For much of the past eighty years, courts have fixated on dual sovereignty as the organizing federalism paradigm under New Deal-era energy statutes. Dual sovereignty’s reign emphasized a jurisdictional “bright line,” a fixed and legalistic boundary between federal and state regulators. Rossi explores how three recent Supreme Court decisions limit dual sovereignty’s role as the organizing federalism principle under energy statutes. These recent decisions do not approach federal–state jurisdiction as an either/or proposition, but instead recognize it is concurrent for many energy transactions. Concurrent jurisdiction opens up a brave new path of possibilities for energy federalism but also has been a target of criticism, including in Justice Scalia’s last published dissent. Rossi defends concurrent jurisdiction as consistent with the language, history, structure, and primary purposes of energy statutes.
is a tax haven, and why are they bad?—before finally commenting on the prescriptions Zucman offers for battling unreported wealth. Read More
decommissioning across U.S. jurisdictions, before finally discussing common pitfalls of current decommissioning law and suggesting how these pitfalls are best avoided.
“Blight” is the label used by U.S. law to describe property that is considered to be dilapidated or injurious to public health. In much of the U.S., it is easier to use eminent domain to condemn a property if it is deemed “blighted.” This Note examines the negative effects that condemning such properties can have on residents of “blighted” areas and proposes some changes to the law that would better protect these residents from the costs associated with condemnation.
In this Note, William Mason analyzes the economic effects of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s decision to revoke federal trademark protection from the Washington Redskins and questions whether those effects are sufficient to force a change to the team’s name. He argues that the protections and incentives provided by the NFL and collective bargaining will significantly damper any economic effect the Board’s decision may have, and instead suggests alternative areas where social and economic pressure may prove more successful.
The Texas Law Review is proud to announce its volume 95 membership! Congratulations to all our new members, and welcome to TLR! The Masthead is now available for download.
The Texas Law Review is proud to announce its volume 94 membership! Congratulations to all our new members, and welcome to TLR! The Masthead is now available for download.
The Texas Law Review is proud and excited to announce the Editorial Board for Volume 94. The members of Volume 93 are happy to pass the torch to such a fantastic group of people. View the Volume 94 Editorial board Masthead.
The Texas Law Review would like to congratulate two of its Volume 92 alumni for achieving the top two scores on the July 2014 Texas Bar Exam. Jamie Yarbrough, who served as the Research Editor on Volume 92′s editorial board, had the top score followed closely by Michael Kelso, an Articles Editor on Volume 92′s editorial board. Mr. Yarbrough is currently working as an associate for Baker Botts in Houston while Mr. Kelso is clerking for Judge Carolyn King of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.