Judicial supremacy and the settlement function.(Symposium: Reflections on City of Boerne v. Flores)

From: William and Mary Law Review | Date: February 1, 1998| Author: Nagel, Robert F. | Copyright information

In City of Boerne v. Flores,(1) the Supreme Court repeats the familiar proposition that it is the province and duty of the judiciary "to say what the law is."(2) But the Court also says that Congress has "the duty to make its own informed judgment" on the meaning of the Constitution.(3) The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA or the "Act")(4) thus exceeded Congress's power not because constitutional interpretation is outside the legislative function, but because the Act was ba...

Read all of this article with a FREE trial to HighBeam Research

Related newspaper, magazine, and journal articles from HighBeam Research

New era of supremacy? From Miranda to FDA decisions, court calls itself ultimate decisionmaker.(USA)(Court's Term In Review)
The Christian Science Monitor ; If there is one message delivered with absolute clarity this year from Chief Justice William Rehnquist, it is that in matters of constitutional law, his court will cede authority to no one. This is not a Supreme Court that is inclined to defer to the judgment of Congress or the president - or even
The Supreme Court rules.
First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life ; Not so very long ago, defenders of judicial activism felt it necessary to justify how an unelected body of lifetime appointees could become the definitive voice of constitutional authority in a democratic society. One thinks, for example, of Professor Alexander Bickel of Yale Law School, who
Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy.(Book review)
Yale Law Journal ; ... for Lincoln was clearly prepared to concede the Court more than were its opponents of fifty years earlier. ). (91.) The Latest News, N.Y. DAILY TRY., Mar. 7, 1857, at 5, quoted in Friedman, supra note 77, at 417. See generally Friedman, supra note 77, at 416 ...
Judicial supremacy and its discontents.
Constitutional Commentary ; [T]he federal judiciary is supreme in the exposition of the law of the Constitution (1) The decision [Brown v. Board of Education] tortured the Constitution--the South will torture the decision. (2) Will nobody defend judicial supremacy anymore? (3) The Supreme Court has made its grab for power.
Judicial supremacy and the settlement function.(Symposium: Reflections on City of Boerne v. Flores)
William and Mary Law Review ; In City of Boerne v. Flores,(1) the Supreme Court repeats the familiar proposition that it is the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is. (2) But the Court also says that Congress has the duty to make its own informed judgment on the meaning of the Constitution.(3) The Religious
Two versions of judicial supremacy. (Symposium: Reflections on City of Boerne v. Flores)
William and Mary Law Review ; The easiest way to defend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act's (RFRA)(1) constitutionality was to establish the substantive interpretation of Congress's power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment ( Section 5 2) According to that interpretation, Congress's power to enforce the provisions
How the Court Became Supreme.(the United States Supreme Court )
First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life ; The past half century has witnessed the rise to prominence of a constitutional theory that gives the U.S. Supreme Court a virtual monopoly in American constitutional law. This theory grants the Court conclusive authority to determine the meaning of constitutional provisions--even those that empower
Presidential Challenges to Judicial Supremacy and the Politics of Constitutional Meaning(*).
Polity ; In 1803, Chief Justice John Marshall declared that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is, and thus claimed for the Supreme Court the right to determine the meaning of the Constitution and to hold the actions of the other branches of government
IT'S THE O'CONNOR COURT: A BRIEF DISCUSSION OF SOME CRITIQUES OF THE REHNQUIST COURT AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Northwestern University Law Review ; I. INTRODUCTION Michael Herz's article1 makes an important contribution to our understanding of both administrative law and the Rehnquist Court. Noting that nothing too significant has happened in the Supreme Court's administrative law jurisprudence under Chief Justice Rehnquist, Herz attempts to
The importance of being final.(supremacy of the US Supreme Court)
Constitutional Commentary ; The Supreme Court likes to bill itself as the definitive interpreter of the Constitution. In Cooper v. Aaron (1), all nine Justices individually signed an opinion proclaiming that the Court's constitutional doctrines were the supreme law of the land. More recently, the joint opinion in Planned