TITLE

SUPREME COURT REVIEW OF STATE-COURT DETERMINATIONS OF STATE LAW IN CONSTITUTIONAL CASES

AUTHOR(S)
Monaghan, Henry Paul
PUB. DATE
December 2003
SOURCE
Columbia Law Review;Dec2003, Vol. 103 Issue 8, p1919
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The decision in Bush v. Gore and particularly Chief Justice Rehnquist's concurring opinion were widely criticized for their unwarranted intrusion upon the "authoritative" status of the Florida Supreme Court in determining the meaning of Florida election law. This Article rejects the merits of that criticism. It proposes the thesis that the Supreme Court has ancillary jurisdiction to review state-court determinations of state law in cases where the Constitution or federal law imposes a duty of fidelity to prior state law (t[sub 1]) and the claim is that the state court materially and impermissibly departed from that law at a later point in time (t[sub 2]). Using Bush v. Gore as a vehicle and building upon an examination of the adequate nonfederal ground doctrine and the implications of the Supremacy Clause, this Article establishes that some Supreme Court reexamination of state-court determinations of state law "antecedent" to the federal claim is not only indisputable, but quite familiar. It goes on to argue for independent judgment, rather than the more familiar "fair support" standard, as the ultimate measure of the Supreme Court's jurisdictional authority to reexamine state law, supporting this normative assertion with extensive evidence from Supreme Court practice since the founding. The Article concludes by suggesting that the distinction between the two standards is important to litigants and should (but may not) be important to the Court because, contrary to critics' claims, in appropriate cases—Bush v. Gore among them—independent judgment can serve, rather than undermine, the values of "Our Federalism.
ACCESSION #
11785106

 

Related Articles

  • Getting it into proportion. Niekirk, Paul // Accountancy;Dec1993, Vol. 112 Issue 1204, p106 

    The article focuses on the case "Cheese v Thomas" in Great Britain. Mr. Cheese had an arrangement with his great-nephew Mr. Thomas that they would buy a house. However under uncontrollable circumstances, they have to sell the house and divide the sale between them. The problem arose when the...

  • HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE BALANCE -- HATTON AND MARCIC. Layard, Antonia // Environmental Law Review;2004, Vol. 6 Issue 3, p196 

    Discusses two human rights cases in Great Britain. "Hatton v United Kingdom"; "Marcic v Thames Water".

  • The Second Dartmouth College Case.  // National Review;8/5/1988, Vol. 40 Issue 15, p20 

    Focuses on a series of lawsuits filed against Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire. Draconian disciplinary sentences received by three students for participating in a brief and nonviolent confrontation with a black music professor; Questions of constitutional law and public policy.

  • The third lawsuit in October. Haltom, Bill // Tennessee Bar Journal;Sep2004, Vol. 40 Issue 9, p34 

    Presents the case "Crimson Tide v. Vols" in Tennessee. Basis of the ruling of the court; Claims of the lawsuits; Decision of the court.

  • KELO V. CITY OF NEW LONDON–WRONGLY DECIDED AND A MISSED OPPORTUNITY FOR PRINCIPLED LINE DRAWING WITH RESPECT TO EMINENT DOMAIN TAKINGS. Delogu, Orlando E. // Maine Law Review;2006, Vol. 58 Issue 1, p18 

    The article discusses the final ruling of the Supreme Court in Connecticut on the "Kelo v. City of New London" court case. A mistake in relation to the establishment of a principled line with respect to the eminent domain taking powers was found on the court's final decision. The author stressed...

  • Sugar Magnolia standoff headed for a court battle. Miller, Holly // New Orleans CityBusiness (1994 to 2008);9/20/2004, Vol. 25 Issue 12, p7 

    Reports on the lawsuit filed by Sugar Magnolia against O.J. Hooter of Irish Channel Properties Inc. in New Orleans, Louisiana. Details of the lawsuit; Eviction proceedings against Steve McKenna.

  • The Case Of The #@!*ing Cussing Canoeist. Rennicke, Jeff // Backpacker;Aug2002, Vol. 30 Issue 6, p20 

    Focuses on the verdict of the Michigan State Appeals Court on the case of canoeist Timothy Boomer. Background of the case; Reason for the decision of the court to overturn Boomer's sentence.

  • Trial Date Set for Texas Redistricting. Albanese, Elizabeth // Bond Buyer;11/5/2003, Vol. 346 Issue 31755, p2 

    Reports on the scheduling of trial date for a lawsuit against congressional redistricting in Texas. Queries on the legality of the initiative; Validity of the map.

  • ON THE PROSPECT OF "DAUBERTIZING" JUDICIAL REVIEW OF RISK ASSESSMENT. McGarity, Thomas O. // Law & Contemporary Problems;Autumn2003, Vol. 66 Issue 4, p155 

    Focuses on the prospect of "Daubertizing" judicial review of risk assessment. Discussion of the case "Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc."; Cases involving expert testimony in the U.S.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics