Home Rule Begins At Home

In Wisconsin, the Home Rule Amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution grants cities and villages the power to determine their local affairs and government, subject only to the constitution itself and uniform legislative enactments of statewide concern.  The Wisconsin Supreme Court has recognized that the Home Rule Amendment serves not only to empower cities and villages, but also to curtail the power of the state legislature to act within the sphere of local affairs.  Van Gilder v. City of Madison, 267 N.W. 25 (1936).  The job of defining the proper province of constitutional home rule authority (i.e., what constitutes a matter of “local affairs and government” or a matter of “statewide concern”) falls to the courts and, not surprisingly, it is no easy task.  Given the concurrent interest of state and local government in many governmental functions, one may argue that such functions cannot be so classified except by arbitrary reasoning.

Notwithstanding the difficulty in defining its exact reach, local home rule is worth preserving and worth defending. 

Continue ReadingHome Rule Begins At Home

Legal Portraits: Portraits of Lawyers

Yale Law Library’s Rare Books Blog announced the posting of a photo gallery of legal authors. Rare Book Librarian Mike Widener writes:

The star of the gallery is the portrait at [left], of Paolo Attavanti (1445?-1499), generally considered to be the very first author portrait to ever appear in a printed book. The woodcut appears in a summary of canon law that Attavanti authored, Breviarium totius juris canonici (Milan: Leonhard Pachel and Ulrich Scinzenzeler, 28 Aug. 1479). As such, it is the granddaddy of the author photos on today’s dust jackets.

If your interest in legal portaits is piqued, you may want to review Otto Vervaart’s article on researching legal portraits, The telling image: searching for portraits of lawyers. Of course, you may want to wait until after final exams.

Continue ReadingLegal Portraits: Portraits of Lawyers

“Lincoln” and the Law

Reviewers of Steven Spielberg’s “Lincoln” have rightfully praised the film for its faithfulness to history and for the fine acting of Daniel Day Lewis, Sally Field, and Tommy Lee Jones, among others. As a “lifer” in legal academics, I was intrigued by the film’s engagement with law, lawmaking, and law-related ideology.

The most important “law” in the film is the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution, and the film accurately suggests that the Amendment’s ratification in 1865 was more important in formally ending slavery than was the more famous Emancipation Proclamation. The latter, issued by President Lincoln in 1863, served only to free slaves in the ten Confederate states warring against the Union. Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation chiefly as a war measure and hoped it would prompt slaves to take up arms against slave owners.  

Continue Reading“Lincoln” and the Law