Digital Commons Network^™

Baltimore's Monumental Question: Can The Heightened Social Conscience Against The Confederacy Rewrite The Constitutional Right To Due Process?, Blake Alderman

University of Baltimore Journal of Land and Development

Monuments are preserved in order to remember, educate the public on, and acknowledge the monuments’ historical significance. Maryland’s monuments are designated by two authorities: the Board of the Maryland Historical Trust and smaller municipal commissions.1 The Board examines local monuments to be submitted to the national registry, whereas the smaller commissions are appointed and operate to preserve local Baltimore monuments.2 On June 30, 2015, Baltimore City Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake announced the creation of a Special Commission to review all Baltimore City Confederate historical monuments.3

The Commission’s appointment stems from a recently heightened national awareness of racism embedded in government culture. …

Fifty Years Before Brady, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

In marking the fiftieth anniversary of Brady v. Maryland, a fitting way to appreciate the historic significance of Justice Douglas’ opinion for the Court is to turn back the pages another fifty years. Brady’s profound contribution to our criminal justice system becomes apparent by considering the impoverished state of the Supreme Court’s due process doctrine as it stood a century ago. In the fifty years that led up to Brady, the Court confronted a series of racially and politically charged cases that forced constitutional soul searching about due process in the face of rank injustice. The story of the Court’s …

The Virtue Of Obscurity, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

The critics have panned Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion in United States v. Windsor. Supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage have together bemoaned what may be called Kennedy’s “doctrinal obscurity” in Windsor. Doctrinal obscurity describes the opinion’s failure to justify striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) using any discernable accepted test for substantive due process or equal protection. Specifically, Kennedy does not ask whether DOMA burdens a right “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition,” nor does he identify sexual orientation as a suspect or semi-suspect classification, nor does he subject DOMA to explicit rational …

Expanding Stare Decisis: The Role Of Precedent In The Unfolding Dialectic Of Brady V. Maryland, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

Does stare decisis constrain the expansion of constitutional doctrine? Does existing precedent preclude the Supreme Court from expanding a criminal defendant’s right to exculpatory evidence? While commentators frequently clash on when stare decisis should prevent the Court from overruling its own precedents, the question of when fidelity to precedent should inhibit doctrinal expansion is surprisingly under-theorized. This Article begins to fill this gap through an in-depth case study of stare decisis and the expansion of criminal due process doctrine.

This Article analyzes the longstanding constitutional dialectic between procedural and substantive schools of criminal due process. Focus is on Brady v. …

Does The Constitution Apply To The Actions Of The United States Anti-Doping Agency?, Dionne L. Koller

All Faculty Scholarship

Since its formation in 2000, the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has aggressively pursued athletes who are believed to have used performance-enhancing substances and has aggressively prosecuted those who ultimately test positive. To many, this is a long overdue response to the growing problem of doping in sports. But to others, USADA's actions, and the federal government's support of these efforts, has sparked enormous controversy. This article examines USADA and its relationship to the federal government to determine whether USADA's actions could be constrained by the Constitution. While it is clear that USADA has very close ties to the federal …