Show simple item record

Selective Judicial Activism

dc.contributor.authorSherry, Suzanna
dc.date.accessioned2017-10-19T18:11:10Z
dc.date.available2017-10-19T18:11:10Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citation14 Geo. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 559 (2016)en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1803/8463
dc.descriptiona published article whose scope embraces the following topics: libertarian, heightened scrutiny, rational basis, judicial activism, economic regulation, Carolene Products,en_US
dc.description.abstractThis Essay, written for a symposium asking “Is the Rational Basis Test Unconstitutional?,” defends the bifurcated-scrutiny approach of Carolene Products and its famous footnote four. A growing cadre of conservative and libertarian scholars has called for increased scrutiny of legislation affecting economic rights. The Essay marshals four types of arguments to suggest that regulation of market activities should not be subject to the same, heightened, level of scrutiny as legislation affecting personal rights: moral arguments, constitutive arguments, consequentialist arguments, and arguments resting on the likelihood of illicit legislative motives.en_US
dc.format.extent1 PDF (20 pages)en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherGeorgetown Journal of Law & Public Policyen_US
dc.subject.lcshConstitutional law -- United Statesen_US
dc.titleSelective Judicial Activismen_US
dc.title.alternativeDefending "Carolene Products"en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.ssrn-urihttps://ssrn.com/abstract=2741287


Files in this item

Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record