Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Political science

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Political science

The Necessary and Proper Clause as an intrinsic restraint on federal lawmaking power

Article Abstract:

Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone, in US v. Darby in 1941, reestablished the Necessary and Proper Clause as the basis of Congress' plenary power over interstate commerce. His views superceded the dual federalism doctrine which refused to couple the Clause with any enumerated powers. However, Justice Hugo Black later expounded the mistaken view that Congress' power over commerce derives from the Commerce Clause alone, rather than coupled with the Necessary and Proper Clause.

Author: Engdahl, David E.
Publisher: Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc.
Publication Name: Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy
Subject: Political science
ISSN: 0193-4872
Year: 1998
United States, Federalism, Legislative power

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Introduction to volume nineteen

Article Abstract:

The birth of the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy showed that, contrary to popular opinion, conservatism was not dead. The journal has made important contributions to constitutional jurisprudence in the areas of the Takings and Commerce Clauses. A study of cases in these areas since the Journal's founding show that constitutional interpretations have been more exact and an effort has been made to give clear standards.

Author: Kozinski, Alex
Publisher: Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc.
Publication Name: Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy
Subject: Political science
ISSN: 0193-4872
Year: 1995
Interpretation and construction, Criticism and interpretation, Constitutional law, Constitutional interpretation, Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy (Periodical)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


At last, the Supreme Court solves the takings puzzle

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court in Dolan v. City of Tigard has issued a definitive ruling on how to balance private property interests and governmental police power under the Takings Clause. The court ruled that the common law of nuisance should be used to decide that balance. This ruling is consistent with the Constitution while stopping short of judicial activism.

Author: Kmiec, Douglas W.
Publisher: Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc.
Publication Name: Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy
Subject: Political science
ISSN: 0193-4872
Year: 1995
Eminent domain (Law)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States, Laws, regulations and rules, Interstate commerce, Regulatory taking (Law)
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: The reemergence of the Commerce Clause as a limit on federal power: United States v. Lopez. The Dormant Commerce Clause and the interstate shipment of waste
  • Abstracts: Labor law as an impediment to labor relations reform: leveling the playing field. Federal Labor relations 2000: introduction to the symposium
  • Abstracts: The Sistani factor. The uses of historical memory. Constitution-making after conflict: lessons for Iraq
  • Abstracts: German foreign policy and the shadow of the past. Finnish neutrality policy during the cold war. Nationalism, indignation and China's Japan policy
  • Abstracts: The generals manoeuvre on the political battlefield. Maneuvering with the military. Corruption in the Russian armed forces
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.