President/Executive Department Commons^™

Tax Court Appointments And Reappointments Improving The Process, Danshera Cords

University of Richmond Law Review

This article explores the problems with the appointment and reappointment process of judges to the United States Tax Court, particularly focusing on the recent politicization of the process. Until 1992, the process ensured the appoint-ment of only well-qualified judges to the Tax Court bench. However, beginning with the administrations of Presidents William J. Clinton and George W. Bush, the President infused politics into the nomination process, causing the process to slow and creating vacancies on the court. Such delays threaten the court's effectiveness and disrupt its operations. To solve this problem, the author endorses changing the statute to allow Tax …

The Presidential Apology: Lessons From Tricky Dick And Slick Willy, Megan Morris

CMC Senior Theses

The concept of an apologetic president has only recently emerged in the United States. All presidents have made mistakes, but only recently have Americans come to expect apologies from them. The development of an increasingly critical media has necessitated that future presidents hone the art of apologizing. This thesis extrapolates lessons in this skill from the apologies of Presidents Nixon and Clinton. Watergate and Lewinsky-gate were cover-up scandals that rocked the nation in the 1970s and '90s. Although the presidential misconduct in both cases were similar, the way each president opted to navigate his controversy differed dramatically. Both presidents initially …

Assessing The Impeachment Of President Bill Clinton From A Post 9/11 Perspective, Susan Low Bloch

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The impeachment of President Clinton was more a circus than a serious effort to remove the President of the United States. The reason is simple: Few people--in the Congress or the country--wanted to remove him or believed the impeachment effort would actually result in his removal. Instead, it was a partisan political effort to embarrass Clinton and "send a message" of disapproval. Congress was attaching a "scarlet letter." But this was an indulgence that posed considerable danger that few in Congress considered. In particular, few tried to assess the potential impact this use of the process would have on the …

Ten Years On: Military Justice And Civil Liberties In The Post-9/11 Era, Eugene R. Fidell

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Increased Tax Liability Awards After Eshelman: A Call For Expanded Acceptance Beyond The Realm Of Anti-Discrimination Statutes, Eirik Cheverud

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

"The Essence Of A Free Society": The Executive Powers Legacy Of Justice Stevens And The Future Of Foreign Affairs Deference, Dawn E. Johnsen

Articles by Maurer Faculty

After 9/11, Justice John Paul Stevens insisted the United States maintain its foundational commitment to the rule of law—the very “essence of a free society.” Justice Stevens led the Court’s scrutiny and rejection of early Bush Administration policies regarding the detention and prosecution of suspected terrorists. Since it lost Justice Stevens’s passionate and principled voice in 2008, the Court has not addressed the scope of the President’s military detention authority. This Article considers Justice Stevens’s role in the Court’s altered stance, and also a complementary explanation: the Obama Administration’s improved interpretation and exercise of executive authority. Informed and inspired by …

Waiving Goodbye To Nondisclosure Under Foia’S Exemption 4: The Scope And Applicability Of The Waiver Doctrine, Patrick Lightfoot

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Has The Obama Justice Department Reinvigorated Antitrust Enforcement?, Daniel A. Crane

Articles

The Justice Department’s recently filed antitrust case against Apple and several major book publishers over e-book pricing, which comes on the heels of the Justice Department’s successful challenge to the proposed merger of AT&T and T-Mobile, has contributed to the perception that the Obama Administration is reinvigorating antitrust enforcement from its recent stupor. As a candidate for President, then-Senator Obama criticized the Bush Administration as having the “weakest record of antitrust enforcement of any administration in the last half century” and vowed to step up enforcement. Early in the Obama Administration, Justice Department officials furthered this perception by withdrawing the …

Heeding The Clarion Call For Sustainable, Spiritual Western Landscapes: Will The People Be Granted A New Forest Service?, Charles Wilkinson, Daniel Cordalis

Publications

No abstract provided.

Beyond Foreign Policy: A Fresh Look At Cross-Cultural Negotiations And Dispute Resolution Based On The India-United States Nuclear Test Ban Negotiations, Sukhsimranjit Singh

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

This paper has three goals: first, to study the negotiation of CTBT from Indian and U.S. perspectives; second, to analyze the influence of culture on the processes and outcomes of nuclear negotiations; and third, to provide an approach that would have produced a better result in the CTBT negotiations, and which could be used with more success in future bilateral and multi-lateral negotiations. The approach and lessons from my analysis can also be applied towards other cross-cultural disputes, especially to those that involve national culture. I conclude that the CTBT negotiation between India and the U.S. (among other nations) was …

Historical Gloss And The Separation Of Powers, Curtis A. Bradley, Trevor W. Morrison

Faculty Scholarship

Arguments based on historical practice are a mainstay of debates about the constitutional separation of powers. Surprisingly, however, there has been little sustained academic attention to the proper role of historical practice in this context. The scant existing scholarship is either limited to specific subject areas or focused primarily on judicial doctrine without addressing the use of historical practice in broader conceptual or theoretical terms. To the extent that the issue has been discussed, most accounts of how historical practice should inform the separation of powers require “acquiescence” by the branch of government whose prerogatives the practice implicates, something that …

Should Mass Comments Count?, Nina A. Mendelson

Articles

I am grateful to the Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law for the opportunity to reply to “Rulemaking vs. Democracy: Judging and Nudging Public Participation That Counts,” a terrific article by Professor Cynthia Farina, Mary Newhart, and Josiah Heidt of the Cornell eRulemaking Institute (“CeRI”). Farina, Newhart, and Heidt’s continuing commitment to structuring public engagement in e-rulemaking, both through scholarship and CeRI’s Regulation Room project, is one of the most hopeful signs for the future of that process. In their Article, the authors are concerned with agency treatment of large volumes of public comments in rulemaking, an increasingly common …

The Obama Justice Department's Merger Enforcement Record: An Armchair Reply To Baker And Shapiro, Daniel A. Crane

Articles

My recent Essay, Has the Obama Justice Department Reinvigorated Antitrust Enforcement?, examined the three major areas of antitrust enforcement—cartels, mergers, and civil non-merger—and argued that, contrary to some popular impressions, the Obama Justice Department has not “reinvigorated” antitrust enforcement. Jonathan Baker and Carl Shapiro have published a response, which focuses solely on merger enforcement. Baker and Shapiro’s argument that the Obama Justice Department actually did reinvigorate merger enforcement is unconvincing.

Judicial Review Of Constitutional Transitions: War And Peace And Other Sundry Matters, Rivka Weill

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Constitutional transition periods present a twilight time between two executives. At such times, the outgoing executive's authority is questionable because of the democratic difficulties and agency concerns that arise at the end of the executive's term. Thus, parliamentary systems developed constitutional conventions that restrict caretaker governments' action. These conventions seem to achieve the desired results in the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia. In contrast, in the United States, the prevailing norm is that there is only one president at a time, and this is the incumbent president, who is fully authorized to govern the country and his or …

Congress In Court, Amanda Frost

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Congress rarely participates in litigation about the meaning of federal law. By contrast, the executive branch joins in federal litigation on a regular basis as either a party or amicus curiae. Congress simply assumes that the president’s lawyers adequately represent its interests save in those rare instances when the two branches have a direct conflict. This Article questions that assumption.

The federal judiciary’s approach to statutory and constitutional interpretation diminishes Congress’s influence, often to the benefit of the executive branch. The rise of textualism, the canon of constitutional avoidance, the reliance on Chevron deference, and the courts’ reluctance to second-guess …

Can The President And Congress Establish A Legislative Veto Mechanism For Jointly Drawing Down A Long And Controversial War?, Charles Tiefer

All Faculty Scholarship

In the simplest case: Congress declares war, and does not intrude on the President's solo decision about when the troops come home. However, in our time, long wars, such as in Afghanistan and Iraq, occur with great tension between the two elected branches of government over the pace of a drawdown. Sometimes it may be a hawkish Congress that disagrees with a President reluctant to continue the war at full troop levels. To find a joint way to draw down the American troops in the war zone, they may seek congressional mechanisms to resolve their differences with interactive processes. Then, …

To Tax, To Spend, To Regulate, Gillian E. Metzger

Faculty Scholarship

Two very different visions of the national government underpin the ongoing battle over the Affordable Care Act (ACA). President Obama and supporters of the ACA believe in the power of government to protect individuals through regulation and collective action. By contrast, the ACA's Republican and Tea Party opponents see expanded government as a fundamental threat to individual liberty and view the requirement that individuals purchase minimum health insurance (the so-called "individual mandate") as the conscription of the healthy to subsidize the sick. This conflict over the federal government's proper role is, of course, not new; it has played out repeatedly …

Presidential Power And Constitutional Responsibility, Thomas P. Crocker

Faculty Publications

Some constitutional theorists defend unbounded executive power to respond to emergencies or expansive discretionary powers to complete statutory directives. Against these anti-Madisonian approaches, this Article examines how the textual assignment of republican virtues helps to constitute and constrain the president's power. The Madisonian solution for constitutional constraint both creates institutions for unenlightened statesmen and relies on virtue to make governing possible. Constitutional responsibility is a consistent textual theme found in the command to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," the responsibility to remain faithful to the office of president, and the obligation to preserve the Constitution itself. Although …

Partisan Conflicts Over Presidential Authority, Jide Nzelibe

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Samantar And Executive Power, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

This essay examines Samantar v. Yousuf in the context of broader debate about the relationship between federal common law and executive power. Samantar represents simply the latest effort by the Executive Branch to literally shape the meaning of law through a process referred to in the literature as “executive lawmaking.” While traditional accounts of executive lawmaking typically have treated the idea as a singular concept, Samantar demonstrates the need to bifurcate the concept into at least two different categories: acts of executive lawmaking decoupled from pending litigation and acts of executive lawmaking taken expressly in response to litigation. As Samantar …