The Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law
Not a member yet
5983 research outputs found
Sort by
Approaches to Combating Gender-Based Violence: The Council of Europe Istanbul Convention Approach and the U.S. Experience
No full textOn Wednesday, April 14, Contemporary Challenges in American & Global Law held its first program of the Spring Session, focusing on “Approaches to Combating Gender-Based Violence: The Council of Europe Istanbul Convention Approach and the U.S. Experience.” The program was held just weeks after Turkey—which was the first country to ratify the Istanbul Convention in 2011—announced its withdrawal from the Convention. Katarzyna Wolska-Wrona (CUA LL.M. 2005), Chief Expert for the European Affairs Committee, Prime Minister\u27s Chancellery Republic of Poland, led the discussion from the European perspective, while the Honorable Diane Kiesel ’85, Acting Supreme Court Justice for the Supreme Court of New York County, Criminal Term, provided comments considering the American experience
Statutory Jurisdiction and Constitutional Orthodoxy in McCulloch, Cohens, and Osborn
Get PDFThis essay examines the underappreciated element of statutory jurisdiction in McCulloch v. Maryland, Cohens v. Virginia, and Osborn v. Bank of the United States. One objective is to identify more precisely the Marshall Court’s jurisdictional innovations in these three foundational decisions. A close look at the question of statutory jurisdiction in the trio of McCulloch, Cohens, and Osborn reveals a kind of constitutional magnetism at work. In constitutional avoidance, a court adopts an interpretation in order to stay away from a constitutional problem. In contrast, the Marshall Court in Cohens and Osborn expanded the jurisdictional statutes at issue in order to conform to a constitutional vision of the Supreme Court’s role as set forth in McCulloch. The jurisdictional maneuvering in that case likely brought to the Court’s attention the statutory jurisdictional gaps that the Court filled by construction in Cohens and Osborn. Part I discusses McCulloch v. Maryland with particular attention to its jurisdictional basis. Part II addresses the opposition to McCulloch in Virginia and the Supreme Court’s answer in Cohens v. Virginia. Part III turns to Ohio’s opposition and the Supreme Court’s response in Osborn v. Bank of the United States. A concluding section offers some meditations on McCulloch and the maintenance of constitutional orthodoxy
European and U.S. Perspectives on Investment Fund Regulation
No full textContemporary Challenges in American & Global Law concluded its spring season with a discussion on “European Perspectives on Investment Fund Regulation.” On June 2, attendees from both the Catholic Law and the Jagiellonian University communities joined to hear the conversation led by Wictor Furman (CUA LL.M. 2009), Force Advokatbyrå in Stockholm, Sweden, with comments made by James V. Catano ’11, Partner at Dechert in Washington, D.C