Digital Commons Network^™

Hernández V. Mesa: A Case For A More Meaningful Partnership With The Inter-American Commission On Human Rights, Peyton Jacobsen

Seattle University Law Review

Through an in-depth examination of Hernández, the Inter-American Human Rights System, and the success of Mexico’s partnership with said system, this Note will make a case for embracing human rights bodies— specifically, the Inter-American System on Human Rights—as an appropriate and necessary check on the structures that form the United States government. Part I will look closely at the reasoning and judicially created doctrine that guided the decision in Hernández, with the goal of providing a better understanding of the complicated path through the courts that led to a seemingly straightforward yet unsatisfying result. Part II will illustrate the scope …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Anti-Modalities, David E. Pozen, Adam Samaha

Faculty Scholarship

Constitutional argument runs on the rails of “modalities.” These are the accepted categories of reasoning used to make claims about the content of supreme law. Some of the modalities, such as ethical and prudential arguments, seem strikingly open ended at first sight. Their contours come into clearer view, however, when we attend to the kinds of claims that are not made by constitutional interpreters – the analytical and rhetorical moves that are familiar in debates over public policy and political morality but are considered out of bounds in debates over constitutional meaning. In this Article, we seek to identify the …

Where The Constitution Falls Short: Confession Admissibility And Police Regulation, Courtney E. Lewis

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

A confession presented at trial is one of the most damning pieces of evidence against a criminal defendant, which means that the rules governing its admissibility are critical. At the outset of confession admissibility in the United States, the judiciary focused on a confession’s truthfulness. Culminating in the landmark case Miranda v. Arizona, judicial concern with the reliability of confessions shifted away from whether a confession was true and towards curtailing unconstitutional police misconduct. Post-hoc constitutionality review, however, is arguably inappropriate. Such review is inappropriate largely because the reviewing court must find that the confession was voluntary only by …

Reasonable Action: Reproductive Rights, The Free Exercise Clause, And Religious Freedom In The United States And The Republic Of Ireland, Liam Ray

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note will argue that by denying certiorari in Stormans v. Wiesman, the Supreme Court missed an important opportunity to provide guidance to the states as to how the Free Exercise Clause applies to the kind of stocking and dispensing regulations adopted by the State of Washington. This Note will further argue from a policy perspective that the approach to these kinds of regulations adopted by the Republic of Ireland (“ROI”) presents the best approach for states to adopt because it provides a balance in terms of respecting the free exercise rights of pharmacists and pharmacy owners with …

The Global Person: Pig-Human Embryos, Personhood, And Precision Medicine, Yvonne Cripps

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Chimeras, in the form of pig-human embryos engineered by CRISPR-Cas9 and other biotechnologies, have been created as potential sources of organs for transplantation. Against that background, and in an era of "precision medicine," this Article examines the concept of the global genetically modified person and asks whether humanness and personhood are being eroded, or finding new boundaries in intellectual property and constitutional law.

From Baby M To Baby M(Anji): Regulating International Surrogacy Agreements, Yehezkel Margalit

Hezi Margalit

In 1985, when Kim Cotton became Britain’s first commercial surrogate mother, Europe was exposed to the issue of surrogacy for the first time on a large scale. Three years later, in 1988, the famous case of Baby M drew the attention of the American public to surrogacy as well. These two cases implicated fundamental ethical and legal issues regarding domestic surrogacy and triggered a fierce debate about motherhood, child-bearing, and the relationship between procreation, science and commerce. These two cases exemplified the debate regarding domestic surrogacy - a debate that has now been raging for decades. Contrary to the well-known …

Book Review: The Once And Future King: The Rise Of Crown Government In America, Ronald D. Rotunda

Ronald D. Rotunda

If you want to understand your own language, learn a foreign tongue. Similarly, if you want to understand the American system of government, learn what our intellectual kin—Great Britain and Canada—have done. As Professor F.H. Buckley notes, “He who knows only his own country knows little enough of that.” He is one of the few people who has thoroughly mastered the legal structure and history of all three countries.

Rethinking The Context Of Hate Speech Regulation, Robert Kahn

Robert Kahn

In this essay I review Michael Herz and Peter Molnar (eds.) The Content and Context of Hate Speech: Rethinking Regulation and Responses (Cambridge University Press 2012). As I show in the review, the Herz and Molnar volume advances our understanding of comparative hate speech regulation in three ways. First, the essays suggest that local context has a role to play in understanding, assessing, and applying hate speech regulations, even in an age when online hate speech is pressuring states and regions to reach common solutions to these problems. Second, the essays rebut the commonly held premise that the United States …

Semi-Presidentialism Under The Indian Constitution, Khagesh Gautam

Khagesh Gautam

No abstract provided.

A Comparison Of The Jurisprudence Of The Ecj And The Efta Court On The Free Movement Of Goods In The Eea: Is There An Intolerable Separation Of Article 34 Of The Tfeu And Article Of 11 Of The Eea?, Jarrod Tudor

Jarrod Tudor

Article 11 of the European Economic Area (“EEA”) and Article 34 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibit quantitative restrictions on the free movement of goods. The EEA is monitored by the European Free Trade Area Court (“EFTA Court”) and the TFEU is monitored by the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”). In theory, the EFTA Court and the ECJ should interpret Article 11 and Article 34 in the same manner in order to promote harmonization of the law on the free movement of goods and allow for further economic integration between EFTA and the EU. …

Does It Matter How One Opposes Memory Bans? A Commentary On Liberte Pour L'Histoire, Robert Kahn

Robert Kahn

This paper examines Liberté pour l'Histoire, a group of French historians who led the charge against that nation’s memory laws, in the process raising unique arguments not found elsewhere in the debate over hate speech regulation. Some of these arguments – such as a focus on how the constitutional structure of the Fifth Republic encouraged memory laws – advance our understanding of the connection between hate speech bans and political institutions. Other arguments, however, are more problematic. In particular, Liberté historians struggle to distinguish the Holocaust (which is illegal to deny) from the Armenian Genocide (which is not). The Liberté …

The Rise Of Judicial Governance In The Supreme Court Of India, Manoj Mate

Manoj S. Mate

The Romanian Double Executive And The 2012 Constitutional Crisis, Vlad Perju

Vlad Perju

The Road Most Travel: Is The Executive’S Growing Preeminence Making America More Like The Authoritarian Regimes It Fights So Hard Against?, Ryan T. Williams

Ryan T. Williams

Balancing The Scales: Adhuc Sub Judice Li Est Or Trial By Media, Casey J. Cooper

Casey J Cooper

The right to freedom of expression and free press is recognized under almost all major human rights instruments and domestic legal systems—common and civil—in the world. However, what do you do when a fundamental right conflicts with another equally fundamental right, like the right to a fair trial? In the United States, the freedom of speech, encompassing the freedom of the press, goes nearly unfettered: the case is not the same for other common law countries. In light of cultural and historic facts, institutional factors, modern realities, and case-law, this Article contends that current American jurisprudence does not take into …

Punição E Constituição: Cinco Princípios Para O Futuro Da Democracia Brasileira (Punishment And The Constitution: Five Principles For The Future Of Brazilian Democracy), Paulo Barrozo

Paulo Barrozo

Portuguese Abstract: Publicado nos Anais da XXII Conferência da Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil realizada em 2014, este ensaio elabora cinco princípios para orientar a reforma do sistema penal brasileiro visando traze-lo ao centro da arquitetura constitucional de um país comprometido com os valores do auto-governo democrático e dos direitos individuais. English Abstract: Published in the annals of the of the Brazilian Bar Association XXII annual conference in 2014, this essay offers five principles to guide reform of the Brazilian criminal justice system in order to bring it to the center of the constitutional framework of a country committed to …

Taming The "Feral Beast": Cautionary Lessons From British Press Reform, Lili Levi

Lili Levi

Abstract: As technology undermines the economic model supporting traditional newspapers, power shifts from the watchdog press to those it watches. Worldwide calls for increased press “responsibility” are one result. Pending British press reform provides a troubling example with far-ranging implications for freedom of the press. Under the guise of modest press self-regulation, the U.K. is currently poised to upend 300 years of press freedom via the recently-approved Royal Charter for Self-Regulation of the Press. The Royal Charter was adopted in response to the moral panic engendered by Britain’s tabloid phone-hacking scandal. An example of 20^th Century regulation poorly fitted …

The Abolition Of The Mandatory Death Penalty In The Commonwealth: Recent Developments From India And Bangladesh, Andrew Novak

Andrew Novak

India and Bangladesh are following the Commonwealth-wide trend toward discretionary death penalty regimes and away from the common law mandatory death penalty. This case note analyzes three recent decisions of the Supreme Court of India and the Bangladesh Appellate Division invalidating mandatory death sentences.

Andrew Novak is an adjunct professor of law at American University Washington College of Law, and an adjunct professor of criminology, law, and society at George Mason University. He is the author of The Global Decline of the Mandatory Death Penalty: Comparative Jurisprudence and Legislative Reform in Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean (Ashgate 2014) and The …

State Constitutions And The Basic Structure Doctrine, Manoj Mate

Manoj S. Mate

High Courts And Election Law Reform In The United States And India, Manoj Mate

Manoj S. Mate

Corruption, Constitutions And Crude In Latin America, Fredrick V. Perry, Scheherazade S. Rehman

Fredrick V. Perry

This paper examines the perception of corruption that exists throughout Latin America, and analyses the importance of the institutional environment in Latin American countries, which are both richly endowed with and dependent on oil and natural gas. First, we look at corruption generally in the region and then carry our analysis by looking at various countries’ GDP per capita versus several indices measuring different dimensions of countries’ economic development, political progress, and social performance. We also combine corruption indices and separate them by typology of corruption in order to investigate the particular facets of corruption that pose the greatest impediment …

Israel's Constitutional Tragedy, Menachem Lorberbaum

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Divided Loyalties: The Problem Of “Dual Sovereignty” And Constitutional Faith, Sanford Levinson

Touro Law Review

Sanford Levinson provides the inaugural lecture of the new Jewish Law Institute at Touro Law School. He focuses on some of the ways that he finds himself constantly thinking of what might be termed "meta-issues" that arise in his joint study of, and intellectual confrontation with, Jewish law and American constitutional law.

An Anachronism Too Discordant To Be Suffered: A Comparative Study Of Parliamentary And Presidential Approaches To Regulation Of The Death Penalty, Derek R. Verhagen

Derek R VerHagen

It is well-documented that the United States remains the only western democracy to retain the death penalty and finds itself ranked among the world's leading human rights violators in executions per year. However, prior to the Gregg v. Georgia decision in 1976, ending America's first and only moratorium on capital punishment, the U.S. was well in line with the rest of the civilized world in its approach to the death penalty. This Note argues that America's return to the death penalty is based primarily on the differences between classic parliamentary approaches to regulation and that of the American presidential system. …

We The Peoples: The Global Origins Of Constitutional Preambles, Tom Ginsburg, Daniel Rockmore, Nick Foti

Tom Ginsburg

No abstract provided.

Majoritarian Judicial Review: The Case Of Taiwan, Chien-Chih Lin

Chien-Chih Lin

Whether, and to what extent, the practice of judicial review in the United States is counter-majoritarian has been contentiously debated since its inception. Yet, whether judicial review in nascent democracies functions in the same way has not been lucidly articulated. Based on docket records, agenda setting, and case studies of the Constitutional Court in Taiwan, this paper suggests that judicial review in Taiwan is majoritarian, rather than counter-majoritarian. Specifically, the Constitutional Court is more majoritarian in the field of fundamental rights than it is in separation-of-powers cases. This finding is contradictory to conventional wisdom since high courts in new democracies …

The Separation Of Powers, Constitutionalism And Governance In Africa: The Case Of Modern Cameroon, John Mukum Mbaku

JOHN MUKUM MBAKU

The Separation of Powers, Constitutionalism and Governance in Africa: The Case of Modern Cameroon

John Mukum Mbaku, Esq.

Abstract

Countries incorporate the principle of the separation of powers in their constitutions in an effort to meet several goals, the most important of which is to minimize government-induced tyranny. Specifically, countries that make this principle part of their constitutional practice intend to limit public servants by national laws and institutions, enhance government accountability, minimize opportunistic behaviors by civil servants and politicians, provide for checks and balances, and generally improve government efficiency. Cameroon, like many other African countries that transitioned to democratic …

Social Protection Afforded To Irregular Migrant Workers: Thoughts On International Norms, The Southern African Development Community, Botswana And South Africa, Bruno Ps Van Eck, Felicia Snyman

Bruno PS Van Eck

The majority of migrant workers target those countries in southern Africa that have stronger economies. Irregular migrants are in a particularly vulnerable position, and this article discusses the protection that this category of persons may expect to experience in the southern African region. The authors recommend that the broad notion of “social protection”, rather than the narrower concept “social security” should be emphasized. International, continental and regional instruments providing protection to irregular migrants are traversed and the constitutional and legislative frameworks in relation to social protection in Botswana and South Africa are compared. The article concludes that there are significant …

Why Do Europeans Ban Hate Speech? A Debate Between Karl Loewenstein And Robert Post, Robert Kahn

Robert Kahn

European countries restrict hate speech, the United States does not. This much is clear. What explains this difference? Too often the current discussion falls back on a culturally rich but normatively vacant exceptionalism (American or otherwise) or a normatively driven convergence perspective that fails to address historical, cultural and experiential differences that distinguish countries and legal systems. Inspired by the development discourse of historical sociology, this article seeks to record instances where Americans or Europeans have argued their approach to hate speech laws was more “advanced” or “modern.”

To that end this article focuses on two authors whose writing appears …