CONGRESSIONAL POWER TO CHANGE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: THREE LACUNAE

[41] ORTH JV, 1987, JUDICIAL POWER US 11, P22

[42] ORTH JV, 1981, NC L REV, V59, P747

[43] PASCHAL RA, 1991, JL POL, V8, P155

[44] Pfander JE, 1998, CORNELL LAW REV, V83, P1269

[45] Federalism in the taft court era: Can it be "revived"? [J]. DUKE LAW JOURNAL, 2002, 51 (05) : 1513 - 1639

[46] POST R, 2002, DUKE LAW J, V51, P1530

[47] Post RC, 2003, HARVARD LAW REV, V117, P4

[48] POWELL TR, 1956, VAGARIES VARIETIES C, P165

[49] POWELL TR, 1938, SELECTED ESSAYS CONS, V3, P931

[50] THE SUPREME-COURT AND STATE PROTECTIONISM - MAKING SENSE OF THE DORMANT COMMERCE CLAUSE [J]. MICHIGAN LAW REVIEW, 1986, 84 (06) : 1091 - 1287

[41] ORTH JV, 1987, JUDICIAL POWER US 11, P22

[42] ORTH JV, 1981, NC L REV, V59, P747

[43] PASCHAL RA, 1991, JL POL, V8, P155

[44] Pfander JE, 1998, CORNELL LAW REV, V83, P1269

[45] Federalism in the taft court era: Can it be "revived"? [J]. DUKE LAW JOURNAL, 2002, 51 (05) : 1513 - 1639

[46] POST R, 2002, DUKE LAW J, V51, P1530

[47] Post RC, 2003, HARVARD LAW REV, V117, P4

[48] POWELL TR, 1956, VAGARIES VARIETIES C, P165

[49] POWELL TR, 1938, SELECTED ESSAYS CONS, V3, P931

[50] THE SUPREME-COURT AND STATE PROTECTIONISM - MAKING SENSE OF THE DORMANT COMMERCE CLAUSE [J]. MICHIGAN LAW REVIEW, 1986, 84 (06) : 1091 - 1287