Thomas Bridge - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Uploads
Papers by Thomas Bridge
Boston College Law Review, 1985
and absolute requirement, the discretionary exercise of pendent jurisdiction may serve all of the... more and absolute requirement, the discretionary exercise of pendent jurisdiction may serve all of these goals. The exercise of pendent jurisdiction is, as the Court correctly points out, 374 decided with reference to the principles of state immunity on each issue. Those principles of state sovereign immunity ought not, however, amount to an absolute, unconditional bar. Decided with reference to whether the state did extend its immunity to cover the official's actions, and whether the state may so extend its immunity, the discretionary exercise of pendent jurisdiction may avoid unnecessary constitutional decisions, and serve the goals of efficiency and fairness to litigants.
Each and every sponsoring organization maintaining donor-advised funds – as well as each donor – ... more Each and every sponsoring organization maintaining donor-advised funds – as well as each donor – is subject to a host of requirements under existing law to ensure that charitable funds are used exclusively for charitable purposes. Beginning with the requirements of the “operational test” for tax exemption and continuing through focused penalty provisions (which are not yet fully implemented), the foundation is in place to enforce compliance and prevent abuses, with much room for additional regulatory guidance and enforcement. Ensuring that charitable funds are properly used depends on rigorous employment and enforcement of these rules of general application, and not on arbitrary classifications and labels imposed on sponsoring organiza-
the amendment is precise, and closely parallels that of the grant of federal judicial power in ar... more the amendment is precise, and closely parallels that of the grant of federal judicial power in article III. 2 The interpretation of the eleventh amendment, however, has been one of the most confused and least understood areas of constitutional laws Despite its precise language, the eleventh amendment has been interpreted to extend beyond its literal terms, 4 and has been held to represent broad principles of federalism and state sovereign immunity. 5 While recognizing that the eleventh amendment represents some type of restraint on the power of the federal judiciary over the states, the United States Supreme Court has never clarified the exact nature of that restraint. 6 One commentator would limit the eleventh amendment to the assertion that article III did not abrogate the sovereign immunity of the states.? Other commentators assert that the eleventh amendment operates solely as a check on the power of U.S. CONST. amend. Xl.
Boston College Law Review, 1985
and absolute requirement, the discretionary exercise of pendent jurisdiction may serve all of the... more and absolute requirement, the discretionary exercise of pendent jurisdiction may serve all of these goals. The exercise of pendent jurisdiction is, as the Court correctly points out, 374 decided with reference to the principles of state immunity on each issue. Those principles of state sovereign immunity ought not, however, amount to an absolute, unconditional bar. Decided with reference to whether the state did extend its immunity to cover the official's actions, and whether the state may so extend its immunity, the discretionary exercise of pendent jurisdiction may avoid unnecessary constitutional decisions, and serve the goals of efficiency and fairness to litigants.
Each and every sponsoring organization maintaining donor-advised funds – as well as each donor – ... more Each and every sponsoring organization maintaining donor-advised funds – as well as each donor – is subject to a host of requirements under existing law to ensure that charitable funds are used exclusively for charitable purposes. Beginning with the requirements of the “operational test” for tax exemption and continuing through focused penalty provisions (which are not yet fully implemented), the foundation is in place to enforce compliance and prevent abuses, with much room for additional regulatory guidance and enforcement. Ensuring that charitable funds are properly used depends on rigorous employment and enforcement of these rules of general application, and not on arbitrary classifications and labels imposed on sponsoring organiza-
the amendment is precise, and closely parallels that of the grant of federal judicial power in ar... more the amendment is precise, and closely parallels that of the grant of federal judicial power in article III. 2 The interpretation of the eleventh amendment, however, has been one of the most confused and least understood areas of constitutional laws Despite its precise language, the eleventh amendment has been interpreted to extend beyond its literal terms, 4 and has been held to represent broad principles of federalism and state sovereign immunity. 5 While recognizing that the eleventh amendment represents some type of restraint on the power of the federal judiciary over the states, the United States Supreme Court has never clarified the exact nature of that restraint. 6 One commentator would limit the eleventh amendment to the assertion that article III did not abrogate the sovereign immunity of the states.? Other commentators assert that the eleventh amendment operates solely as a check on the power of U.S. CONST. amend. Xl.