Pub Date : 2020-12-31DOI: 10.1215/9780822386100-009
C. Schmidt
{"title":"J. Waties Waring and the Making of Liberal Jurisprudence in Postwar America","authors":"C. Schmidt","doi":"10.1215/9780822386100-009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822386100-009","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46006,"journal":{"name":"Supreme Court Review","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77708547","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-31DOI: 10.1215/9780822386100-017
D. M. Douglas
{"title":"Brown v. Board of Education and Its Impact on Black Education in America","authors":"D. M. Douglas","doi":"10.1215/9780822386100-017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822386100-017","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46006,"journal":{"name":"Supreme Court Review","volume":"497 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80025385","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-31DOI: 10.1215/9780822386100-006
Peter Lau
{"title":"From the Periphery to the Center: Clarendon County, South Carolina, Brown, and the Struggle for Democracy and Equality in America","authors":"Peter Lau","doi":"10.1215/9780822386100-006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822386100-006","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46006,"journal":{"name":"Supreme Court Review","volume":"5 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72410060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-31DOI: 10.1515/9780822386100-013
C. Greene
{"title":"‘‘The New Negro Ain’t Scared No More!’’: Black Women’s Activism in North Carolina and the Meaning of Brown","authors":"C. Greene","doi":"10.1515/9780822386100-013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822386100-013","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46006,"journal":{"name":"Supreme Court Review","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81965781","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-31DOI: 10.1515/9780822381945-011
Tony Mauro
{"title":"TEN The Supreme Court and the Cult of Secrecy","authors":"Tony Mauro","doi":"10.1515/9780822381945-011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822381945-011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46006,"journal":{"name":"Supreme Court Review","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78029716","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-31DOI: 10.1215/9780822386100-014
Madeleine E. López
{"title":"New York, Puerto Ricans, and the Dilemmas of Integration","authors":"Madeleine E. López","doi":"10.1215/9780822386100-014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822386100-014","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46006,"journal":{"name":"Supreme Court Review","volume":"85 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89179579","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-31DOI: 10.1215/9780822386100-011
Tomiko Brown-Nagin
{"title":"The Impact of Lawyer-Client Disengagement on the naacp’s Campaign to Implement Brown v. Board of Education in Atlanta","authors":"Tomiko Brown-Nagin","doi":"10.1215/9780822386100-011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822386100-011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46006,"journal":{"name":"Supreme Court Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89754222","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-31DOI: 10.1215/9780822386100-007
Larissa Smith
{"title":"A Civil Rights Vanguard: Black Attorneys and the naacp in Virginia","authors":"Larissa Smith","doi":"10.1215/9780822386100-007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822386100-007","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46006,"journal":{"name":"Supreme Court Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89444637","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Under the U.S. Constitution, is the executive branch unitary, and if so, in what sense? For many decades, there has been a sharp dispute between those who believe in a strongly unitary presidency, in accordance with the idea that the president must have unrestricted removal power over high-level officials entrusted with implementation of federal law, and those who believe in a weakly unitary presidency, in accordance with the view that Congress may, under the Necessary and Proper Clause, restrict the president’s removal power, so long as the restriction does not prevent the president from carrying out his constitutionally specified functions. Both positions can claim support from the original understanding of relevant clauses; both can claim to keep faith with constitutional commitments in light of dramatically changed circumstances, above all the rise of the modern administrative state. In Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a sharply divided Court enthusiastically embraced the strongly unitary position, in an ambiguous opinion that might be read to preserve the constitutionality of independent multimember commissions, but that also left a great deal of room for constitutional challenges to such commissions in their present form. The Court’s analysis purports to be rooted in the original understanding of the constitution, and not implausibly so; but the Court relies so heavily on abstract principles, such as “liberty” and “accountability,” that its analysis is not easily distinguishable from a dynamic constitutionalism suffused with political morality. The Court’s holding and analysis can thus be seen as a direct outgrowth of modern anxiety, rooted in structural concerns, about the threats posed by a powerful, discretion-wielding administrative apparatus, and a belief that presidential control is an essential safeguard.
{"title":"The Unitary Executive: Past, Present, Future","authors":"C. Sunstein, Adrian Vermeule","doi":"10.1086/714860","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/714860","url":null,"abstract":"Under the U.S. Constitution, is the executive branch unitary, and if so, in what sense? For many decades, there has been a sharp dispute between those who believe in a strongly unitary presidency, in accordance with the idea that the president must have unrestricted removal power over high-level officials entrusted with implementation of federal law, and those who believe in a weakly unitary presidency, in accordance with the view that Congress may, under the Necessary and Proper Clause, restrict the president’s removal power, so long as the restriction does not prevent the president from carrying out his constitutionally specified functions. Both positions can claim support from the original understanding of relevant clauses; both can claim to keep faith with constitutional commitments in light of dramatically changed circumstances, above all the rise of the modern administrative state. In Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a sharply divided Court enthusiastically embraced the strongly unitary position, in an ambiguous opinion that might be read to preserve the constitutionality of independent multimember commissions, but that also left a great deal of room for constitutional challenges to such commissions in their present form. The Court’s analysis purports to be rooted in the original understanding of the constitution, and not implausibly so; but the Court relies so heavily on abstract principles, such as “liberty” and “accountability,” that its analysis is not easily distinguishable from a dynamic constitutionalism suffused with political morality. The Court’s holding and analysis can thus be seen as a direct outgrowth of modern anxiety, rooted in structural concerns, about the threats posed by a powerful, discretion-wielding administrative apparatus, and a belief that presidential control is an essential safeguard.","PeriodicalId":46006,"journal":{"name":"Supreme Court Review","volume":"2020 1","pages":"83 - 117"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41840495","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：