Institution
Georgetown University Law Center
About: Georgetown University Law Center is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Supreme court & Public health. The organization has 585 authors who have published 2488 publications receiving 36650 citations. The organization is also known as: Georgetown Law & GULC.
Topics: Supreme court, Public health, Global health, Health policy, Human rights
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
•
TL;DR: Balkin this paper argued that the original meaning of the word "commerce" was not social interaction, but commerce referred to the trade or transportation of things or persons, and did not include such productive economic activity as manufacturing or agriculture.
Abstract: In his book, Living Originalism, Jack Balkin proposes what he calls the “interaction theory” of the original semantic meaning of the word “commerce” in the Commerce Clause. He claims that “commerce” meant “social interaction.” In this article I show why this theory is wrong due to errors of commission and omission. Balkin is wrong to reduce “commerce” to “intercourse,” “intercourse” to “interaction,” and “interaction” to “affecting.” This triple reduction distorts rather than illuminates the original meaning of “commerce.” And Balkin omits from his discussion the massive amounts of evidence of contemporary usage—along with dictionary definitions of “intercourse”—establishing that “commerce” referred to the trade or transportation of things or persons, and did not include such productive economic activity as manufacturing or agriculture, much less all social interaction. In this article, I also reply to Balkin’s criticisms of my book, Restoring the Lost Constitution. I show how his heavy reliance on Gunning Bedford’s resolution in the secret Philadelphia convention is misplaced in a discussion of the original meaning of the Commerce Clause.
1 citations
•
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that certain common misperceptions about congressional ethics enforcement (misperceptions advanced most recently in Paul M. Thompson's response to my Comment calling for the creation of Congressional Commissioners for Standards) result from a confusion of the purposes of congressional ethics with those of the criminal law.
Abstract: This brief piece argues that certain common misperceptions about congressional ethics enforcement (misperceptions advanced most recently in Paul M. Thompson's response to my Comment calling for the creation of Congressional Commissioners for Standards) result from a confusion of the purposes of congressional ethics with those of the criminal law. Congressional ethics is not simply about punishing rulebreakers; rather, it aims to promote clean government and public trust in Congress and its members. This understanding of the proper purpose of congressional ethics allows us to see more clearly both what is wrong with the current system and how certain reforms would provide useful correctives.
1 citations
••
TL;DR: Biden will try to navigate a Congress narrowly controlled by Democrats while acting administratively as well as discussed by the authors, but will face a difficult task navigating a Congress that is controlled by Republicans.
Abstract: President Joe Biden will try to navigate a Congress narrowly controlled by Democrats while acting administratively as well
1 citations
•
[...]
TL;DR: The other trade war is not the tit-for-tat tariffs but rather the clash over the expansion of judicial lawmaking at the World Trade Organization and its Appellate Body as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: This Essay takes up the “other trade war” – not the tit-for-tat tariffs but rather the clash over the expansion of judicial lawmaking at the World Trade Organization and its Appellate Body. In Part I of this Essay, I outline the positions of critics of the WTO dispute settlement system and situate those views in the context of a broader conversation on issues with international trade law. Part II argues for rethinking and disaggregating. While some commentators view the other trade war monoptically as a general crisis precipitated by power politics, I introduce four different crises or conflicts that I believe frame the debate. This Essay’s approach challenges the popular perspective on how the present critical juncture developed and instead emphasizes the weight of divisions in legal ideology. Part III situates my proposed frame in the larger context of international dispute settlement design and delegation. The Essay concludes that the international dispute settlement “forest” should be the focus of our sustained work, rather than the trade law “trees”.
1 citations
•
TL;DR: Benko and Rohrs as mentioned in this paper present an overview of the interim guidance issued by Treasury and the IRS on the new section 199 domestic production deduction, which is used in Section 199.
Abstract: Beth M. Benko and Jane A. Rohrs present an overview of the interim guidance issued by Treasury and the IRS on the new section 199 domestic production deduction.
1 citations
Authors
Showing all 585 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Lawrence O. Gostin | 75 | 879 | 23066 |
Michael J. Saks | 38 | 155 | 5398 |
Chirag Shah | 34 | 341 | 5056 |
Sara J. Rosenbaum | 34 | 425 | 6907 |
Mark Dybul | 33 | 61 | 4171 |
Steven C. Salop | 33 | 120 | 11330 |
Joost Pauwelyn | 32 | 154 | 3429 |
Mark Tushnet | 31 | 267 | 4754 |
Gorik Ooms | 29 | 124 | 3013 |
Alicia Ely Yamin | 29 | 122 | 2703 |
Julie E. Cohen | 28 | 63 | 2666 |
James G. Hodge | 27 | 225 | 2874 |
John H. Jackson | 27 | 102 | 2919 |
Margaret M. Blair | 26 | 75 | 4711 |
William W. Bratton | 25 | 112 | 2037 |