The Constitution and the Lessons of Rome

This article identifies all references in The Federalist to ancient Rome and explains them and their import for the arguments favoring ratification. As our knowledge of classical civilization fades, we become less able to understand the meaning of a central document in our history. The article addresses this problem

How the Separation of Powers Doctrine Shaped the Executive

This Article examines the debates of the Founders over the separation of powers doctrine as it relates to the executive branch. After surveying the experience in the colonies and under the post-Revolutionary state constitutions, it analyzes the relevant issues at the Constitutional Convention. Rather than focusing on abstract discussions of political theory, the article examines specific decisions and controversies in which separation of powers was a concern. The Article offers a detailed recounting of those debates. At the Convention, separation of powers arose most prominently in the arguments over nine issues: choosing the Executive, permitting the Executive to stand for second term, removing the Executive, devising the Executive veto, requiring legislative advice and consent for executive appointments, authorizing the Executive to grant reprieves and pardons, and making the Vice President the President of the Senate. The Article demonstrates that much of the discussion centered on allocating power between the Legislative and Executive branches and thus really amounted to a struggle over defining the nascent office of the Executive. It thus offers the historical background for today’s debates over separation of powers. For the Founders, separation of powers served not as a rigid rule, but as a functional guide, designed to help construct a working constitution with a workable executive branch

A Proposal for Improving Argument Before the United States Supreme Court

This Article offers a simple solution for reducing the overload of questions at oral argument. Justices, individually or collectively, could pose written questions on facts and law to the litigants\u27 counsel before oral argument and expect written responses. The submitted questions might inquire about the facts of the case, about the litigant\u27s interpretation of the relevant law, about the response that the litigant would make to a hypothetical scenario, or about the precise holding that the litigant wishes the Court to propound. The responses should allow for more thought-out answers than oral argument can produce and might both reduce the number of questions that the Justices ask during oral argument and improve the quality of the answers. The Article places this proposal in historical context by examining how Supreme Court rules on presenting argument have developed--shifting the emphasis from oral argument to written argument. After explaining the value of oral argument and the ways in which courts have tried to deal with the brevity of oral arguments, the Article illustrates the value of the proposal by closely analyzing the oral argument in Kelo v. City of New London

Secular Contribution of Religion to the Political Process: The First Amendment and School Aid, The

In this Article, I first develop the thesis and evaluate objections to it. I also relate it to the thinking of the Constitution\u27s Framers. Modern Supreme Court cases on church and state then are reviewed in search of acknowledgement of the positive dimensions of church-state relations. I conclude by applying the thesis to cases dealing with government aid to church-related schools and their students

Stopping Nuclear Power Plants: A Memoir

A memoir of the author\u27s involvement in the anti-nuclear power movement

Readability Studies: How Technocentrism Can Compromise Research and Legal Determinations

One way to determine whether consumers understand a document is to use a readability formula to assign it a score. These formulas calculate readability by counting such variables as the number of words and syllables in a passage or document. The idea of readability formulas has been defined as “an equation which combines those text features that best predict text difficulty. The equation is usually developed by studying the relationship between text features (e.g., words, sentences) and text difficulty (e.g., reading comprehension, reading rate, and expert judgment of difficulty).” Even though readability formulas are mechanical and imperfect, they are easy to apply and, therefore, popular. The Flesch-Kincaid test is one popular readability formula, perhaps because Microsoft Word allows users to apply it easily to documents that are typed or pasted into the program. If Microsoft’s readability program is flawed, however, it compromises the results of the many researchers who have relied on it

A Primer on Organ Donation

As organ donation gains increasing attention in our society, attorneys have an obligation to stay current on the issues so that they can properly advise two groups of clients: those who may need transplants and those who, if given reliable information, might consider becoming organ donors. A client in need of a transplant may wish advice about putting his or her affairs in order, and a client who retains an attorney to draft a will may be interested in learning about organ donation. Attorneys should know what a potential organ recipient should consider, how donated organs are allocated, how to become an organ donor, what myths discourage individuals from becoming organ donors, and the role attorneys can play in raising the issue of organ donation with their clients