FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2595957777> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2595957777 startingPage "165" @default.
• W2595957777 abstract "I. Introduction 165II. Tiered Constitutional Scrutiny Levels: Some Examples and Initial Concerns 169III. A Brief Tour of Some Important Tiered Scrutiny Constitutional Cases: The Initial Concerns Develop 173IV. Abolishing Constitutional Tiered Scrutiny and Encouraging the Proper Exercise of Judicial Responsibility 182A. Simplicity and Complexity 182B. Some Common Judicial Biases 185C. Some Related Further Deficiencies in Judicial Decision Making 188D. Judicial Intuitionism as a Partial Replacement for Illusory Formulaic Constitutional Adjudication.........190E. Refined Intuitionism, Practical Wisdom, and Related Virtues as a Replacement for Illusory Formulaic Constitutional Adjudication 1931. Limiting the Biases Through Technical Means......1932. Cultivating Judicial Practical Wisdom 1943. Some Related Virtues of Judgment 196V. Conclusion 200I. IntroductionConstitutional adjudication through one or more levels, or hierarchical tiers, of judicial scrutiny is entirely familiar. For ex- ample, one or more varieties of tiered scrutiny typically appear in adjudication involving equal protection,1 freedom of speech,2 the free exercise of religion,3 substantive due process,4 the Second Amendment,5 and even in adjudicating the exercise of enumerated congressional powers.6As thoroughly familiar as tiered constitutional scrutiny plainly is, it is still fair to wonder about the consequences of its hypothetical abandonment. No one realistically expects the prompt, universal abandonment of tiered constitutional scrutiny. But one might well learn valuable lessons from reflecting upon such a turn of affairs, merely as a thought-experiment.7 Even a tentative conclusion that the effects of abandoning tiered constitutional scrutiny would, on balance, tend to be negative might allow us to better understand, and better appreciate, tiered scrutiny. A tentative conclusion that abandoning tiered scrutiny would likely make little difference, or would have offsetting advantages and disadvantages, could have even greater value for us, however surprising such a conclusion might be. A tentative conclusion-as this Article in fact reaches below-that broadly abandoning tiered constitutional scrutiny could be of net overall value may, correspondingly, provide the greatest theoretical, and ultimately practical, value.Before outlining the basic structure of this Article, one important clarification is useful. In discussing, and ultimately recommending, universal abolition of the constitutional scrutiny tiers, this Article does not intend to endorse only half-measures. That is, this Article does not endorse merely a choice, in general or in any particular subject matter area, of some specific level of scrutiny for universal application. Entirely rejecting, say, strict scrutiny and minimum scrutiny, in all varieties, in favor of some version of mid-level scrutiny8 would still count as a reform merely within the tiered scrutiny schemata. Always applying some single level of constitutional scrutiny amounts to the continued endorsement, rather than the abandonment, of the tiers of scrutiny approach.Relatedly, adopting either generally or in a particular context a scale9 of more and less rigorous scrutiny, on whatever grounds, would also count as merely a reform within the schemata of tiered scrutiny, even though a sliding scale eliminates the discrete step-ups and step-downs of more traditional levels of scrutiny. …" @default.
• W2595957777 created "2017-03-23" @default.
• W2595957777 creator A5048860839 @default.
• W2595957777 date "2014-10-01" @default.
• W2595957777 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2595957777 title "What If All the Levels of Constitutional Scrutiny Were Completely Abandoned" @default.
• W2595957777 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2595957777 type Work @default.
• W2595957777 sameAs 2595957777 @default.
• W2595957777 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2595957777 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2595957777 hasAuthorship W2595957777A5048860839 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C159717818 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C204434341 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C2776050585 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C2776372474 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C2781442640 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConcept C48764862 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C111472728 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C138885662 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C144024400 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C159717818 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C17744445 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C190253527 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C199539241 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C204434341 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C2776050585 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C2776372474 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C2781442640 @default.
• W2595957777 hasConceptScore W2595957777C48764862 @default.
• W2595957777 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2595957777 hasLocation W25959577771 @default.
• W2595957777 hasOpenAccess W2595957777 @default.
• W2595957777 hasPrimaryLocation W25959577771 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W1422996617 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W2103378341 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W2274655047 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W2296709580 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W2302147501 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W2602662872 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W2739325455 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W2900404598 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W3121337990 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W3122926302 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W3123005214 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W3123061679 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W3123391557 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W3123599982 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W3123754098 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W3125497739 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W343239670 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W780899025 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W2602043035 @default.
• W2595957777 hasRelatedWork W3123946580 @default.
• W2595957777 hasVolume "45" @default.
• W2595957777 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2595957777 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2595957777 magId "2595957777" @default.
• W2595957777 workType "article" @default.