Hemeroteca

Resultados de búsqueda

SHIFTING BURDENS OF PROOF IN EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION LITIGATION

Harvard Law Review, n.º 7/1996, pág. 1579

SHOULD THE SUPREME COURT PRESUME THAT CONGRESS ACTS CONSTITUTIONALLY? THE ROLE OF THE CANON OF AVOIDANCE AND RELIANCE ON EARLY LEGISLATIVE PRACTICE IN CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION

Harvard Law Review, n.º 6/2003, pág. 1798

Sumario

I. CAN CONGRESS BE TRUSTED TO ACT CONSTITUTIONALLY?. II. IS THERE ANY PLACE FOR THE AVOIDANCE CANON OR PRIOR LEGISLATIVE PRACTICE IN CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE?. III. CONCLUSION.

SOBER SECOND THOUGHTS: REFLECTIONS ON TWO DECADES OF CONSTITUTIONAL REGULATION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

STEIKER, CAROL S.;STEIKER, JORDAN M.

Harvard Law Review, n.º 2/1995, pág. 355

Sumario

1. Introduction. 2. Beginning at the Beginning: The concerns of Furman and Gregg. a) Desert. b). Fairness. c) Individualisation. d) Heightened procedural reliability. 3. Ending back at the beginning: The return to pre-furman capital sentencing. a) Narrowing. b) Channeling...

SOFT MONEY: THE CURRENT RULES AND THE CASE FOR REFORM.

Harvard Law Review, n.º 5/1998, pág. 1323

Sumario

1. Laws governing money raised and money spent. a) Hard vs. soft money. b) Regulation of soft money: the "Dual Account" regime. 2. Applying the law. a) A taxonomy for applying the law. b) How parties spend money. 3. The 1996 presidential campaign: abusing soft money. a) Solicitation of nonfederal money by federal candidates. b) Use of soft money to pay pro-candidate television ads. c) Transferring money to states. 4. Proposals to change campaign finance laws. a) Track one: Restrict soft-money raising and spending. b) Track two: ban soft money. 5. Conclusion.

SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY AS A DOCTRINE OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION

NELSON, CALEB

Harvard Law Review, n.º 6/2002, pág. 1559

Sumario

Introduction. I. The founders' framework for sovereign immunity. II. The legal effect of the eleventh amendment. III. Can Congress abrogate the states' immunities?. Conclusion.

STANDING AND MISUNDERSTANDING IN VOTING RIGHTS LAW

ISSACHAROFF, SAMUEL;KARLAN, PAMELA S.

Harvard Law Review, n.º 8/1998, pág. 2276

Sumario

1. Standing cannot stand alone: Deriving rules about standing from conceptions of injury. a) Standing on precedent: the vote denial cases. b) Standing on precedent: the vote dilution cases. c) "Analytically distinct" but distinctively nonanalytic: Standing in shaw cases. 2. Standing in the middle. 3. Divided they stand: Why the supreme court can't answer a questions that john hart ely thinks is so simple.

STANDING IN THE WAY OF SEPARATION OF POWERS: THE CONSEQUENCES OF RAINES V. BYRD

Harvard Law Review, n.º 7/1999, pág. 1741

Sumario

1. Raines v. Byrd: the opinion and the puzzles. 2.Raines v. Byrd: Reconstruction. 3. Raines v. Byrd:Evaluation. 4. Conclusion.

STATE COURTS AND THE PASSIVE VIRTUES: RETHINKING THE JUDICIAL FUNCTION

HERSHKOFF, HELEN

Harvard Law Review, n.º 7/2001, pág. 1833

Sumario

1. State justiciability doctrine and the judicialfunction. a) State courts and advisory opinions. b) Statecourts and public actions. c) State courts and mootdisputes. d) State courts and political questions. e) Statecourts and judicial administration. f) Rethinking the statejudicial function. 2. Reconsidering the "Passive Virtues" instate constitutional cases. a) Justiciability and common lawadjudication. b) Justiciability and separation of powers...3. Developing a state approach to justiciability doctrine.

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT.THIRD CIRCUIT HOLDS THAT UNEMPLOYABLE FORMER EMPLOYEES MAY SUE EMPLOYERS

Harvard Law Review, n.º 5/1999, pág. 1118

STILL WORTHY OF PRAISE.

NUSSBAUM, MARTHA C.

Harvard Law Review, n.º 7/1998, pág. 1776

Sumario

1. Posner's methods. 2. Relativism and subjectivism. 3. The sources of normativity. 4. Theory and practice. 5. Experience and imagination.

Página 18 de 25

Hemeroteca

Resultados de búsqueda

El Centro

Formación

Doc. y Publicaciones

Investigación