Legislation Commons^™

Assessing The Need To Reform The Laws And Regulations, Perry R. Hagenstein

The National Forest Management Act in a Changing Society, 1976-1996: How Well Has It Worked in the Past 20 Years?: Will It Work in the 21st Century? (September 16-18)

2 pages.

The Copyright Act Of 1976 And Prejudgment Interest, Jon M. Powers

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that prejudgment interest should be presumptively available on damages-plus-profits awards under section 504(b) but should not be available for statutory damages under section 504(c). Part I argues that Supreme Court precedent suggests that the explicit reference to interest found in the Patent Act does not prevent courts from awarding prejudgment interest under the 1976 Copyright Act. Part II asserts that the 1976 Copyright Act's silence regarding prejudgment interest does not represent a congressional choice to exclude this remedy and that, in the face of this silence, the underlying purposes of section 504 should determine the propriety of …

Toward A "Due Foundation" For The Separation Of Powers: The Federalist Papers As Political Narrative, Victoria Nourse

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

During the past quarter century, lawyers have become strangely comfortable with descriptions of our government's structure that would, to an untutored ear, speak contradiction. We are quite satisfied to say that governmental powers are separate and shared, departments distinct and overlapping, functions autonomous and interdependent. We have settled into these contradictions as we would a roomy chair: talking this way is no longer controversial but taken for granted, uttered with a knowing wink, perceived as the starting point of sophisticated analysis. A not "entirely separate," but "entirely free," set of departments is the only way we can think about the …

Tragic Irony Of American Federalism: National Sovereignty Versus State Sovereignty In Slavery And In Freedom, The Federalism In The 21st Century: Historical Perspectives, Robert J. Kaczorowski

Faculty Scholarship

A plurality on the Supreme Court seeks to establish a state-sovereignty based theory of federalism that imposes sharp limitations on Congress's legislative powers. Using history as authority, they admonish a return to the constitutional "first principles" of the Founders. These "first principles," in their view, attribute all governmental authority to "the consent of the people of each individual state, not the consent of the undifferentiated people of the Nation as a whole." Because the people of each state are the source of all governmental power, they maintain, "where the Constitution is silent about the exercise of a particular power-that is, …

Stepping Into The Projects: Lawmaking, Storytelling, And Practicing The Politics Of Identification, Lisa A. Crooms

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

In her article, "The Black Community," Its Lawbreakers, and a Politics of Identification, Professor Regina Austin proposes a paradigm to move the Black community beyond a "manifestation of a nostalgic longing for a time when blacks were clearly distinguishable from whites and concern about the welfare of the poor was more natural than our hairdos.” Austin's politics of identification provides the conceptual framework through which the Black community can reconstitute itself in accordance with its own principles, which may or may not be those embraced by the mainstream. This article considers Professor Regina Austin’s politics of identification as practiced by …

Corrections Day, John Copeland Nagle

Journal Articles

In July 1995, the House of Representatives established a Corrections Day procedure for fixing statutory mistakes. This article traces the history of the corrections day idea, beginning with suggestions offered by Justices Cardozo and Ginsburg many years apart. The article also recounts the early applications of Correction Day by the House. This article describes the problem of statutory mistakes: what they are, and who makes them. It explains that statutory mistakes do exist, regardless of how one defines mistake. Congress, agencies, and the courts all make mistakes, though the responsibility for them ultimately resides with Congress, the author of the …

Introduction, Harold H. Bruff

Publications

As citizens, we ought to ensure that our criticisms of Congress are constructive, lest we damage ourselves. In that spirit, the American Bar Association's Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice created a special Congressional Process Committee to study selected aspects of congressional procedures and to recommend appropriate reforms. The Committee, which I chair, is composed of administrative lawyers who are experienced in legislative practice, or who have worked in Congress. We decided to address selected aspects of congressional structure and procedure for which we believe administrative lawyers possess relevant expertise.

The articles that form this Symposium grew out of …

Constitutional Constancy: Why Congress Should Cure Itself Of Amendment Fever, Kathleen M. Sullivan

Cardozo Law Review

The annual Benjamin N. Cardozo Lecture was delivered at the House of the Association on October 25, 1995, in memory of Benjamin N. Cardozo.

Paradise Lost, Paradigm Found: Redefining The Judiciary's Imperiled Role In Congress, Charles G. Geyh

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Long perceived as acting in splendid isolation, the legislative and judicial branches have become increasingly intertwined. The judiciary is becoming more involved in the legislative province of statutory reform, and Congress has inserted itself more frequently into the judicial territory of procedural rulemaking. In this article, Professor Geyh observes that a new, interactive paradigm has replaced the perceived model of separation and delegation between the brandies. As the judiciary and Congress have grown more enmeshed, the judiciary's reputation has suffered, both from a Watergate-vintage mistrust of all things governmental and from a perception that judicial activism is born of self-interest …

"A Government Of Limited And Enumerated Powers": In Defense Of United States V. Lopez, Steven G. Calabresi

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court's recent decision in United States v. Lopez marks a revolutionary and long overdue revival of the doctrine that the federal government is one of limited and enumerated powers. After being "asleep at the constitutional switch" for more than fifty years, the Court's decision to invalidate an Act of Congress on the ground that it exceeded the commerce power must be recognized as an extraordinary event. Even if Lopez produces no progeny and is soon overruled, the opinion has shattered forever the notion that, after fifty years of Commerce Clause precedent, we can never go back to the …

Foreword, Louis H. Pollak

Michigan Law Review

Introduction to the Symposium Reflections on United States v. Lopez

Enumerated Means And Unlimited Ends, H. Jefferson Powell

Michigan Law Review

United States v. Lopez can be read as a fairly mundane disagreement over the application of a long-settled test. The Government defended the statute under review in the case, the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, along familiar lines as a permissible regulation of activity affecting interstate and foreign commerce.

In this essay, I do not address the question whether Lopez was an important decision. My concern instead is with the problem that underlies Lopez's particular issue of the scope of the commerce power: Given our commitment to limited national government, in what way is the national legislature actually limited? …

Commerce!, Deborah Jones Merritt

Michigan Law Review

In this article, I explore the Supreme Court's new definition of "Commerce ... among the several States."9 In Part I, I examine three new principles that Lopez announces and that could significantly rework the Court's Commerce Clause jurisprudence. Part II, however, shows that these principles must be understood in the context of almost a dozen factors narrowing the Supreme Court's Lopez decision. Part II also demonstrates that the lower courts have understood the contextual uniqueness of Lopez and already have distinguished the decision in upholding more than half a dozen broad exercises of congressional authority. Part III then shows that …

The Constitutionality Of Legislative Supermajority Requirements: A Defense, John O. Mcginnis, Michael B. Rappaport

Articles

No abstract provided.

Power, Responsibility, And Republican Democracy, Marci A. Hamilton

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Power Without Responsibility: How Congress Abuses the People Through Delegation by David Schoenbrod

The Indiana Environmental Policy Act: Casting A New Role For A Forgotten Statute, Jeffrey L. Carmichael

Indiana Law Journal

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.

That The Laws Shall Bind Equally On All: Congressional And Executive Roles In Applying Laws To Congress, Harold H. Bruff

Publications

No abstract provided.

A Beginning And Not An End In Itself: The Role Of Risk Assessment In Environmental Decision-Making, John S. Applegate

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Legislative Intent Vs. Executive Non-Enforcement: A New Bounty Statute As A Solution To Executive Usurpation Of Congressional Power, George R. Rogers

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

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 …

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.

Congressional Oversight Of Morality: Sodomy Law Reform In The District Of Columbia, Gina M. Smith, Heidi Norton

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

On September 14, 1993, the District of Columbia successfully reformed the sodomy law with which it has been burdened for nearly two centuries. This reform appears at first glance to have been a major victory, not only for the lesbian and gay residents of the District for whom the law represented the greatest threat, but also for proponents of the principles of self-governance. But the road to this victory was a long and difficult one, spanning many decades and testing the outer limits of thd tenets of Home Rule and Congressional oversight of District affairs. This article sets forth the …

Arbitrability In Recent Federal Civil Rights Legislation: The Need For Amendment, Douglas E. Abrams

Faculty Publications

This Article discusses the shortcomings inherent in the consideration and enactment of the arbitrability provisions of the ADA and the 1991 Civil Rights Act. As a threshold matter, Part II demonstrates that the latter Act's textual encouragement of arbitration indicates that Congress misapprehended the effect of Gilmer, which the Supreme Court had decided barely six months before the Act's passage. Specifically, this Part will argue that after Gilmer, textual encouragement of arbitration has little or no greater legal significance than textual silence would have. In the few decades before the decision, textual encouragement would have had significant impact because particular …

Bonding, Structure And The Stability Of Political Parties: Party Government In The House, Gary W. Cox, Mathew D. Mccubbins

Faculty Scholarship

The public policy benefits that parties-deliver are allocated by democratic procedures that devolve ultimately to majority rule. Majority-rule decision making, however, does not lead to consistent policy choices; it is "unstable." In this paper, we argue that institutions - and thereby policy coalitions -- can be stabilized by extra-legislative organization. The rules of the Democratic Caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives dictate that a requirement for continued membership is support on the floor of Caucus decisions for a variety of key structural matters. Because membership in the majority party’s caucus is valuable, it constitutes a bond, the posting of …

Taxation Of Punitive Damages Obtained In A Personal Injury Claim, Douglas A. Kahn

Articles

The author explains that in recent court opinions and commentaries concerning whether punitive damages are taxable, considerable weight has been given to a negative inference that appears to lurk in a 1989 amendment to the relevant code provision, section 104(a)(2). To the contrary, he argues, the legislative history of that amendment and the form that the bill had when it was reported out of the Conference Committee establish beyond doubt that no such inference is warranted.

The Case Of The Prisoners And The Origins Of Judicial Review, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

For over one hundred years, scholars have closely studied the handful of cases in which state courts, in the years before the Federal Constitutional Convention, confronted the question whether they had the power to declare laws invalid. Interest in these early cases began in the late nineteenth century as one aspect of the larger debate about the legitimacy of judicial review, a debate triggered by the increasing frequency with which the Supreme Court and state courts were invalidating economic and social legislation. The lawyers, political scientists, and historians who initially unearthed the case law from the 1770s and 1780s used …

Advising The President: Separation Of Powers And The Federal Advisory Committee Act, Jay S. Bybee

Scholarly Works

This Article examines the tensions between Congress, the judiciary, and the President over presidential use of advisory committees. It argues that courts, in attempting to avoid difficult constitutional questions, have misread the Federal Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”). Properly construed, FACA violates separation of powers by limiting the terms on which the President can acquire information from nongovernmental advisory committees.

The author argues that the President does have the power to consult with outside advisers, and that FACA unconstitutionally infringes upon that power. FACA fails to draw a distinction between congressionally created advisory committees and presidentially created advisory committees, and assumes …

Presidential Interpretation Of The Constitution, David A. Strauss

Cardozo Law Review

May the executive branch disagree with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution, and act in accordance with its own view? We tend to associate this question with a few great constitutional crises. Disputes between President Jackson and the Supreme Court over the Bank of the United States; between President Lincoln and the Court over slavery; and between President Franklin Roosevelt and the Court over New Deal legislation, all produced memorable statements by presidents claiming a broad power to act independently from the Court's decisions. The school desegregation controversy was between the Court and some state governments, not the President, …