President/Executive Department Commons^™

Bring Back The Draft?, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Politics And Principle: An Alternative Take On Seth P. Waxman's Defending Congress, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Steel Seizure Case: One Of A Kind?, Neal Devins, Louis Fisher

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Civil Rights And Civil Liberties In A Crisis: A Few Pages Of History, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

Tribute to Judge Procter Hug of the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, based on a talk adapted from Thomas E. Baker's At War With the Constitution: A History Lesson from the Chief Justice, 14 BYU J. Pub.L. 69 (1999).

It is but a truism that the powers of the government are greatest when the Nation is at war. All of our wartime Commanders-in-Chief have conducted themselves based on this belief. For its part, the Supreme Court has acquiesced in draconian measures undertaken by the Executive that would not be permitted during peacetime. The lasting problem …

Structural Principles And Presidential Succession, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

At War With Civil Rights And Civil Liberties, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

This essay looks at the Supreme Court and acquiescence to measures by the Executive Branch that limit or suspend civil liberties during times of war or threats to national security.

Falling Out Of Love With America: The Clinton Impeachment And The Madisonian Constitution, Frank O. Bowman Iii

Faculty Publications

First, were the Nixon and Clinton affairs truly as different as my memory makes them? Were the villains of Watergate as villainous and the heroes as heroic as I remember them? Were nearly all the players on both sides of l'affaire Lewinsky as shallow and fatuous as they seemed? Or to put the question in broader historical context, was the impeachment of Bill Clinton truly distinct, not only from Watergate, but from all of the other (fortunately few) occasions on which a president was seriously threatened with removal from office? Second, if the Clinton impeachment really was as bizarre, unprecedented, …

Impeachment Defanged And Other Institutional Ramifications Of The Clinton Scandals, Michael J. Gerhardt

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Abdication By Another Name: An Ode To Lou Fisher, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Special Constitutional Structure Of The Federal Impeachment Process, Michael J. Gerhardt

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Perils Of Presidential Impeachment, Michael J. Gerhardt

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

High Crimes And Misdemeanors: Defining The Constitutional Limits On Presidential Impeachment, Frank O. Bowman Iii, Stephen L. Sepinuck

Faculty Publications

This Article had its genesis in a statement by the authors submitted to the House Judiciary Committee during its proceedings regarding the impeachment of President Clinton. This final much expanded version appears after the conclusion of the Clinton impeachment proceedings in the Senate, and it is certainly informed by the course those proceedings took. Strictly speaking, however, this is not an article “about” the Clinton impeachment. Although this Article draws some conclusions from the treatment by the House and Senate of the fundamental allegations against President Clinton, it does not address in detail the specific facts underlying those allegations. The …

The Historical And Constitutional Significance Of The Impeachment And Trial Of President Clinton, Michael J. Gerhardt

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Lessons Of Impeachment History, Michael J. Gerhardt

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Hypocrites And Barking Harlots: The Clinton-Lewinsky Affair And The Attack On Women, Christina E. Wells

Faculty Publications

This essay defends against the wholesale castigation of women who support the President. It reveals that such criticism is wrong and unfair. Specifically, it demonstrates that the critics have unreasonably characterized women's responses to Clinton as hypocritical or extremely naive, rather than as examples of astute political decision-making. The essay further exposes the sexism underlying the critics' arguments, revealing that stereotypes regarding (1) women's role as the keeper of morals and (2) women as non-political or non-rational beings are at the heart of much of the criticism. By reinforcing these stereotypes, the critics pose a greater danger to women than …

Dog That Rarely Barks: Why The Courts Won't Resolve The War Powers Debate, Jonathan L. Entin

Faculty Publications

There is a certain irony about the stimulating papers by Louis Fisher and Peter Shane: the political scientist, Fisher, makes a normative constitutional argument of the sort typically made by legal scholars; the legal scholar, Shane, makes an institutional and policy analysis of the sort typically made by political scientists. Nevertheless, these papers share a common theme: that the President does not and should not have unfettered or unilateral power in the war-making area. Both also focus on war powers rather than other aspects of foreign affairs such as treaties and executive agreements, but their approaches have implications for those …

Synecdoche And The Presidency: The Removal Power As Symbol, Jonathan L. Entin

Faculty Publications

In this brief comment I want to explore the reasons for this phenomenon. I will illustrate my point by reference to the seminal case of Myers v. United States, which is not discussed in the symposium contribution by Calabresi and Yoo not surprising, because that case was decided well after the period upon which they focus here. After that, I will suggest some reasons why the removal power, despite its limited substantive importance, retains its grip on the academic and political imagination.

Congressional-Executive Information Access Disputes: A Modest Proposal - Do Nothing, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Unitariness And Independence: Solicitor General Control Over Independent Agency Litigation, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

With a few exceptions, the Solicitor General controls all aspects of independent agency litigation before the Supreme Court. Solicitor General control of Supreme Court litigation creates a tension between independent agency freedom and the Solicitor General's authority. On the one hand, Solicitor General control provides the United States with a unitary voice before the Supreme Court, and provides the Court with a trustworthy litigator to explicate the government's position. On the other hand, such control may undermine the autonomy of independent agency decision making. In this Article, the author argues for a hybrid model of independent agency litigation in the …

The Confirmation Process And The Quality Of Political Debate, Jonathan L. Entin

Faculty Publications

This Article examines the seeming contradiction between the rise of the ideological model and the increasing public revulsion against the degrading spectacle that the confirmation process all too often has become. The principal problem with recent confirmation debates has been the exaggeration of the stakes of argument. Participants have focused so single-mindedly on winning the immediate battle that they have lost sight of the limited impact that any individual justice can have on American law and society. I suggest that the kind of political discourse which can promote effective government has both normative and empirical components. The normative aspect involves …

Political Will And The Unitary Executive: What Makes An Independent Agency Independent?, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Ronald V. Dellums V. George Bush (D.D.C. 1990): Memorandum Amicus Curiae Of Law Professors, Bruce A. Ackerman, Abram Chayes, Lori Fisler Damrosch, John Hart Ely, Erwin N. Griswold, Gerald Gunther, Louis Henkin, Harold Hongju Koh, Philip B. Kurland, Laurence H. Tribe, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Publications

This joint memorandum is submitted to the court hearing Dellums v. Bush. This amicus brief advocates that the President may not order American armed forces to make war without consultation with and approval by Congress. The brief also argues that the case is justiciable.

The President's Powers As Commander-In-Chief Versus Congress' War Power And Appropriations Power, Charles W. Bennett, Arthur B. Culvahouse, Geoffrey P. Miller, William Bradford Reynolds, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Publications

This joint work explores a variety of viewpoints all centered around the War Powers Resolution and its application to the situation in the Persian Gulf.

Averting Government By Consent Decree: Constitutional Limits On The Enforcement Of Settlements With The Federal Government, Jeremy A. Rabkin, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Congressional Standing To Sue: Whose Vote Is This, Anyway?, R. Lawrence Dessem

Faculty Publications

The article is divided into three major sections. Section I traces the development of a separate doctrine of “congressional standing.” It examines the doctrine's development from the Supreme Court's initial consideration of legislative standing through the current opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Section II then analyzes three possible theories of congressional injury and standing. Derivative, representative, and third-party standing theories are all rejected as a basis for congressional standing. While rejecting the suggestion that congressmen possess a personal interest in “their” votes sufficient to constitute the “distinct and palpable injury” required …

How Successfully Can The States' Item Veto Be Transferred To The President?, Louis Fisher, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Edward Keyes' Undeclared War: Twilight Zone Of Constitutional Power, W. Taylor Reveley Iii

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Book Review Of War Powers Of The President And Congress: Who Holds The Arrows And Who Holds The Olive Branch?, William B. Spong Jr.

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Role Of Congress In Determining Incidental Powers Of The President And Of The Federal Courts: A Comment On The Horizontal Effect Of "The Sweeping Clause", William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Allocation Of The War Powers Between The President And Congress: 1787-88, W. Taylor Reveley Iii

Faculty Publications

For some time the international community has been keenly interested in the foreign uses to which America puts its military. The nature of these uses has traditionally been affected by the manner in which the Constitution divides the war powers between the President and Congress. This allocation of war-peace authority, in tum, is the product of a number of influences, among them the intentions of the Framers and Ratifiers for the text which they drafted and approved. Their war-power debates, as we shall see, have heavy international overtones.These debates have not been neglected, especially during America's recent involvement in Indochina. …