Back to the Drawing Board: Reexamining Accepted Criteria for Regional Structure of the Courts of Appeals

This article aims to determine which of the accepted structural features of the courts of appeals are essential by demonstrating that the federal courts are designed to assure the supremacy and uniformity of federal law, and that regional organization was intended to foster, not to negate, uniformity

Once a Century: Time for a Structural Overhaul of the Federal Courts

In this Article, I describe a structure capable of accommodating growing caseloads in a manner consistent with basic values of appellate justice. Before doing so, I sketch in Part I the structural evolution of the federal courts. Part II describes the current pressures on the courts of appeals, while Part III examines the effects of internal reforms on the quality of appellate justice and the development of a coherent body of national law. Next, in Part IV, I posit requirements for the federal courts\u27 third century. Part V reviews major proposals to address the caseload crisis in the courts of appeals

GRAS-Fed Americans: Sick of Lax Regulation of Food Additives

Americans are “GRAS-fed” because of a “loophole” in the strict regime Congress provided for the regulation of food additives. Additives - and food products containing them - are exempt from this strict regime if they are accorded GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) status. The guidelines Congress provided for achieving that status by scientific evidence of safety are no longer observed. Most additives are determined by the producer alone to be GRAS. At the same time, Americans’ consumption of highly processed foods continues to rise, giving rise to long-term health problems that are increasingly tied to diet. The average American’s diet includes many additives, most of whose safety has never been reviewed by the Food & Drug Administration. Our GRAS-laden diet may be making us sick. This Article reexamines the GRAS exception and proposes modest changes to restore some of the rigor Congress provided

Letter to Anne Prentice providing information on SEAALL, February 20, 1990

A letter from Martha Dragich to Anne Prentice providing information on the SEAALL Annual Meeting and asking the Director to share information with students

Note to Hazel Johnson concerning letters to Library School Deans, February 27, 1990

A note from Martha Dragich to Hazel Johnson including copies of letters Dragich sent to Library School Deans

Letter to Dr. Guy Craft providing information on SEAALL, November 3, 1989

A letter from Martha Dragich to Dr. Guy Craft providing information on SEAALL and asking the Dean to share information with students

State Constitutional Restrictions on Legislative Procedure: Rethinking Analysis of Original Purpose, Single Subject, and Clear Title Challenges

Recognizing that state courts are beginning to review procedural challenges more rigorously, this Article attempts to provide guidance for the resolution of such cases. Part I examines the history, purposes, and standards of original purpose, single subject, and clear title restrictions, using Missouri\u27s provisions as examples. Part I also identifies paradigmatic cases of each of the procedural violations with the hope of more sharply differentiating the three claims. Parts II through V present a case study of ten Missouri cases decided since 1994, supplemented with notable cases from other states. Part II begins with a brief description of the Missouri cases. These cases together address all three of the constitutional restrictions, and do so in more depth and variety than do the recent cases of any other single state. As such, they constitute a compact yet well-developed body of law for analysis. Part II concludes by presenting a preliminary assessment of the Missouri Supreme Court\u27s analysis of these claims. Part III uses the Missouri cases as a basis from which to develop a framework for analysis of original purpose, single subject, and clear title claims

Letter to Anne Prentice providing information on SEAALL, September 13, 1989

A letter from Martha Dragich to Anne Prentice providing information on SEAALL and asking the Director to share information with students. Also includes a note from Dragich to Hazel Johnson