Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Exclusionary rule (4)
- Fourth Amendment (4)
- Supreme Court of the United States (3)
- 2016 Presidential Election (2)
- Constitutional Law (2)
-
- Discrimination (2)
- John Roberts (2)
- Judicial confirmation (2)
- Jury (2)
- Law enforcement (2)
- Legal history (2)
- Neil Gorsuch (2)
- Admissibility (1)
- Appeal of directed verdict of not guilty (1)
- Barry Goldwater (1)
- Bilingual (1)
- Brown v. Board of Education (1)
- China (1)
- Citizen (1)
- Citizens (1)
- Citizens United v. FEC (1)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1)
- Civil liberties (1)
- Civil rights (1)
- Civil rights movement (1)
- Constitutional interpretation (1)
- Constitutionalism (1)
- Contempt (1)
- Court Decisions (1)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 20 of 20
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
How Can You Tell If There Is A Crisis? Data And Measurement Challenges In Assessing Jury Representation, Mary R. Rose, Marc A. Musick
How Can You Tell If There Is A Crisis? Data And Measurement Challenges In Assessing Jury Representation, Mary R. Rose, Marc A. Musick
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
Judges, Lawyers, And Willing Jurors: A Tale Of Two Jury Selections, Barbara O'Brien, Catherine M. Grosso
Judges, Lawyers, And Willing Jurors: A Tale Of Two Jury Selections, Barbara O'Brien, Catherine M. Grosso
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
Race, Peremptory Challenges, And State Courts: A Blueprint For Change, Nancy S. Marder
Race, Peremptory Challenges, And State Courts: A Blueprint For Change, Nancy S. Marder
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
Lay Participation Reform In China: Opportunities And Challenges, Zhiyuan Guo
Lay Participation Reform In China: Opportunities And Challenges, Zhiyuan Guo
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Hybridization Of Lay Courts: From Colombia To England And Wales, Jeremy Boulanger-Bonnelly
The Hybridization Of Lay Courts: From Colombia To England And Wales, Jeremy Boulanger-Bonnelly
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
Beacons Of Democracy? A Worldwide Exploration Of The Relationship Between Democracy And Lay Participation In Criminal Cases, Sanja K. Ivkovic, Valarie P. Hans
Beacons Of Democracy? A Worldwide Exploration Of The Relationship Between Democracy And Lay Participation In Criminal Cases, Sanja K. Ivkovic, Valarie P. Hans
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
Virtual Technology And The Changing Rituals Of Courtroom Justice, Meredith Rossner, David Tait
Virtual Technology And The Changing Rituals Of Courtroom Justice, Meredith Rossner, David Tait
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
Introduction To Reviving The American Jury, Nancy S. Marder
Introduction To Reviving The American Jury, Nancy S. Marder
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
Bye, Bye, Bilinguals: The Removal Of English- Spanish Bilinguals From The Criminal Jury And Latino Discrimination, Ashley Rich
Bye, Bye, Bilinguals: The Removal Of English- Spanish Bilinguals From The Criminal Jury And Latino Discrimination, Ashley Rich
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
What Members Of Congress Say About The Supreme Court And Why It Matters, Carolyn Shapiro
What Members Of Congress Say About The Supreme Court And Why It Matters, Carolyn Shapiro
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Republican and Democratic senators took strikingly different approaches to Justice Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation hearing. Republicans focused on judicial process—what judges are supposed to do, how they are constrained, and the significance of the constitutional separation of powers—evoking rhetoric long used by the political right. Democrats, by contrast, focused primarily on case outcomes, complaining, for example, that Gorsuch favored “the big guy” over “the little guy” in cases he decided as a judge on the Tenth Circuit. This Article critiques the Democrats’ failure to discuss judicial process and to promote their own affirmative vision of the judiciary and the Constitution. A …
Neil Gorsuch And The Ginsburg Rules, Lori A. Ringhand, Paul M. Collins Jr.
Neil Gorsuch And The Ginsburg Rules, Lori A. Ringhand, Paul M. Collins Jr.
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Supreme Court nominees testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee frequently invoke the so-called “Ginsburg Rule” to justify not answering questions posed to them. According to this “rule,” nominees during their testimony must avoid signaling their preferences about previously decided Supreme Court cases or constitutional issues. Using empirical data on every question asked and answered at every hearing from 1939–2017, we explore this “rule,” and its attribution to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. We demonstrate three things. First, the Ginsburg Rule is poorly named, given that the practice of claiming a privilege to not respond to certain types of questions predates the …
The Forgotten Issue? The Supreme Court And The 2016 Presidential Campaign, Christopher W. Schmidt
The Forgotten Issue? The Supreme Court And The 2016 Presidential Campaign, Christopher W. Schmidt
Chicago-Kent Law Review
This Article considers how presidential candidates use the Supreme Court as an issue in their election campaigns. I focus in particular on 2016, but I try to make sense of this extraordinary election by placing it in the context of presidential elections over the past century.
In the presidential election of 2016, circumstances seemed perfectly aligned to force the Supreme Court to the front of public debate, but neither Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton treated the Court as a central issue of their campaigns. Trump rarely went beyond a brief mention of the Court in his campaign speeches; Clinton basically …
The Conservative-Libertarian Turn In First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman
The Conservative-Libertarian Turn In First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman
All Faculty Scholarship
Conservative constitutional jurisprudence in the United States has an important libertarian dimension. In recent years, a conservative majority of the Supreme Court has strengthened the constitutional protections for property rights, recognized an individual right to own firearms, imposed limits on the welfare state and the powers of the federal government, cut back on affirmative action, and held that closely held corporations have a right to religious liberty that permits them to deny contraceptive coverage to their female employees. This libertarian streak also can be seen in decisions on freedom of speech and association. In several leading cases, conservative judges have …
The Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Divide, Christopher W. Schmidt
The Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Divide, Christopher W. Schmidt
All Faculty Scholarship
Contemporary legal discourse differentiates “civil rights” from “civil liberties.” The former are generally understood as protections against discriminatory treatment, the latter as freedom from oppressive government authority. This Essay explains how this differentiation arose and considers its consequences.
Although there is a certain inherent logic to the civil rights-civil liberties divide, it in fact is the product of the unique circumstances of a particular moment in history. In the early years of the Cold War, liberal anticommunists sought to distinguish their incipient interest in the cause of racial equality from their belief that national security required limitations on the speech …
Constitutionalism: East Asian Antecedents, Tom Ginsburg
Constitutionalism: East Asian Antecedents, Tom Ginsburg
Chicago-Kent Law Review
To what degree can traditional Asian political and legal institutions be seen as embodying constitutionalist values? This question has risen to the fore in recent decades as part of a new attention to constitutionalism around the world, as well as the decline in orientalist perceptions of Asia as a region of oppressive legal traditions. This article juxtaposes East Asian analogues or antecedents of constitutionalism with a particular set of recent theoretical understandings of the concept of constitutionalism. After conducting a historical review of political and legal institutions in China, Japan and Korea, the article argues that we can indeed speak …
Prosecution Appeals Of Court-Ordered Midtrial Acquittals: Permissible Under The Double Jeopardy Clause?, David S. Rudstein
Prosecution Appeals Of Court-Ordered Midtrial Acquittals: Permissible Under The Double Jeopardy Clause?, David S. Rudstein
All Faculty Scholarship
This article considers whether a statute or rule of court allowing the prosecution to appeal a directed verdict of not guilty, or its equivalent, would be constitutional under the Double Jeopardy Clause.
The Fourth Amendment, The Exclusionary Rule, And The Roberts Court: Normative And Empirical Dimensions Of The Over-Deterrence Hypothesis, Donald Dripps
Chicago-Kent Law Review
This essay engages in the risky business of predicting future Supreme Court developments. In the first part, I analyze the evidence suggesting that the Roberts Court might abolish the exclusionary rule. The critique of exclusion in Hudson v. Michigan is both less and more probative than appears at first blush. Part II turns to some less obvious evidence pointing in the direction of retaining the exclusionary rule. First, abolition of the exclusionary rule is inconsistent with the Hudson majority's apparent content with prevailing police behavior. Second, abolition of the exclusionary rule would curtail the power of the Supreme Court. Part …
Replacing The Exclusionary Rule: Fourth Amendment Violations As Direct Criminal Contempt, Ronald J. Rychlak
Replacing The Exclusionary Rule: Fourth Amendment Violations As Direct Criminal Contempt, Ronald J. Rychlak
Chicago-Kent Law Review
The exclusionary rule, which bars from admission evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures, is a bedrock of American law. It is highly controversial, but there seems to be no equally effective way to protect citizens' rights. This paper proposes that an admissibility standard be adopted that is in keeping with virtually every jurisdiction around the world other than the United States. Thus, before ruling evidence inadmissible, the court would consider the level of the constitutional violation, the seriousness of the crime, whether the violation casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the …
Mapp V. Ohio'S Unsung Hero: The Suppression Hearing As Morality Play, Scott E. Sundby
Mapp V. Ohio'S Unsung Hero: The Suppression Hearing As Morality Play, Scott E. Sundby
Chicago-Kent Law Review
The exclusionary rule is back under the judicial magnifying glass. Recent opinions, most notably by Justice Scalia, have sparked speculation that the Roberts Court is inclined to overrule Mapp v. Ohio and send Fourth Amendment disputes back to the realm of civil suits and police disciplinary actions. As the Court's rulings have made clear, any reevaluation of the exclusionary rule's future will be conducted under the now familiar rubric of whether the rule's "benefit" of deterring police misbehavior outweighs the "cost" of lost evidence and convictions.
This essay argues that if any such reevaluation does occur, the Court must take …
Fourth Amendment Federalism And The Silencing Of The American Poor, Andrew E. Taslitz
Fourth Amendment Federalism And The Silencing Of The American Poor, Andrew E. Taslitz
Chicago-Kent Law Review
In Virginia v. Moore, police officers searched Moore incident to an arrest for a minor traffic infraction for which Virginia statutory law in fact prohibited arrest. The officers found cocaine on Moore's person, arresting him for that crime too. The United States Supreme Court ultimately found that the arrest for the traffic infraction and the subsequent search were valid under the federal Constitution's Fourth Amendment. Central to the Court's reasoning was its insistence that the state statute was irrelevant. Any contrary conclusion, explained the Court, would wrongly make the Fourth Amendment's meaning vary from place to place. Professor Taslitz …