Monday, November 24, 2008

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Is federalism dead?

Robert Nagel argues that political and judicial revolutions have usurped the power of the states and thereby enervated local associational life. Although Kimberly Hendrickson agrees with much of Nagel’s argument about the implosion of federalism, she lauds the emergence of a “moral federalism” through plebiscitary democracy on issues ranging from abortion to euthanasia to affirmative action to medical marijuana to homosexual marriage.

Is federalism dead? If so, should we mourn or celebrate its demise? Is the rise of moral federalism a sign of life for American democracy or a threat to individual rights?

Please read short articles by Nagel and Hendrickson. Click on link below for Hendrickson article. You may pick up copy of Nagel article in Govt Dept. office.;col1

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

DC v Heller

NY Times article includes links to transcript and audio recording of oral argument.

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Friday, February 15, 2008

The Founders Constitution

New required course at George Mason University Law School.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

District of Columbia v. Heller

Merit and amicus briefs for interesting case to be heard in March.

Eminent domain and Columbia University

Saturday, February 2, 2008

Another eminent domain case

Homeowners lose case in federal appeals court over the use of eminent domain to obtain land for Brooklyn Yards development, which will include new arena for the NBA Nets.

Monday, January 28, 2008

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Thursday, January 3, 2008

Is That a Veto in Your Pocket?

There's an interesting new constitutional controversy over the pocket veto. When Congress passes a bill, they send it to the President, who has ten days to sign or veto the bill. If he vetoes the bill, it is sent back to Congress which can then vote to override with a two-thirds majority. If he neither signs nor vetoes the bill, and Congress is in session, the bill becomes law. If Congress is not in session and the President neither signs nor vetoes the bill, that's a pocket veto and it can't be overridden by Congress. In that case, the Congress must start again and repass new legislation.

The recent Defense authorization bill passed both chambers by veto-proof majorities. In order to prevent a pocket veto, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid kept the Senate in pro forma session during the holidays. President Bush claims that he pocket vetoed the bill since the House wasn't in session.

Louis Fisher, a scholar at the Congressional Research Service and a leading expert on separation of powers issues, seems to think that the Bush administration's argument doesn't hold much water.

Tuesday, January 1, 2008