A fundamental premise of the relationship between state and federal courts is that the courts
in the two judicial systems share the responsibility for the protection of constitutional rights …

Problems in the allocation of lawmaking power between the federal government and the
states do not-and I am inclined to think that they should not-loom large in the traditional …

1 The governing jurisdictional statute, 28 USC § 1257 {l)-(2)(1976) extends the Court's
jurisdiction to review state court decisions only to cases in which the validity of a federal …

The decision in Bush v. Gore and particularly Chief Justice Rehnquist's concurring opinion
were widely criticized for their unwarranted intrusion upon the" authoritative" status of the …

These introductory observations focus on a theme common and crucial to many of the
papers in this symposium. I have in mind the inevitable question: to what extent, if any …

Over the past several years, the California Constitution has supplanted the Federal
Constitution as the basis for the California Supreme Court's judicial review of the actions of …

The law of federal jurisdiction lacks an overarching theory to explain the allocation of claims
between state and federal courts. For example, why is it that a state civil enforcement …

State courts live by simple rules. One rule holds that state courts may adjudicate federal
questions-or most of them, at least. 1 Another rule permits state courts to play a pivotal role …

A federal court is frequently called upon to determine matters of state law. In such situations,
the federal court must divine how the state's high court would decide the state law question …

Federalism is the cornerstone of the Constitution. Yet, federalism is too often confused by
both admirers and detractors with state autonomy, popularly known as" states' rights." The …