Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Rule of Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Supreme Court of the United States

Institution
Keyword
Publication Year
Publication
Publication Type

Articles 421 - 426 of 426

Full-Text Articles in Rule of Law

"Congress Shall Make No Law…":Ii, O. John Rogge Feb 1958

"Congress Shall Make No Law…":Ii, O. John Rogge

Michigan Law Review

The framers of the federal bill of rights by the First and Tenth Amendments sought to deny Congress power over utterances unless they were connected with criminal conduct other than advocacy. Any power over such utterances was to reside in the states. However, the Supreme Court departed from the framers' intent.

One of the factors in this development was the emergence of an undefined federal police power. This occurred largely under the commerce and postal clauses. It began over a century ago. As early as 1838 Congress passed a law requiring the installation of safety devices upon steam vessels. Beginning …


"Congress Shall Make No Law..."*, O. John Rogge Jan 1958

"Congress Shall Make No Law..."*, O. John Rogge

Michigan Law Review

It is the position of the writer that, at least so far as Congress is concerned, speech is as free as thought, and that unless and until speech becomes a part of a course of conduct which Congress can restrain or regulate no federal legislative power over it exists. State power, despite the Fourteenth Amendment, may be somewhat more extensive. Certainly the framers of the First Amendment intended that it should be. This article will deal with federal power over speech.


Constitutional Law - Due Process -Watkins V. United States As A Limitation On Power Of Congressional Investigating Committees, Allan F. Bioff S. Ed. Dec 1957

Constitutional Law - Due Process -Watkins V. United States As A Limitation On Power Of Congressional Investigating Committees, Allan F. Bioff S. Ed.

Michigan Law Review

It is the purpose of this comment to examine the nature and extent of the restraints imposed by the Watkins case as well as the potential problems raised by the decision.


Estoppel And Crown Privilege In English Administrative Law, Bernard Schwartz Nov 1956

Estoppel And Crown Privilege In English Administrative Law, Bernard Schwartz

Michigan Law Review

Perhaps the most anachronistic doctrine in Anglo-American public law is that of sovereign immunity. Under it, the State is placed in a privileged position of immunity from the principles of law which are binding upon the ordinary citizen, unless it expressly consents to be bound by such principles. In Anglo-American law the infallibility attributed to the King in the days when he was personally sovereign has been more recently recognized in the State, which the Crown now merely personifies. Thus, even today, and even in the American democracy, the basic principle of public law is that the King can do …


Constitutional Decisions By A Bare Majority Of The Court, Robert Eugene Cushman Jun 1921

Constitutional Decisions By A Bare Majority Of The Court, Robert Eugene Cushman

Michigan Law Review

In December, 1823, the legislature of Kentucky, in a blaze of resentment against a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States invalidating a Kentucky statute,' petitioned Congress "so to organize the Supreme Court of the United States that no constitutional question * * * involving the validity of State laws, shall be decided by said Court unless two-thirds of all the members belonging to said court shall concur in such decision." 2 At the same time a United States senator from Kentucky was demanding that Congress- require for such decisions the concurrence of seven judges out of a …


Limits To State Control Of Private Business, Thomas M. Cooley Dec 1877

Limits To State Control Of Private Business, Thomas M. Cooley

Articles

The present purpose is to inquire whether, in the matter of the regulation of property rights and of business, legislation has not of late been occupying doubtful, possibly unconstitutional grounds. The discussion in the main must be limited to fundamental.-principles, aided by such light as legal and constitutional history may throw upon them, since the express provisions of the constitutions can give little assistance. They always contain the general guaranty of due process of law to life, liberty, and property, but in other particulars they for the most part leave protection to principles which have come from the common law. …