence of appropriations has become relatively common in the United States, particularly when projected expenses exceed projected revenue, making adoption of a budget a difficult task for the legislature. This Article focuses on the budget crisis in the Commonwealth of Kentucky from 2002 through 2003. In Part I, this Article recapitulates the history of the spending plan, including the action filed in Franklin Circuit Court to affirm its constitutionality. In Part II, this Article discusses certain theoretical, historical, and legal principles that inform analysis of the plan. In Part III, it considers certain deviations and …

Protecting The Constitution From The People: Juricentric Restrictions On Section Five Power, Robert C. Post, Reva B. Siegel

Indiana Law Journal

Symposium: Congressional Power in the Shadow of the Rehnquist Court: Strategies for the Future held at Indiana University Law School, February 1-2, 2002.

Federalism And The Public Good: The True Story Behind The Religious Land Use And Institutionalized Persons Act, Marci A. Hamilton

Indiana Law Journal

Symposium: Congressional Power in the Shadow of the Rehnquist Court: Strategies for the Future held at Indiana University Law School, February 1-2, 2002.

Reinforcing Representation: Enforcing The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments In The Rehnquist And Waite Courts, Ellen D. Katz

Articles

A large body of academic scholarship accuses the Rehnquist Court of "undoing the Second Reconstruction," just as the Waite Court has long been blamed for facilitating the end of the First. This critique captures much of what is meant by those generally charging the Rehnquist Court with "conservative judicial activism." It posits that the present Court wants to dismantle decades' worth of federal antidiscrimination measures that are aimed at the "reconstruction" of public and private relationships at the local level. It sees the Waite Court as having similarly nullified the civil-rights initiatives enacted by Congress following the Civil War to …

Thayerian Deference To Congress And Supreme Court Supermajority Rules: Lessons From The Past (Symposium: Congressional Power In The Shadow Of The Rehnquist Court: Strategies For The Future), Evan H. Caminker

Articles

Over the past eight years, the Supreme Court has been unusually aggressive in its exercise ofjudicial review over federal statutes challenged on federalism grounds. Eleven times the Court has invalidated provisions in federal statutes after determining that Congress exceeded the scope of its limited regulatory authority. In ten of the eleven cases, the vote was 5-4 with the identical five-Justice conservative majority (Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas) controlling the decision.

Best Mode: A Plea To Repair Or Sacrifice This Broken Requirement Of United States Patent Law, Steven B. Walmsley

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

An inventor's obligation to disclose the best mode of her invention is strong consideration in the U.S. patent bargain, but the courts paradoxically define the scope of that obligation, thus rendering the enforcement of U.S. patents unreasonably unpredictable. If an inventor cannot reasonably foresee the scope of her obligation to disclose invention details, then she is subjected to the costs and risks of either overcompliance or undercompliance with the best mode requirement. The scope of the best mode requirement should either be reliably defined by an en banc ruling of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, or the …

Losing Sight Of The Utilitarian Forest For The Retributivist Trees: An Analysis Of The Role Of Public Opinion In A Utilitarian Model Of Punishment, Andrew R. Strauss

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Demystifying Ambiguous Statutes With The Maxims Of Statutory Interpretation: A Closer Look At J.D. Tan, Llc V. Summers, Alexander Kleinberg

Seattle University Law Review

Section I begins with a brief discussion of the maxims of statutory interpretation and an explanation of how courts employ them to determine an enigmatic law's meaning. Section II provides a history of the J.D. Tan case, including a chronicle of the underlying dispute between the principal debtor, William Summers, and the assighee of the judgment holder, J.D. Tan, LLC. Section III explains why the statute at issue in J.D. Tan, RCW 6.17.020(3), was ambiguous when this case was decided, and how this statute was in need of judicial interpretation via application of the maxims of statutory interpretation. Section IV …

Federal Class Action Reform In The United States: Past And Future And Where Next?, Edward H. Cooper

Articles

Predicting the likely future developments in class action practice in the federal courts of the United States must begin in the past.

Statutes With Multiple Personality Disorders: The Value Of Ambiguity In Statutory Design And Interpretation, Joseph A. Grundfest, Adam C. Pritchard

Articles

Ambiguity serves a legislative purpose. When legislators perceive a need to compromise they can, among other strategies, "obscur[e] the particular meaning of a statute, allowing different legislators to read the obscured provisions the way they wish." Legislative ambiguity reaches its peak when a statute is so elegantly crafted that it credibly supports multiple inconsistent interpretations by legislators and judges. Legislators with opposing views can then claim that they have prevailed in the legislative arena, and, as long as courts continue to issue conflicting interpretations, these competing claims of legislative victory remain credible. Formal legal doctrine, in contrast, frames legislative ambiguity …

The Dynamic Judicial Opinion, William D. Popkin

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Eskridge's article on Dynamic Statutory Interpretation advances an aggressively pragmatic theory of interpretation but has had more influence among academics than judges because of a failure to attend to the problems of writing a candid, pragmatic and dynamic judicial opinion. This article argues that, although not free from doubt, a candid judicial opinion is preferable, and discusses how to write such an opinion - suggesting that judges rely on the "intent of the statute," not legislative intent; and adopt a personal/exploratory style in presenting their views.

Application Of The Rational Basis Test To Treaty-Implementing Legislation: The Need For A More Stringent Standard Of Review, Virginia H. Johnson

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Capital Punishment: 21st Century Lynching, Serena L. Hargrove

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Making The Case For Megan's Law: A Study In Legislative Rhetoric, Daniel M. Filler

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

In The Wake Of Crosby V. National Foreign Trade Council: The Impact Upon Selective Purchasing Legislation Throughout The United States, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 827 (2001), Ako Miyaki-Murphy

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

A New Approach To Statutory Interpretation In Washington, Philip A. Talmadge

Seattle University Law Review

In this article, I will first explore Washington's existing law, both statutory and judicial, on statutory interpretation. I will then evaluate the mechanisms for construing statutes derived from common law and legislative sources. Finally, I will recommend a new paradigm for statutory construction so that legislative intent may be more accurately conveyed to the courts, abandoning many of the time-encrusted canons in favor of principles of interpretation adhering more specifically to the legislature's actual statutory language.

Interpreting Urugual Round Agreements Act Section 102(B)'S Safeguards For State Sovereignty: Reconciling Judicial Independence With The United States Trade Representative's Policy Expertise, Brandon Johnson

Michigan Journal of International Law

In this Note, I address the concerns of one aspect of this academic commentary-the claim that the WTO Agreement may cause a tectonic shift in domestic regulatory power, away from the states and toward the federal government and/or the WTO. I argue that while the concerns about the loss of national sovereignty are exaggerated, there is a very real threat to the sovereignty of the States. Congress was aware of this danger and included a variety of provisions designed specifically to protect state sovereignty from federal encroachment in the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), the federal legislation incorporating the WTO …

From Miranda To §3501 To Dickerson To...(Symposium: Miranda After Dickerson: The Future Of Confession Law), Yale Kamisar

Articles

Once the Court granted [certiorari in Dickerson] court-watchers knew the hour had come. At long last the Court would have to either repudiate Miranda, repudiate the prophylactic-rule cases [the cases viewing Miranda's requirements as not rights protected by the Constitution, but merely "prophylactic rules"] or offer some ingenious reconciliation of the two lines of precedent. The Supreme Court of the United States, however, doesn't "have to" do anything, as the decision in Dickerson once again reminds us.

Politics And Sociology In Federal Civil Rulemaking: Errors Of Scope, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

In April 2000 the United States Supreme Court promulgated a package of Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that took effect on December 1, 2000, without Congressional intervention. As one commentator observed, “(a)ll of (the proposed amendments) promise to have a significant effect on discovery practice.” One Proposed Amendment--narrowing the scope of discovery available pursuant to Rule 26(b)(1)--was particularly controversial before both the Advisory Committee, the Standing Committee, and the Judicial Conference. Nonetheless, the Proposed Amended Rule narrowing scope proceeded from the Court to finality with no intervention by Congress. Proponents of the change minimized criticism by …

Convicting The Innocent Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: Some Lessons About Jury Instructions From The Sheppard Case, Lawrence Solan

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Federalism, Preclearance, And The Rehnquist Court, Ellen D. Katz

Articles

Lopez v. Monterey County is an odd decision. Justice O'Connor's majority opinion easily upholds the constitutionality of a broad construction of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) in language reminiscent of the Warren Court. Acknowledging the "substantial 'federalism costs" resulting from the VRA's "federal intrusion into sensitive areas of state and local policymaking," Lopez recognizes that the Reconstruction Amendments "contemplate" this encroachment into realms "traditionally reserved to the States." Justice O'Connor affirms as constitutionally permissible the infringement that the section 5 preclearance process "by its nature" effects on state sovereignty, and applies section 5 broadly, holding the statute …

State Constitutional Restrictions On Legislative Procedure: Rethinking Analysis Of Original Purpose, Single Subject, And Clear Title Challenges, Martha Dragich

Faculty Publications

Recognizing that state courts are beginning to review procedural challenges more rigorously, this Article attempts to provide guidance for the resolution of such cases. Part I examines the history, purposes, and standards of original purpose, single subject, and clear title restrictions, using Missouri's provisions as examples. Part I also identifies paradigmatic cases of each of the procedural violations with the hope of more sharply differentiating the three claims. Parts II through V present a case study of ten Missouri cases decided since 1994, supplemented with notable cases from other states. Part II begins with a brief description of the Missouri …

Rules And Judicial Review, Emily Sherwin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Judicial review of statutes on constitutional grounds is affected by a cluster of doctrinal practices that are generally accepted, but not very well explained, by the courts and not entirely consistent with each other. Courts usually judge statutes “as applied” rather than as written; they favor “severance” of valid applications of statutes from invalid or possibly invalid applications when possible; and they interpret statutes in ways that avoid constitutional difficulty. These overlapping practices presumably are intended to preserve legislation, and hence are associated with a modest conception of the role of courts in government. Yet they are not always modest …

Statutory Interpretation And Mr. Justice Rutledge, Nathaniel L. Nathanson

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Secret Evidence Repeal Act Of 1999, Part 2: Hearing Before The H. Comm. On The Judiciary, 106th Cong., May 23, 2000 (Statement Of David D. Cole, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), David Cole

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Secret Evidence Repeal Act Of 1999, Part 1: Hearing Before The H. Comm. On The Judiciary, 106th Cong., Feb. 10, 2000 (Statement Of David D. Cole, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), David Cole

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Should State Corporate Law Define Successor Liability - The Demise Of Cercla's Federal Common Law, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

During the 1980s and early 1990s, a series of decisions broadly interpreting the liability provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCIA) appeared destined to transform corporate law practice. CERCIA does not directly address successor liability, but the statute's complex and contradictory legislative history arguably implies that Congress wanted federal courts to apply broad liability principles to achieve the statute's fundamental remedial goal of making polluters and their successors pay for cleaning up hazardous substances.

Notably, a number of courts rejected state corporate law principles that usually limit the liability of successor corporations and instead …

John Marshall, Mcculloch V. Maryland, And The Southern States' Rights Tradition, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 875 (2000), R. Kent Newmyer

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

John Marshall In Spencer Roane's Virginia: The Southern Constitutional Opposition To The Marshall Court, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1131 (2000), F. Thornton Miller

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bitch V. Whore: The Current Trend To Define The Requirements Of An Actionable Hostile Environment Claim In Verbal Sexual Harassment Cases, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 465 (2000), Jamie Lynn Cook

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.