Overruling INS v. Chadha: Advice on Choreography - A Reply to Professor Sanford V. Levinson
Seth Barrett Tillman
National University of Ireland, Maynooth (NUI Maynooth) - Faculty of Law
Pierce Law Review, Vol. 4, p. 207, 2006
University of New Hampshire Law Review, Vol. 4, p. 207, 2006
This article is published in conjunction with my MODEL CONTINUITY OF CONGRESS STATUTE. Professor Sanford V. Levinson in a comment, appearing with the MODEL, has voiced legal and prudential objections to my proposed statutory solution. This Reply responds to those objections.
My opening article appears at: Tillman, Model, 4 PIERCE LAW REVIEW 191 (2006), also appearing at, http://ssrn.com/abstract=891560. Professor Sanford V. Levinson comments on my Model at: Levinson, Comment, Assuring Continuity of Government, 4 PIERCE LAW REVIEW 201 (2006), also appearing at, http://ssrn.com/abstract=900607. I reply to his comment at: Tillman, Reply, Overruling INS v. Chadha, 4 PIERCE LAW REVIEW 207 (2006), also appearing at, http://ssrn.com/abstract=900589.
Since publication, Pierce Law Review has been renamed University of New Hampshire Law Review.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 12
Keywords: continuity, congress, textualist, Chadha
Date posted: May 4, 2006 ; Last revised: October 5, 2011
© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.704 seconds