Monday, July 11, 2011
Here is my contribution (S.B. 1070: Federal preemption and why the Court won’t address civil rights issues).
I will update this entry as other contributions are posted.
Richard Samp, Washington Legal Foundation, The constitutionality of S.B. 1070
Peter Spiro, Temple, Why the Court will duck S.B. 1070 case (for now)
Roderick Hills, NYU, Textualism and open questions about S.B. 1070
Carissa Hessick, Arizona State University, Mirror image theory in state immigration regulation
Rogers Smith, University of Pennsylvania, The constitutionality of “attrition through enforcement”
Ilya Shapiro, Cato Institute, S.B. 1070: Constitutional but bad policy
Carol Swain, Vanderbilt, Why the Court should uphold S.B.1070
Hope Lewis, Northeastern, Human rights implications of Arizona v. United States
Margaret Stock, professor at the University of Alaska Anchorage and Counsel to the firm at Lane Powell PC, Arizona v. United States: The tail wagging the dog on regulating immigration enforcement
Lauren Gilbert, St. Thomas, Presuming preemption: Implications of Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting
Larry Joseph, Arizona v. United States:Narrowing “prevent-or-frustrate” conflict preemption