In the Michigan Court of Appeals: In the Matter of AMB,a Minor

HOLDING: In the accelerating rush to judgment that occurred here, a series of legal errors and missteps following a preliminary hearing compounded what was already an excruciatingly difficult and complex situation. The record strongly suggests that no one involved in the protective proceeding had ever communicated directly with baby AMB's parents and only the testifying doctor had ever seen AMB, an infant with life-threatening disabilities. Thus, a duly enacted statutory process designed to protect individual rights, to allow the intelligent exercise of these rights, and to assure balanced and considered decision making became, instead, the opposite. There was such a relentless disregard for basic principles of law that in its opinion, the Michigan Court of Appeals attempted to assure that this tragedy is never repeated in that state.     

What Role Does the "Federalism Bonus" Play in Presidential Selection?

The conflicting outcome of the electoral and popular votes inthe 2000 presidential election provoked calls to abolish oralter the electoral college. One prominent criticism is thatthe institution distorts election outcomes by providing disproportionateinfluence to small states. If each state receives a number ofpresidential electors equal to that states' number of membersin the U.S. House of Representatives plus the two senators,then the "federalism bonus" represents the two electoral collegevotes that correspond to the position of each state as an equalentity in the Senate. This research examines how the "federalismbonus" influences presidential selection by addressing threequestions. First, why did the framers include a federal componentin the electoral college? Second, under what circumstances hasthe "federalism bonus" played a role in presidential selection?Third, how would the various alternatives for reform affectthe federal component of the electoral college, and what isthe likelihood of adoption for each?