ISSN 0042-0018
Vol. 39, Issue 3, 2005January 01, 2005 PDT
Diamond v. Chakrabarty: Gauging Congress’s Response to Dynamic Statutory Interpretation by the Supreme Court
Diamond v. Chakrabarty: Gauging Congress’s Response to Dynamic Statutory Interpretation by the Supreme Court
Anna Lumelsky,
Articles in Vol. 39, Issue 3, 2005
Vol. 39, Issue 3, 2005
- A Tribute to Professor John de J. Pemberton Jr. at the Commencement of the Jack Pemberton Lecture on Workplace JusticeWilliam B. Gould IV
- Collective Rights as Human Rights: Fulfilling Senator Wagner’s Promise of Democracy in the Workplace-The Blue Eagle Can Fly AgainCharles J. Morris
- Not Enough Official Torture in the World? The Circumstances in Which Torture Is Morally JustifiableMirko BagaricJulie Clarke
- Protecting Gays from the Government’s Crosshairs: A Reevaluation of the Ninth Circuit’s Treatment of Gays Under the Federal Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause Following Lawrence v. TexasJeffrey M. Goldman
- Diamond v. Chakrabarty: Gauging Congress’s Response to Dynamic Statutory Interpretation by the Supreme CourtAnna Lumelsky
- The Brady Solution: A Due Process Remedy for Those Convicted with Evidence from Faulty Crime LabsLaurel P. Gorman
- Punch-Card Ballots, Residual Votes and the Systematic Disenfranchisement of Minority Voters: A Look at the Decision to Allow the California Recall Election to ProceedSuzy Loftus
- Commerce Clause Challenges to the Endangered Species Act: The Rehnquist Court’s Web of Confusion Traps More Than the FlyDavid W. Scopp
Anna Lumelsky, Diamond v. Chakrabarty: Gauging Congress’s Response to Dynamic Statutory Interpretation by the Supreme Court, 39 U.S.F. L. Rev. 5 (2005).