Derek Muller on Evenwel v. Abbott
Michael Ramsey
At Liberty Law Blog, Derek Muller (Pepperdine): One Man, One Vote in Texas (discussing Evenwel v. Abbott, the Court's new apportionment case). From the introduction: New litigation in Texas threatens to undermine a basic principle of our constitutional design: that our elected officials represent all of us. The President of the United States represents all of […]
Amending the Seventh Amendment
Mike Rappaport
I have been exploring the original meaning of the Seventh Amendment right to a civil jury trial. Here, I want to step back from that discussion and instead address the desirability of the Seventh Amendment. In my view, it is not clear that a strong civil jury trial right is desirable. My reasons are similar to those that have […]
Reasonable Regulation of the Right to a Jury Trial
Mike Rappaport
I have been blogging about the original meaning of the Seventh Amendment. Here I want to discuss another issue concerning its meaning: how much the Amendment allows the legislature to change the rules governing jury trials? One concern about the Seventh Amendment is that it might be thought to freeze in place the precise common law at […]
Which “Common Law” Does the Seventh Amendment Protect?
Mike Rappaport
In my last post, I cited to Renee Lettow Lerner’s paper describing how the Seventh Amendment Jury Trial Right had been given a narrow meaning. Here I want to address one of the issues concerning the original meaning of the Seventh Amendment. The Amendment provides: “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall […]
The Failure of Originalism to Preserve the Civil Jury Trial
Mike Rappaport
Recently, the Center for the Study of Constitutional Originalism at the University of San Diego hosted the presentation of a paper on the constitution right to a jury trial by Renee Lettow Lerner. Lerner’s paper is entitled: The Failure of Originalism in Preserving Constitutional Rights to Civil Jury Trial and here is the abstract: The Federal Bill […]
Justice Scalia’s Worst Opinions
Mike Rappaport
Recently, there has been some discussion, by admirers of Justice Scalia, of what is the Justice’s worst opinion. Mike Paulsen argues it is Employment Division v. Smith, where Scalia for the Court interpreted the Free Exercise Clause to provide less protection for those who seek religious exemptions from general laws. Mike Ramsey mentions both Whitman v. American Trucking (expansive […]
Korematsu, National Power, and Individual Rights
Mike Rappaport
One of the key cases in modern Constitutional Law is Korematsu v. United States, where the Supreme Court held that the exclusion of Japanese citizens from large parts of the West Coast was constitutional. (While the case technically did not cover the internment of the Japanese, the exclusion of Japanese from such a large area without […]
Constraining Executive Regulatory Authority
Mike Rappaport
At the Liberty Law Blog, I have been writing a series of posts on ways of limiting executive regulatory authority that are desirable and that might actually be enacted. While it is not exactly originalism, I thought some readers might be interested in these posts: 1. Congressional Reforms of Excessive Executive Power: Can They Be Enacted? […]
New Book: “Equal Citizenship, Civil Rights, and the Constitution” by Christopher Green
Michael Ramsey
Co-blogger Chris Green's important new book on the privileges or immunities clause is now published: Equal Citizenship, Civil Rights, and the Constitution: The Original Sense of the Privileges or Immunities Clause (Routledge, 2015). Here is the book description from Amazon: The Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is arguably the most historically important clause […]
Article III’s Case-or-Controversy Requirement: The Original Meaning
Mike Rappaport
Another of the papers held at the Works-in-Progress Conference at the Originalism Center at the University of San Diego this past weekend was The Contested History of Article III's Case-or-Controversy by James Pfander of Northwestern University Law School. Pfander’s paper provides evidence that early Congresses authorized and courts allowed lawsuits that do not seem to satisfy […]