Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Civil procedure (1)
- College campus (1)
- College rape (1)
- College sexual assault (1)
- Compentence (1)
-
- Constitution; constitutional law; united states v. johnson; felony; felonies; violent; violence; retroactivity (1)
- Due process (1)
- Fair Campus Act (1)
- Federal Courts; First Amendment; free speech (1)
- Federal Courts; supervised release (1)
- Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act; immunity; federal courts; federal jurisdiction; jurisdiction; separation of powers (1)
- Pro se (1)
- Rape (1)
- Safe Campus Act (1)
- Same sex marriage; marriage equality; Obergefell; constitutional law; due process; equal protection; gay marriage (1)
- School discipline (1)
- Self-representation (1)
- Sexual assault (1)
- Sexual violence (1)
- Title IX (1)
- University campus (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Free Speech And Civil Liberties In The Second Circuit, Floyd Abrams
Free Speech And Civil Liberties In The Second Circuit, Floyd Abrams
Fordham Law Review
Much of the development of First Amendment law in the United States has occurred as a result of American courts rejecting well-established principles of English law. The U.S. Supreme Court has frequently rejected English law, permitting far more public criticism of the judiciary than would be countenanced in England, rejecting English libel law as being insufficiently protective of freedom of expression and holding that even hateful speech directed at minorities receives the highest level of constitutional protection. The Second Circuit has played a major role in the movement away from the strictures of the law as it existed in the …
Supervised Release, Sex-Offender Treatment Programs, And Substantive Due Process, Max B. Bernstein
Supervised Release, Sex-Offender Treatment Programs, And Substantive Due Process, Max B. Bernstein
Fordham Law Review
This Note argues that mandated PPG testing should be eliminated as a condition of federal supervised release. The test infringes on a constitutionally protected liberty interest against unwanted bodily intrusions and, as only the Second Circuit has held, any condition of supervised release that infringes on a constitutionally protected right may be mandated only where it is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest. Because there are a number of viable, less intrusive alternatives, PPG testing as it stands today is not narrowly tailored enough to serve a compelling government interest.
Are Campus Sexual Assault Tribunals Fair?: The Need For Judicial Review And Additional Due Process Protections In Light Of New Case Law, Emily D. Safko
Are Campus Sexual Assault Tribunals Fair?: The Need For Judicial Review And Additional Due Process Protections In Light Of New Case Law, Emily D. Safko
Fordham Law Review
The pervasiveness of sexual assault on college and university campuses and the schools’ failures to take sexual assault seriously have resulted in recent reforms to college campus disciplinary proceedings. The federal government has largely prompted this wave of reform through Title IX, requiring schools to employ particular policies and procedures for investigating and adjudicating sexual assault as a condition of receiving federal funds. Although the federal government’s mandates may be properly motivated, these reforms are criticized because they encourage schools to enact procedures that are heavily stacked against those accused of sexual assault. Consequently, students alleging that they have been …
Communication And Competence For Self-Representation, E. Lea Johnston
Communication And Competence For Self-Representation, E. Lea Johnston
Fordham Law Review
In Indiana v. Edwards, the U.S. Supreme Court held that states may impose a higher competency standard for self-representation than to stand trial in criminal cases. While the Court articulated a number of interests relevant to representational competence, it left to states the difficult task of formulating an actual competence standard. This Article offers the first examination and assessment of the constitutionality of state standards post-Edwards. It reveals that seven states have endorsed a representational competence standard with a communication component. Additionally, twenty states have embraced vague, capacious standards that could consider communication skills. In applying these standards, states …
A Right Not To Marry, Kaiponanea T. Matsumura
A Right Not To Marry, Kaiponanea T. Matsumura
Fordham Law Review
In Obergefell v. Hodges, the United States Supreme Court recognized a constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry. Although the decision is an important milestone in the struggle for equality, it also threatens to destabilize the relationships of those who previously entered into civil unions or domestic partnerships and may, for a variety of reasons, prefer not to trade their existing status for marriage. That is because states have routinely responded to the legalization of same-sex marriage by eliminating their nonmarital statuses. Some states have terminated such statuses and have required couples to opt into marriage to continue receiving …
Using Johnson V. United States To Reframe Retroactivity For Second Or Successive Collateral Challenges, Thomas H. Gabay
Using Johnson V. United States To Reframe Retroactivity For Second Or Successive Collateral Challenges, Thomas H. Gabay
Fordham Law Review
The Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) provides a fifteen-year mandatory minimum sentence in federal prison for persons with at least three prior “violent felony” convictions who are subsequently convicted of being in possession of a firearm. In Johnson v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down one portion of this statute on the ground that it was unconstitutionally vague. In addition to an enumerated list of “violent felonies” that can result in a conviction, this portion included a catchall category that defined a violent felony as a crime that “otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk …
The New Tate Letter: Foreign Official Immunity And The Case For A Statutory Fix, Luke Ryan
The New Tate Letter: Foreign Official Immunity And The Case For A Statutory Fix, Luke Ryan
Fordham Law Review
Plaintiffs sometimes bring civil lawsuits in U.S. federal courts against officials or ex-officials of foreign governments accused of committing atrocities abroad. In these types of cases, the foreign individuals will almost certainly invoke the affirmative defense of foreign official immunity. In the 2010 decision, Samantar v. Yousuf, the Supreme Court unanimously held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA)—a 1976 statute governing the immunity of foreign states—did not control judicial determination of a foreign individual’s request for immunity. Instead, the Court said that foreign officials may be entitled to immunity as a matter of federal common law. Because of …