Compulsory Disclosure and the First Amendment - The Scope of Judicial Review

Involvement of the Supreme Court of the United States with highly charged public issues understandably occasions fresh debate concerning the proper role of the Court in determining questions of ultimate governmental power, in short, debate over the doctrine of judicial review. As it is sometimes difficult for the judge to distinguish between what is unconstitutional and what is merely unwise, so it is difficult for the critic to disassociate his reaction to the results reached in a given case from his evaluation of the competence of the particular judicial performance. For some the failure to draw such a line robs criticism of much of its usefulness and reduces it to the level of determining ownership of the proverbial gored ox. For others the effort to make such distinctions is simply unrealistic; nice questions regarding the nature of the process are of interest only in the context of larger purposes served or thwarted by the particular decision. This essay is predicated upon the propositions that means are important, that the reasons advanced by courts in support of their judgments are not simply window dressing, and that questions relating to what courts ought and ought not to consider are of real and not merely apparent significance

Compulsory Disclosure and the First Amendment - The Scope of Judicial Review

Involvement of the Supreme Court of the United States with highly charged public issues understandably occasions fresh debate concerning the proper role of the Court in determining questions of ultimate governmental power, in short, debate over the doctrine of judicial review. As it is sometimes difficult for the judge to distinguish between what is unconstitutional and what is merely unwise, so it is difficult for the critic to disassociate his reaction to the results reached in a given case from his evaluation of the competence of the particular judicial performance. For some the failure to draw such a line robs criticism of much of its usefulness and reduces it to the level of determining ownership of the proverbial gored ox. For others the effort to make such distinctions is simply unrealistic; nice questions regarding the nature of the process are of interest only in the context of larger purposes served or thwarted by the particular decision. This essay is predicated upon the propositions that means are important, that the reasons advanced by courts in support of their judgments are not simply window dressing, and that questions relating to what courts ought and ought not to consider are of real and not merely apparent significance

Map Use in Small-Town Planning Documents in Northeast Ohio

Author Institution: Department of Geography and Planning, University of AkronMaps are of fundamental importance to the planning profession. This paper examines the use of maps in planning documents from small towns in northeast Ohio. It considers the frequency of map use, the types of maps utilized, and their quality. Map quality is evaluated by determining the presence or absence of basic map elements and the utilization of a lettering hierarchy for the various map elements. Maps are found in all the plans (median =10) and these represent about one-quarter of non-textual materials. Maps of community facilities and land use are most common, accounting for over half of all maps. Key map elements are included on almost all maps, but few incorporate a lettering hierarchy to reflect the importance of the various elements. The increasing availability of computer mapping programs and the ease with which inadequate maps can be produced make it imperative that planners become more cognizant of the proper techniques for effective cartographic communication. More comprehensive studies are warranted examining the use of maps in planning documents from a wider range of types and sizes of administrative units—i.e., cities, metropolitan areas, and countie