Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1972434
 


 



Constitutional Remedies for Underinclusive Statutes: A Critical Appraisal of Heckler v. Mathews


Bruce K. Miller


Western New England University School of Law

1985

Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review (CR-CL), Vol. 20, p. 79, 1985

Abstract:     
The power of the federal courts to remedy injuries caused by constitutional violations is a fundamental assumption of our constitutional scheme. The Supreme Court's equal protection decisions of the past generation illustrate the extent to which we take this power completely for granted. When confronted with a statute that denies a litigant's fifth or fourteenth amendment right to equal treatment, the Court has rarely limited itself to a simple declaration that the statute is unconstitutional. Such declarations, rather, have been routinely accompanied by awards of often substantial relief to the persons injured by the unconstitutional inequality. The author analyzes Heckler v. Matthews as it informs this area of law.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 73

Keywords: constitutional law, federal courts, statutes

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: December 15, 2011 ; Last revised: December 28, 2011

Suggested Citation

Miller, Bruce K., Constitutional Remedies for Underinclusive Statutes: A Critical Appraisal of Heckler v. Mathews (1985). Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review (CR-CL), Vol. 20, p. 79, 1985. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1972434

Contact Information

Bruce K. Miller (Contact Author)
Western New England University School of Law ( email )
1215 Wilbraham Road
Springfield, MA 01119
United States

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 235
Downloads: 17

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.234 seconds