Rule of Law Commons^™

The Public's Right To Know: The Supreme Court As Pandora?, Loren P. Beth

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Public's Right to Know: The Supreme Court and the First Amendment by David M. O'Brien

Justice And The Bureaucratization Of Appellate Courts, Joseph Vining

Articles

The author notes the growing bureaucratization of appellate justice in the United States and, in particular, the drafting of opinions by law clerks rather than by judges. Taking the Supreme Court of the United States as an example, and comparing its internal procedure with that of large administrative agencies, he questions whether the method of analysis familiarly used by lawyers to arrive at an authoritative statement of law is applicable to legal texts bureaucratically produced. He suggests that legal method and its presuppositions are ultimately associated with the authority of law, and concludes that there may be critical losses not …

Constitutional Interpretation, Terrance Sandalow

Articles

"[We] must never forget," Chief Justice Marshall admonished us in a statement pregnant with more than one meaning, "that it is a constitution we are expounding."' Marshall meant that the Constitution should be read as a document "intended to endure for ages.to come, and, consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs."'2 But he meant also that the construction placed upon the document must have regard for its "great outlines" and "important objects."'3 Limits are implied by the very nature of the task. There is not the same freedom in construing the Constitution as in constructing a …

Immunity Under The Speech Or Debate Clause For Republican And From Questioning About Sources, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Gravel v. United States, which arose out of Senator Mike Gravel's attempt to publicize the Pentagon Papers, concerned the scope of the immunity conferred upon a legislator and his aide under article I, section 6, of the United States Constitution. This provision, commonly called the "speech or debate clause," provides that "for any Speech or Debate in either House, [United States Senators or Representatives] shall not be questioned in any other Place." Gravel is one of the few Supreme Court interpretations of this clause.

Judicial Supremacy Re-Examined: A Proposed Alternative, G. Sidney Buchanan

Michigan Law Review

A citizen critic recently expressed to me his bitter opposition to the Warren Court's decisions on school prayer and school desegregation. If this critic were elected governor of a state or placed in some other position of governmental authority, he would almost certainly use his power to block public school desegregation and to encourage prayer reading in the public schools. Conceding that our critic would be acting controversially in so using his power, would he be acting unconstitutionally? This is the question which this Article will attempt to answer. More generally, this Article will consider the extent to which a …

Reapportionment--Nine Years Into The "Revolution" And Still Struggling, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Malapportioned legislative districts traditionally have inhibited the effective working of government at the federal, state, and local levels. By 1960, the population disparities among legislative districts had attained such great magnitude "that the integrity of representative government was in many instances endangered." The underrepresented victims of malapportionment sought relief through the courts. Initially the Supreme Court, ever hesitant to enter the "political thicket," declined to address itself to reapportionment controversies. This era of judicial inaction ended in 1962 with the Court's ruling in Baker v. Carr, in which the plaintiffs overcame the formidable barrier posed by the political-question doctrine. …

The Warren Court And The Press, John P. Mackenzie

Michigan Law Review

The conventional wisdom about the relationship between the ·warren Court and the news media runs something like this: With a few exceptions, the press corps is populated by persons with only a superficial understanding of the Court, its processes, and the values with which it deals. The Court has poured out pages of legal learning, but its reasoning has been largely ignored by a result-oriented news industry interested only in the superficial aspects of the Court's work. The Court can trace much of its "bad press," its "poor image," to the often sloppy and inaccurate work of news gatherers operating …

Murphy: Congress And The Court, Robert B. Mckay

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Congress and the Court. By Walter F. Murphy

The Supreme Court And The Rule Of Law, Paul G. Kauper

Michigan Law Review

I should like to approach this afternoon's subject along two lines. On the one hand, I propose to develop the subject in terms of the Supreme Court's contribution to our understanding of the Rule of Law, and, on the other hand, I propose to look at the Supreme Court as a governmental institution subject to the Rule of Law. In short, I propose to discuss the Supreme Court both as an instrumentality for the development of the American concept of the Rule of Law and as an institution governed by the Rule of Law. Needless to say, these two approaches …

"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

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.

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

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

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

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. …