“…The Civil Rights Movement's activities in the courts during the mid‐twentieth century was supported in large part by the parallel alternative strategy in Howard Law School and other Historically Black Law Schools (Epp ; Johnson ; Kluger ; Tushnet ). The conservative counterrevolution began in earnest with the supplemental strategy of The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies which has, as scholarship has documented, served to train and credential a generation of conservative legal academics, litigators and judges who have been able to effectively infiltrate mainstream law school faculties and positions of power (Hollis‐Brusky , , ; Southworth ; Teles ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As Steven Teles writes in his sweeping 2008 study of the libertarian and secular conservative infiltration of law schools:These institutions not only produce legal ideas, but are also the dominant force in training successive generations of lawyers, influencing their notions of the proper function of law in society, of which legal claims are “off the wall.” And of how a career in law might be pursued (12–13).Indeed, institutions of legal education are well‐positioned to provide various forms of essential capital for movements interested in transforming law. They attract, socialize, and credential lawyers (human capital) (Teles ); establish or provide inroads to networks for group advancement (social capital) (Southworth ); and create, spread, and legitimate ideas within the legal, political, and wider publics (intellectual and cultural capital) (Balkin ; Hollis‐Brusky , ; Teles ). As such, one can begin to understand the “allure” of law schools and legal education for movement patrons looking to transform the law more broadly.…”
Section: Strategies For Leveraging Law Schools and Legal Training Formentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, institutions of legal education are well-positioned to provide various forms of essential capital for movements interested in transforming law. They attract, socialize, and credential lawyers (human capital) (Teles 2008); establish or provide inroads to networks for group advancement (social capital) (Southworth 2008); and create, spread, and legitimate ideas within the legal, political, and wider publics (intellectual and cultural capital) (Balkin 2001;Hollis-Brusky 2013, 2015Teles 2008). As such, one can begin to understand the "allure" of law schools and legal education for movement patrons looking to transform the law more broadly.…”
Section: Strategies For Leveraging Law Schools and Legal Training Formentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is, in part, a result of the widely acknowledged supporting role law schools and legal education have played in a series of high‐profile revolutionary legal movements in the United States over the last century. From the New Deal Revolution in the 1930s and 40s (Irons ; Kalman ; Teles ) to the “Rights Revolution” of the mid‐twentieth century (Epp ; Johnson ; Kluger ; Tushnet ) to the conservative counterrevolution currently underway on the Supreme Court (Hollis‐Brusky , , ; Southworth ; Teles ), a robust body of scholarship has documented how these changes have been, in part, an outgrowth of changes in law schools, legal training, and education. Moreover, recent high‐profile investments in higher education by conservative patrons and donors such as the Koch Brothers, the Olin Foundation, and the Scaife Foundation to establish conservative “beach heads” in the legal academy for conservatives who reject the liberal legal orthodoxy (Mayer ; Miller ; Teles ) demonstrate the widely held belief that American law schools are a critical lynchpin in the battle for control over the law.…”
The allure of law schools as transformative institutions in the United States prompted Christian Right leaders to invest in legal education in the 1990s and early 2000s. The aspiration was to control the training of lawyers in order to challenge the secular legal monopoly on law, policy, and culture. In this article, we examine three leading Christian conservative law schools and one training program dedicated to transforming the law. We ask how each institution seeks to realize its transformative mission and analyze how they organize themselves to produce the kinds of capital (human, intellectual, social, cultural) needed to effectively change the law. To do so, we develop a typology of legal institution‐building strategies (infiltration, supplemental, and parallel alternative) to compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of institutional forms. We conclude by discussing implications of our findings for those looking to law schools as sites of broader transformation within the law.
“…The Civil Rights Movement's activities in the courts during the mid‐twentieth century was supported in large part by the parallel alternative strategy in Howard Law School and other Historically Black Law Schools (Epp ; Johnson ; Kluger ; Tushnet ). The conservative counterrevolution began in earnest with the supplemental strategy of The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies which has, as scholarship has documented, served to train and credential a generation of conservative legal academics, litigators and judges who have been able to effectively infiltrate mainstream law school faculties and positions of power (Hollis‐Brusky , , ; Southworth ; Teles ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As Steven Teles writes in his sweeping 2008 study of the libertarian and secular conservative infiltration of law schools:These institutions not only produce legal ideas, but are also the dominant force in training successive generations of lawyers, influencing their notions of the proper function of law in society, of which legal claims are “off the wall.” And of how a career in law might be pursued (12–13).Indeed, institutions of legal education are well‐positioned to provide various forms of essential capital for movements interested in transforming law. They attract, socialize, and credential lawyers (human capital) (Teles ); establish or provide inroads to networks for group advancement (social capital) (Southworth ); and create, spread, and legitimate ideas within the legal, political, and wider publics (intellectual and cultural capital) (Balkin ; Hollis‐Brusky , ; Teles ). As such, one can begin to understand the “allure” of law schools and legal education for movement patrons looking to transform the law more broadly.…”
Section: Strategies For Leveraging Law Schools and Legal Training Formentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, institutions of legal education are well-positioned to provide various forms of essential capital for movements interested in transforming law. They attract, socialize, and credential lawyers (human capital) (Teles 2008); establish or provide inroads to networks for group advancement (social capital) (Southworth 2008); and create, spread, and legitimate ideas within the legal, political, and wider publics (intellectual and cultural capital) (Balkin 2001;Hollis-Brusky 2013, 2015Teles 2008). As such, one can begin to understand the "allure" of law schools and legal education for movement patrons looking to transform the law more broadly.…”
Section: Strategies For Leveraging Law Schools and Legal Training Formentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is, in part, a result of the widely acknowledged supporting role law schools and legal education have played in a series of high‐profile revolutionary legal movements in the United States over the last century. From the New Deal Revolution in the 1930s and 40s (Irons ; Kalman ; Teles ) to the “Rights Revolution” of the mid‐twentieth century (Epp ; Johnson ; Kluger ; Tushnet ) to the conservative counterrevolution currently underway on the Supreme Court (Hollis‐Brusky , , ; Southworth ; Teles ), a robust body of scholarship has documented how these changes have been, in part, an outgrowth of changes in law schools, legal training, and education. Moreover, recent high‐profile investments in higher education by conservative patrons and donors such as the Koch Brothers, the Olin Foundation, and the Scaife Foundation to establish conservative “beach heads” in the legal academy for conservatives who reject the liberal legal orthodoxy (Mayer ; Miller ; Teles ) demonstrate the widely held belief that American law schools are a critical lynchpin in the battle for control over the law.…”
The allure of law schools as transformative institutions in the United States prompted Christian Right leaders to invest in legal education in the 1990s and early 2000s. The aspiration was to control the training of lawyers in order to challenge the secular legal monopoly on law, policy, and culture. In this article, we examine three leading Christian conservative law schools and one training program dedicated to transforming the law. We ask how each institution seeks to realize its transformative mission and analyze how they organize themselves to produce the kinds of capital (human, intellectual, social, cultural) needed to effectively change the law. To do so, we develop a typology of legal institution‐building strategies (infiltration, supplemental, and parallel alternative) to compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of institutional forms. We conclude by discussing implications of our findings for those looking to law schools as sites of broader transformation within the law.
“…Their clerkships, in turn, burnished their credentials, enabling them to be placed in academia or on the bench themselves one day. 53 But appointing justices to the Supreme Court requires luck and timing-and a willingness to play hardball.…”
This Note traces the evolution of US constitutional law from Roe v. Wade (1973), which established a right to abortion, to Dobbs v. Jackson (2022), which overturned Roe along with Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) and returned the issue to the states. It examines the questions of constitutional interpretation raised by Dobbs. It considers practical challenges, including the patchwork of state laws, the prevalence of medical abortion, and the aggressive stance taken by both sides. Finally, it proposes elements for a principled compromise about law in the United States, which takes seriously the full humanity of the unborn and is attentive to other jurisprudentially relevant factors, including lack of support for women facing crisis pregnancies and the relationship between race and abortion.
Congress's Authority to Influence and Control Executive Branch AgenciesThe Constitution neither establishes administrative agencies nor explicitly prescribes the manner by which they may be created. Even so, the Supreme Court has generally recognized that Congress has broad constitutional authority to establish and shape the federal bureaucracy. Congress may use its Article I lawmaking powers to create federal agencies and individual offices within those agencies, design agencies' basic structures and operations, and prescribe, subject to certain constitutional limitations, how those holding agency offices are appointed and removed. Congress also may enumerate the powers, duties, and functions to be exercised by agencies, as well as directly counteract, through later legislation, certain agency actions implementing delegated authority.The most potent tools of congressional control over agencies, including those addressing the structuring, empowering, regulating, and funding of agencies, typically require enactment of legislation. Such legislation must comport with constitutional requirements related to bicameralism (i.e., it must be approved by both houses of Congress) and presentment (i.e., it must be presented to the President for signature). The constitutional process to enact effective legislation requires the support of the House, Senate, and the President, unless the support in both houses is sufficient to override the President's veto.There also are many non-statutory tools (i.e., tools not requiring legislative enactment to exercise) that may be used by the House, Senate, congressional committees, or individual Members of Congress to influence and control agency action. In some cases, non-statutory measures, such as impeachment and removal, Senate advice and consent to appointments or the ratification of treaties, and committee issuance of subpoenas, can impose legal consequences. Others, however, such as House resolutions of inquiry, may not be used to bind agencies or agency officials and rely for their effectiveness on their ability to persuade or influence.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
