Legal History Commons^™

Of Sheepdogs And Ventriloquists: Government Lawyers In Two New Deal Agencies, Daniel R. Ernst

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

From the neo-Weberian literature on state-building and the political sociology of the legal profession, one might expect government lawyers to be sheepdogs, nipping at the heels of straying administrators, supplying their agencies with the bureaucratic autonomy so often missing in American government. In this contribution to “Serious Fun” a symposium in honor of John Henry Schlegel of the University at Buffalo School of Law, I report my preliminary findings for two agencies created during the Hundred Days of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s presidency, the Agricultural Adjustment Administration and the National Recovery Administration. I suggest that the neo-Weberian model tends to minimize …

Rabbi Lamm, The Fifth Amendment, And Comparative Jewish Law, Samuel J. Levine

Scholarly Works

Rabbi Norman Lamm’s 1956 article, “The Fifth Amendment and Its Equivalent in the Halakha,” provides important lessons for scholarship in both Jewish and American law. Sixty-five years after it was published, the article remains, in many ways, a model for interdisciplinary and comparative study of Jewish law, drawing upon sources in the Jewish legal tradition, American legal history, and modern psychology. In so doing, the article proves faithful to each discipline on its own terms, producing insights that illuminate all three disciplines while respecting the internal logic within each one. In addition to many other distinctions, since its initial publication, …

Utilizing Tort Law To Deter Misconduct In The Public Sector, Boaz Segal

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Functional Statehood In Contemporary International Law, William Thomas Worster

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

The international community lacks a form of territorial-based, international legal personality distinct from statehood, and yet, non-state, territorial entities of varying degrees of autonomy or independence need to function within the international community in some form. Some of these entities cannot be recognized as states because their creation violates jus cogens norms, though others are not recognized based on an assessment that they may not fully qualify as a state or that there are political reasons to refuse recognition. However, existing states still need to engage with these territorial quasi-states through the only paradigm the international community has—statehood. For example, …

The Clean Air Act: How It Can Be Localized To Promote Both Environmental And Social Justice, Tate Kirk

Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental, & Innovation Law

Legislators attempt to achieve intended goals by enacting laws that provide for regulatory enforcement. However, many times laws are unable to achieve their stated goals and in some ways may create new or exacerbate existing issues. Luckily, upon review, many of these issues can be fixed with quick modifications to either their implementation or enforcement mechanisms. In its current form, the Clean Air Act does not effectively account for differences in regional climate patterns, and, moreover, it perpetuates environmental injustice. If local governments were given more autonomy to enforce the Clean Air Act, they could shape its enforcement to more …

Fault Lines: An Empirical Legal Study Of California Secession, Bill Tomlinson, Andrew W. Torrance

Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental, & Innovation Law

Over the last decade, multiple initiatives have proposed that California should secede from the United States. This article examines the legal aspects of California secession and integrates that analysis with findings from an empirical study of public perceptions of such secession. There is no provision in the United States Constitution allowing states, or other political or geographical units, to secede unilaterally. The Civil War was fought to uphold this principle, and the United States Supreme Court confirmed it in its 1869 Texas v. White decision. Nevertheless, numerous instances of secession, both legal and extralegal, have occurred across human history, and …

An Analysis Of The Competing Views On The Interpretation Of The U.S. Constitution, Joseph Longo

Senior Honors Theses

This thesis will examine the competing interpretations of the United States Constitution and the different effects these interpretations would have on the American government and legal systems. By examining legal precedents and different philosophical views, the varying interpretations will be examined and put through real-world scenarios. The founding of America was over 200 years ago, but philosophical views throughout history shall be used in the understanding of the different interpretations and real-world consequences. The thesis will not claim that one interpretation is proper and the perfect one for the United States, rather it will challenge each view in an attempt …

Law School News: Rwu Law Announces Rbg Contest For K-12 Students 12-2-2020, Michael M. Bowden

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

The Munemitsu Legacy: The Japanese American Family Behind Mendez V. Westminster: California’S First Successful Desegregation Case, Annie Tang

Library Articles and Research

"Many Orange County, California schoolchildren know the name 'Mendez.' After all, the iconic name is front and center of the landmark civil rights case that desegregated several of the county’s public schools in 1947, preceding the 1954 Brown v. Board case on a national level. The Mendez family, one of five Latino families which challenged several school districts in the county on their practice of Mexican-only schools, had their name immortalized in history. But the Mendezes would not have been able to lead the legal charge if it was not for another family of color, the Munemitsus, the Japanese American …

A Bleak House: The Story Behind The Oldest Legal Controversy In The State Of Georgia, Clayton T. Kendrick

Mercer Law Review

Bleak Houseis a novel written by Charles Dickens, which centers around the fictional English Court of Chancery case Jarndyce and Jarndyce.The fictional case concerns a dispute surrounding a large inheritance that drags on for several generations.As Dickens put it,

Jarndyce and Jarndyce drones on . . . . Innumerable children have been born into the cause; innumerable young people have married into it; innumerable old people have died out of it . . . . The little plaintiff or defendant, who was promised a new rocking-horse when Jarndyce and Jarndyce should be settled, has grown up, possessed himself …

Unifying The Field: Mapping The Relationship Between Work Law Regimes In Ontario, Then And Now, Claire Mumme

Dalhousie Law Journal

Since the mid-20th century in Canada, labour and employment law have been treated as two separate but related fields. In 1981 Brian Langille argued in “Labour Law is a Subset of Employment Law” for the unification of the fields, so that all forms of waged work were understood as matters of public policy, rather than leaving some types of work to private law regulation. Taking up Langille’s argument, this paper argues that employment contracts, individual and collective, are structured through the overlap, interaction and gaps between work law regimes. The creation of a unified field moves from studying the regimes …

On The Presence Of The Past In The Future Of International Labour Law, Adelle Blackett

Dalhousie Law Journal

Professor Blackett presented this talk as the Invited Speaker at the Schulich School of Law’s Horace E Read Memorial Lecture on 9 October 2019.

*This contribution has not been peer-reviewed.

The Tyranny Of Their Mirrors: Social Backgrounds And Variations In Conservative Judicial Philosophies, Andrew Millman

Fordham Undergraduate Law Review

This Article seeks to examine and compare the judicial behaviors of the five conservative justices on the Supreme Court, especially John Roberts and Neil Gorsuch, through the lens of their social backgrounds and opinion-writing and -joining patterns. The research for this Article focused on the frequency with which all nine justices on the high court joined each other’s opinions and were joined by each other justice, as well as a control group of three earlier Supreme Court terms for comparison. This is the best indicator of whether justices are in alignment on a case, not just on the outcome but …

The Executive Branch Anticanon, Deborah Pearlstein

Articles

Donald Trump’s presidency has given rise to a raft of concerns not just about the wisdom of particular policy decisions but also about the prospect that executive actions might have troubling longer term “precedential” effects. While critics tend to leave undefined what “precedent” in this context means, existing constitutional structures provide multiple mechanisms by which presidential practice can influence future executive branch conduct: judicial actors rely on practice as gloss on constitutional meaning, executive branch officials rely on past practice in guiding institutional norms of behavior, and elected officials outside the executive branch and the people themselves draw on past …

Amicus Brief In Collins V. Mnuchin On Original Public Meaning Of Presidential Removal And The 'Decision Of 1789', Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

Petitioners and the en banc Court of Appeals below have rested their contention that the Constitution grants the President at-will removal authority over the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) on historical claims about the first Congress’s ostensible “Decision of 1789.” In so doing, Petitioners are following Chief Justice Taft’s account in Myers v. United States, upon which this Court relied on in 2010 and again last term for an originalist interpretation of Article II. New historical research shows that Myers was incorrect. The “Decision of 1789” actually supports, rather than undermines, Congress’s power to limit presidential removal. …

Brief Of Victims Of The Hungarian Holocaust Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Richard H. Weisberg

Amicus Briefs

This amicus curiae brief was submitted on behalf of victims of the Hungarian Holocaust in support of petitioners in case No. 18-1447 before the United States Supreme Court. The brief addresses questions of international law, sovereign immunity, and the rights of Holocaust survivors seeking restitution and legal accountability. It provides historical context and legal arguments relevant to holding foreign states accountable for atrocities committed during World War II.

The Weaponization Of The “Alien Harboring” Statute In A New-Era Of Racial Animus Towards Immigrants, Hannah Hamley

Seattle University Law Review

Federal law 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii), commonly referred to as the “Alien Harboring” statute, was passed sixty-eight years ago and has been used as a weapon against immigrants and their allies. Spanning back decades, numerous scholars, alarmed by the dangerous use of the statute, have written about its muddled congressional intent and the unclear definition of “harboring.” These issues continue to be relevant and are foundational concerns with the enforcement of the harboring statute. However, in the era of President Donald J. Trump, we are faced with a new danger. We are confronted with an Administration that is ferociously anti-immigrant …

Court-Packing In 2021: Pathways To Democratic Legitimacy, Richard Mailey

Seattle University Law Review

This Article asks whether the openness to court-packing expressed by a number of Democratic presidential candidates (e.g., Pete Buttigieg) is democratically defensible. More specifically, it asks whether it is possible to break the apparent link between demagogic populism and court-packing, and it examines three possible ways of doing this via Bruce Ackerman’s dualist theory of constitutional moments—a theory which offers the possibility of legitimating problematic pathways to constitutional change on democratic but non-populist grounds. In the end, the Article suggests that an Ackermanian perspective offers just one, extremely limited pathway to democratically legitimate court-packing in 2021: namely, where a Democratic …

“Public Use” Or Public Abuse? A New Test For Public Use In Light Of Kelo, Taylor Haines

Seattle University Law Review

The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment has long been controversial. It allows the government to take private property for the purpose of “public use.” But what does public use mean? The definition is one of judicial interpretation. It has evolved from the original meaning intended by the drafters of the Constitution. Now, the meaning is extremely broad. This Note argues that both the original and contemporary meaning of public use are problematic. It explores the issues with both definitions and suggests a new test, solidified in legislation instead of judicial interpretation.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor: The Court’S Premier Defender Of The Fourth Amendment, David L. Hudson Jr.

Seattle University Law Review

This essay posits that Justice Sotomayor is the Court’s chief defender of the Fourth Amendment and the cherished values it protects. She has consistently defended Fourth Amendment freedoms—in majority, concurring, and especially in dissenting opinions. Part I recounts a few of her majority opinions in Fourth Amendment cases. Part II examines her concurring opinion in United States v. Jones. Part III examines several of her dissenting opinions in Fourth Amendment cases. A review of these opinions demonstrates what should be clear to any observer of the Supreme Court: Justice Sotomayor consistently defends Fourth Amendment principles and values.