Digital Commons Network^™

Manufacturing Sovereign State Mootness, Daniel Bruce

William & Mary Law Review

The idea that public defendants should receive any special treatment in the mootness context has been subject to intense criticism among commentators. Most notably, in the lead-up to the New York Rifle decision, Joseph Davis and Nicholas Reaves—two prominent First Amendment litigators from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty—urged the Supreme Court to take the opportunity to correct the lower courts’ practice of blessing government abuse of the voluntary cessation doctrine. Indeed, the Supreme Court has never adopted a presumption in favor of government defendants such as the one applied by the Seventh Circuit in Killeen, and it failed to …

Jury Bias Resulting In Indefinite Commitment: Expanding Procedural Protections In Svp Civil Commitment Proceedings Under The Mathews Test, Alli M. Mentch

William & Mary Law Review

Twenty states, the District of Columbia, and the federal government have enacted Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) laws that permit the civil commitment of sex offenders. Under these laws, imprisoned sex offenders serving criminal sentences are transferred to treatment facilities and held indefinitely. As one individual describes civil commitment, “It’s worse than prison. In prison I wasn’t happy, but I was content because I knew I had a release date.” An estimated 5,400 individuals are currently civilly committed under these laws.

This Note argues that such laws do not adequately protect respondents’ due process rights. To that end, this Note proposes …

Congressional Papers And Judicial Subpoenas And The Constitution, David H. Kaye

David Kaye

Some contemporary Congresses have lost sight of the original scope of their predecessors' assertions of privilege and now claim an absolute privilege to withhold both the originals and copies of subpoenaed papers. A few judicial opinions suggest as much or more. It is possible that even cursorily documented, ill-considered dicta can take root and flourish, and to prevent that, this article This article charts the constitutional boundaries of Congress' privilege to withhold its internal papers from judicial subpoena. It surveys the privileges expressly given Congress in the text of the Constitution as well as the privileges that might be implied …

Retroactivity And Prospectivity Of Judgments In American Law, Richard Kay

Richard Kay

In every American jurisdiction, new rules of law announced by a court are presumed to have retrospective effect—that is, they are presumed to apply to events occurring before the date of judgment. There are, however, exceptions in certain cases where a court believes that such application of the new rule will upset serious and reasonable reliance on the prior state of the law. This essay, a substantially abridged version of the United States Report on the subject, submitted at the Nineteenth International Congress of Comparative Law, summarizes these exceptional cases. It shows that the proper occasions for issuing exclusively or …

Modern Odysseus Or Classic Fraud - Fourteen Years In Prison For Civil Contempt Without A Jury Trial, Judicial Power Without Limitation, And An Examination Of The Failure Of Due Process, Mitchell J. Frank

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

University Of Baltimore Symposium Report: Debut Of “The Matthew Fogg Symposia On The Vitality Of Stare Decisis In America”, Zena D. Crenshaw-Logal

Zena Denise Crenshaw-Logal

On the first of each two day symposium of the Fogg symposia, lawyers representing NGOs in the civil rights, judicial reform, and whistleblower advocacy fields are to share relevant work of featured legal scholars in lay terms; relate the underlying principles to real life cases; and propose appropriate reform efforts. Four (4) of the scholars spend the next day relating their featured articles to views on the vitality of stare decisis. Specifically, the combined panels of public interest attorneys and law professors consider whether compliance with the doctrine is reasonably assured in America given the: 1. considerable discretion vested in …

No Good Deed Goes Unpublished: Precedent-Stripping And The Need For A New Prophylactic Rule, Edward Cantu

Edward Cantu

This paper addresses the “open secret” that federal appellate courts often strip their opinions of precedential value as a means to forgo fair, principled and/or thorough adjudication of issues raised in appeals. Is there a basis in contemporary constitutional doctrine for a presumption that appellants suffer constitutional injury when courts dispose of their appeals using non-precedential opinions? The author answers “yes.” The argument centers on case law establishing so-called “constitutional prophylactic rules,” which work to “overprotect” a given core right—that is, to create a presumption of constitutional injury without proof of it—when such is the only effective way of protecting …

Pearson, Iqbal, And Procedural Judicial Activism, Goutam U. Jois

Goutam U Jois

In its most recent term, the Supreme Court decided Pearson v. Callahan and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, two cases that, even at this early date, can safely be called “game-changers.” What is fairly well known is that Iqbal and Pearson, on their own terms, will hurt civil rights plaintiffs. A point that has not been explored is how the interaction between Iqbal and Pearson will also hurt civil rights plaintiffs. First, the cases threaten to catch plaintiffs on the horns of a dilemma: Iqbal says, in effect, that greater detail is required to get allegations past the motion to dismiss stage. …

Quasi-Preemption: Nervous Breakdown In Our Constitutional System, Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr.

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Partially Prudential Doctrine Of Mootness, Matthew I. Hall

Scholarly Works

The conventional understanding of mootness doctrine is that it operates as a mandatory bar to federal court jurisdiction, derived from the "cases or controversies" clause of the United States Constitution, Article III. In two crucial respects, however, this Constitutional model - which was first adopted by the Supreme Court less than 45 years ago - fails to account for the manner in which courts actually address contentions of mootness. First, the commonly-applied exceptions to the mootness bar are not derived from the "cases or controversies" clause and cannot be reconciled with the Constitutional account of mootness. Second, courts regularly consider …

A Unified Theory Of 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Jurisdiction, Lumen N. Mulligan

Lumen N. Mulligan

Title 28, section 1331 of the United States Code provides the jurisdictional grounding for the majority of cases heard in the federal courts, yet it is not well understood. The predominant view holds that section 1331 doctrine both lacks a focus upon congressional intent and is internally inconsistent. I seek to counter both these assumptions by re-contextualizing the Court’s section 1331 jurisprudence in terms of the contemporary judicial usage of “right” (i.e., clear, mandatory obligations capable of judicial enforcement) and cause of action (i.e., permission to vindicate a right in court). In conducting this reinterpretation, I argue that section 1331 …

Establishing Separate Criminal And Civil Evidence Codes, John J. Capowski

John J. Capowski

Constitutional Law - Protective Orders Prohibiting Publication Of Information Obtained Through Discovery, Joseph A. Almeida

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States Parole Commission V. Geraghty, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

New York City Transit Authority V. Beazer, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Congressional Papers And Judicial Subpoenas And The Constitution, David H. Kaye

Journal Articles

Some contemporary Congresses have lost sight of the original scope of their predecessors' assertions of privilege and now claim an absolute privilege to withhold both the originals and copies of subpoenaed papers. A few judicial opinions suggest as much or more. It is possible that even cursorily documented, ill-considered dicta can take root and flourish, and to prevent that, this article This article charts the constitutional boundaries of Congress' privilege to withhold its internal papers from judicial subpoena. It surveys the privileges expressly given Congress in the text of the Constitution as well as the privileges that might be implied …

Mathews V. Eldridge, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

City Of New Orleans V. Dukes, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - Standing - The Zone Of Interest Test Of Data Processing Held Inapplicable To Plaintiff's Standing In A Suit Between Private Parties, Michael S. Burg

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Recent Developments, Various Editors

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Idigent's Right To An In Forma Pauperis Proceeding In Pennsylvania Divorce Litigation - Analysis And A Proposal, Richard W. Hoolstein, Michael R. Stiles

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Abstracts Of Recent Cases, T. E. P.

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Right To A Jury Trial In West Virginia, L. C.

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Constitutionality Of The Declaratory Judgment, William Gorham Rice Jr.

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.