[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Constitutional power

'm not sure how Brandeis thinks the constitutional power comes into play
here because he never really says why the earlier doctrine is
unconstitutional.  I get the feeling that he is trying to resolve several
separation of powers problems, some of which he is unwillIing to articulate.
He does not simply find the Swift interpretation erroneous as he could have
done so it seems that he is trying to correct a bigger problem.  Clearly he
is concerned about the intrusion into what he feels is the state's "autonomy
and independence" but at the same time and less clearly he doesn't seem
comfortable with the legislature having the last word here either.  He
leaves Sec 34 intact but says the U.S. courts unconstitutionally intruded
into the states rights.