Add to ORKGThere is a pervasive assumption that the Supreme Court\u27s ruling in NLRB v. Noel Canning has rendered void the decisions of the Board during the period when it lacked a quorum because a majority of its members held their posts through unconstitutional recess appointments. The assumption is unfounded. The question of remedy for the wrong identified in Noel Canning should not be decided in the air; it should be decided contextually, as one involving whether and how to provide relief to parties affected by a wholly concluded constitutional violation, in a manner that is akin to harmless- and plain-error review
A recent, and characteristically illuminating, article by Professor Henry Monaghan confidently annou...
On June 26, 2014, the Supreme Court unanimously decided NLRB v. Noel Canning, holding that the Reces...
This symposium paper elaborates on two questions raised by the author’s prior work, Remedial Discret...
There is a pervasive assumption that the Supreme Court\u27s ruling in NLRB v. Noel Canning has rende...
After more than a year of political and legal wrangling, the Senate arrived at the “consent” part of...
This Article argues that the Noel Canning challenge to the President’s use of his recess appointment...
As losses go, NLRB v. Noel Canning is going to be pretty easy for the National Labor Relations Board...
The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Recess Appointments Clause in NLRB v. Noel Canning stands ...
I fear that I am participating in this discussion under false pretenses, because I have no idea how ...
The power of the federal courts to remedy injuries caused by constitutional violations is a fundamen...
This symposium paper elaborates on two questions raised by the author’s prior work, Remedial Discret...
In Part I of this Article, the author briefly recaps the argument against precedent that the author ...
The so-called Recess Appointments Clause of the Constitution provides that: “The President shall hav...
This report begins with a general legal overview of the Recess Appointments Clause and a discussion ...
The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Arthrex opens a window on a set of issues debated i...
A recent, and characteristically illuminating, article by Professor Henry Monaghan confidently annou...
On June 26, 2014, the Supreme Court unanimously decided NLRB v. Noel Canning, holding that the Reces...
This symposium paper elaborates on two questions raised by the author’s prior work, Remedial Discret...
There is a pervasive assumption that the Supreme Court\u27s ruling in NLRB v. Noel Canning has rende...
After more than a year of political and legal wrangling, the Senate arrived at the “consent” part of...
This Article argues that the Noel Canning challenge to the President’s use of his recess appointment...
As losses go, NLRB v. Noel Canning is going to be pretty easy for the National Labor Relations Board...
The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Recess Appointments Clause in NLRB v. Noel Canning stands ...
I fear that I am participating in this discussion under false pretenses, because I have no idea how ...
The power of the federal courts to remedy injuries caused by constitutional violations is a fundamen...
This symposium paper elaborates on two questions raised by the author’s prior work, Remedial Discret...
In Part I of this Article, the author briefly recaps the argument against precedent that the author ...
The so-called Recess Appointments Clause of the Constitution provides that: “The President shall hav...
This report begins with a general legal overview of the Recess Appointments Clause and a discussion ...
The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Arthrex opens a window on a set of issues debated i...
A recent, and characteristically illuminating, article by Professor Henry Monaghan confidently annou...
On June 26, 2014, the Supreme Court unanimously decided NLRB v. Noel Canning, holding that the Reces...
This symposium paper elaborates on two questions raised by the author’s prior work, Remedial Discret...