Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Of Citizen Suits And Citizen Sunstein, Harold J. Krent, Ethan G. Shenkman

Michigan Law Review

After briefly summarizing Lujan and addressing Sunstein's critique, we explore the concept of accountability underlying the creation of a single executive in Article II. We then apply our theory of the unitary executive to several examples of broad grants of statutory standing, concluding that Congress can confer standing on private citizens only if it specifically articulates and individuates the interests whose violation gives rise to a cognizable case. Although we agree with Sunstein's view that broad grants of statutory standing do not necessarily trench upon constitutional values, we ultimately side with Justice Scalia in concluding that universal citizen standing, as …

Legitimating Death, Louis D. Bilionis

Michigan Law Review

This article arrives at the surprising conclusion that a meaningful Eighth Amendment death penalty jurisprudence lives on, that it is a quite intelligible jurisprudence, and that it is driven by a coherent methodology with firm roots in the traditions of constitutional adjudication.

To reach that conclusion, it is helpful first to have some sense of what the Supreme Court has been doing in the death penalty area lately. Part I thus presents a topical review of the Court's recent work, identifying the themes that now dominate, pointing out the concerns those themes raise, and asking whether any sense can be …

Starting From Scratch: The First Amendment Reporter-Source Privilege And The Doctrine Of Incidental Restrictions, Marcus A. Asner

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note examines reporters' claims to a First Amendment reporter-source privilege in light of First Amendment doctrine as a whole. Part I briefly explains the current state of reporter-source privileges and the policies behind them. Part II then attempts to identify doctrinal support for the press's claim to a First Amendment privilege. Part II rejects the notion that the First Amendment affords special protection to the press as an institution. A reporter's status as a member of the institutional media is not irrelevant, however, and the well-established principle that the government may not target or single out the press for …

Souring On Lemon: The Supreme Court's Establishment Clause Doctrine In Transition, Roald Y. Mykkeltvedt

Mercer Law Review

In his opinion for the Court in the landmark case of Everson v. Board of Education, Justice Black held that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment erected a high and impregnable "wall of separation" between church and state. Relying primarily on the writings of James Madison and Thomas Jefferson to discern the intentions of the framers, Justice Black maintained that, at the very least, the establishment proscription meant that

rn]either a state nor the Federal Government .. .can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another .... No tax in any …

Girls Lean Back Everywhere: The Law Of Obscenity And The Assault On Genius, Anne E. Gilson

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Girls Lean Back Everywhere: The Law of Obscenity and the Assault on Genius by Edward de Grazia

The Care And Feeding Of The United States Constitution, Abner J. Mikva

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Intelligible Constitution by Joseph Goldstein

If The Eye Offend Thee, Turn Off The Color, John Harrison

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Color-Blind Constitution by Andrew Kull

Constitutional Judgment, Gene R. Nichol

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Constitutional Interpretation by Philip Bobbitt

The Nonsupreme Court, Kathleen M. Sullivan

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Constitution in Conflict by Robert A. Burt

Strangers On A Train, Peirre N. Leval

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Make No Law: The Sullivan Case and the First Amendment by Anthony Lewis

Court-Gazing, Stephen F. Williams

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Turning Right: The Making of the Rehnquist Supreme Court by David G. Savage and Deciding To Decide: Agenda Setting in the United States Supreme Court by H.W. Perry, Jr.

Capital Punishment's Future, Welsh S. White

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Capital Punishment in America by Raymond Paternoster

A Biography Of The Second Justice Harlan, Louis R. Cohen

Michigan Law Review

A Review of John Marshall: Great Dissenter of the Warren Court by Tinsley E. Yarbrough

Supreme Court's Tilt To The Property Right: Procedural Due Process Protections Of Liberty And Property Interests, Jack M. Beermann, Barbara A. Melamed, Hugh F. Hall

Faculty Scholarship

The Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution provide important protections against government oppression. They provide that government may not deprive any person of "life, liberty or property" without due process of law. In recent decisions, the Supreme Court has appeared willing to strengthen its protection of traditional property interests yet weaken its protection of liberty interests.

It has long been accepted, albeit with controversy, that due process has both procedural and substantive elements. This essay concerns the procedural elements. Procedural due process analysis asks two questions: first, whether there exists a liberty …

Democracy In The Age Of Television, Theodore Y. Blumoff

Mercer Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Civil Rights Act Of 1991: A “Quota Bill,” A Codification Of Griggs, A Partial Return To Wards Cove, Or All Of The Above?, Kingsley R. Browne

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Antitrust 1991-92: The Revenge Of The Amici, Stephen Calkins

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court As The Cheshire Cat: Escaping The Section 1983 Wonderland, Jose R. "Beto" Juarez

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Enslaved To Judicial Supremacy?, H. Jefferson Powell

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Haitian Refugee Crisis: A Quest For Human Rights, Thomas David Jones

Michigan Journal of International Law

On June 14, 1993, the Vienna Conference on Human Rights, sponsored by the United Nations, commenced its opening session mired in controversy over the validity of a universal human rights doctrine. Many Third World or developing nations contended that Western norms of justice and fairness were not applicable to their societies. Thus, the developing nations articulated a culture-bound or relativistic concept of fundamental human rights. The developing nations' particularistic position was championed by such nations as China, Iran, Cuba, and Vietnam, signatories to the Bangkok Declaration of 1993. The Bangkok Declaration provides, inter alia, that though human rights are …

Specter Of A Lesbian Supreme Court Justice: Problems Of Identity In Lesbian Legal Theorizing, Ruthann Robson

St. Thomas Law Review

The specter of a lesbian Supreme Court Justice raises an issue that has troubled lesbian and political theory, the issue of identity politics. Any invocation of identity, political or otherwise, provokes postmodernist apprehension, an apprehension that has been particularly potent in sexual identities. Also as a sexual identity, lesbian identity evokes other postmodernist-influenced issues. Particularly problematic are lesbian identity's unintelligibility until claimed or avowed and lesbian identity's uncertain classification as an identity status or a sexual act. This Article will interrogate the predicaments posed by identity politics, including postmodernist questionings of identity and the identity/ activity dichotomy, concluding with some …

Family Values And The Supreme Court, 25 Conn. L. Rev. 427 (1993), Linda R. Crane

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Statutory Misinterpretations: A Legal Autopsy, Eric Schnapper

Articles

If the Supreme Court is willing to learn from past mistakes, the Court would find it particularly instructive to re-examine the now quite numerous civil rights decisions which have failed to survive congressional scrutiny. The United States Reports are today littered with the corpses of short-lived opinions purporting to interpret federal anti-discrimination statutes; most were dead on arrival in the bound volumes. October Term 1988 was a veritable Pickett's Charge of conservative misinterpretation. Patterson v. McLean Credit Union briefly displaced and destroyed much of section 1981; Public Employees Retirement System v. Betts temporarily overran parts of the Age Discrimination in …

State Interest Analysis And The Channeling Function, Carl E. Scheider

Book Chapters

In this article, I wish to criticize the narrowness of the Supreme Court's conception of the interests states may advance to justify statutes challenged on constitutional privacy grounds. I also wish to identify and describe one of the several state interests that not infrequently undergirds such legislation but that the Court has failed to understand.

Judicial Deference To Administrative Agencies' Legal Interpretations After Lechmere, Inc. V. Nlrb, Susan K. Goplen

Washington Law Review

In Lechmere, Inc. v. NLRB, the Supreme Court held that when interpreting administrative statutes, the Court will defer to its own previous interpretations rather than defer to administrative agencies' interpretations of statutes. Thus, the Court determined that stare decisis is dominant over judicial deference to administrative agencies. The Court decided Lechmere, Inc. v. NLRB wrongly. The rationales for deference to agencies exist whether or not the courts have addressed the statute in question. Therefore, courts should apply the doctrine of judicial deference even when courts have previously interpreted a statute.

Shaw V. Reno: On The Borderline, Emily Calhoun

Publications

No abstract provided.

Introduction Of Scientific Evidence In Criminal Cases, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

No abstract provided.

Disagreement And Interpretation, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

White V. Illinois: The Confrontation Clause And The Supreme Court's Preference For Out-Of-Court Statements, Nancy H. Baughan

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Confrontation Clause, found in the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides criminal defendants with the right to confront adverse witnesses.' A literal interpretation of the Confrontation Clause would preclude courts from allowing the admission of all hearsay testimony. The Court has rejected this interpretation, noting that it would render meaningless every exception to the rule against hearsay. Although unwilling to hold that the Confrontation Clause mandates exclusion of all hearsay, the Court has found that the Clause requires the exclusion of some hearsay statements. The Supreme Court has struggled to define the relationship between the exceptions to …

The United States Supreme Court And The Protection Of Refugees, Lung-Chu Chen

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.