Digital Commons Network^™

Shut Up. You Don't Even Go Here.* An Examination Of First Amendment Rights For Noncitizens, Samantha Chasworth

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development

(Excerpt)

Section I of this Note provides background information about Pineda Cruz et al v. Thompson et al and explains the government’s argument in its Motion to Dismiss. Section II explains the First Amendment, demonstrating what it is and explaining its fundamental nature. Section III argues that noncitizens are entitled to First Amendment rights, presenting the non-speakerbased composition and character of the First Amendment. Next, this section demonstrates the many fundamental rights that noncitizens currently have in an effort to show the hole left open for the First Amendment. Next, this section describes the enormous consequences of not providing First …

Constitutional Cohesion And The Right To Public Health, James G. Hodge Jr., Daniel Aaron, Haley R. Augur, Ashley Cheff, Joseph Daval, Drew Hensley

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Despite years of significant legal improvements stemming from a renaissance in public health law, Americans still face major challenges and barriers in assuring their communal health. Reversals of legal reforms coupled with maligned policies and chronic underfunding contribute to diminished public health outcomes. Underlying preventable morbidity and mortality nationally are realities of our existing constitutional infrastructure. In essence, there is no general obligation of government to protect or promote the public’s health. Under principles of “constitutional cohesion,” structural facets and rights-based principles interwoven within the Constitution protect individuals and groups from governmental vices (i.e., oppression, overreaching, tyranny, and malfeasance). Structural …

State Courts And Democratic Theory: Toward A Theory Of State Constitutional Judicial Review, David Schultz

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Itunes Of Downloadable Guns: Firearms As A First Amendment Right, Sandra Sawan Lara

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

As society becomes more technology driven, legal issues continue to arise around the world. From privacy to national security, technology develops at a rate the law simply cannot keep up with. In the United States, one of the biggest legal issues is how the new risks technology brings will interfere with our individual liberties.

Technologies like three-dimensional (“3D”) printing have transformed everything from lifesaving surgeries to gun manufacturing. This technology has led to a whole new way of communicating via computer coding, with the online open source movement leading innovation by allowing for the sharing and editing of files freely. …

The Recent Unpleasantness: Understanding The Cycles Of Constitutional Time, Jack M. Balkin

Indiana Law Journal

In this Article, I will talk about what I expect is going to happen in the next five to ten years. Unlike eclipses, however, one can’t be entirely sure of the future. Politics is not astronomy, and human affairs do not operate like clockwork. Moreover, we can’t assume that everything is already foreordained: that if people simply sit on their hands and do nothing, the cycles I describe in this lecture will take care of themselves. Quite the contrary. I am telling a story about what happens in the long run, but it is not a deterministic story. The actions …

Disgorging Emoluments, Caprice L. Roberts

Marquette Law Review

This Article is about unjust enrichment. It includes a theory of an unjust

enrichment cause of action against executive actors who receive unlawful

emoluments. Interpretations of the boundaries of unlawful emoluments range

from receipt of a gift or benefit because of the position of power held to quid

pro quo exchanges of a thing of value in exchange for government information

or advantage. Wherever the proper line, the purpose of the law of unjust

enrichment is to prevent and undo benefits one has no right to retain. It

achieves those goals with the use of restitution remedies including

disgorgement of …

The Founding And The Foundering Of The American Constitution, Robert F. Blomquist

Valparaiso University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reefer Madness: The Constitutional Consequence Of The Federal Government's Inconsistent Marijuana Policy, Zachary Ford

Texas A&M Law Review

In the past twenty years, the United States has witnessed over half of its states create marijuana laws that expressly contradict the federal government’s complete ban of the drug. Nine states have completely legalized marijuana for recreational use in the past five years alone. Meanwhile, much of the country remains staunchly opposed to legalization in any form. This difference between state and federal law has the largest negative impact on noncitizens, namely lawful permanent residents whom reside in states that follow the federal government’s complete ban. Congress’s Immigration and Nationality Act broadly defines “conviction,” so even minor drug convictions under …

Looking Backward And Forward At The Suspension Clause, G. Edward White

Michigan Law Review

Review of Amanda L. Tyler's Habeas Corpus in Wartime: From the Tower of London to Guantanamo Bay.

Article Ii And Antidiscrimination Norms, Aziz Z. Huq

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court’s opinion in Trump v. Hawaii validated a prohibition on entry to the United States from several Muslim-majority countries and at the same time repudiated a longstanding precedent associated with the Japanese American internment of World War II. This Article closely analyzes the relationship of these twin rulings. It uses their dichotomous valences as a lens on the legal scope for discriminatory action by the federal executive. Parsing the various ways in which the internment of the 1940s and the 2017 exclusion order can be reconciled, the Article identifies a tension between the Court’s two holdings in Trump …

The New Impartial Jury Mandate, Richard Lorren Jolly

Michigan Law Review

Impartiality is the cornerstone of the Constitution’s jury trial protections. Courts have historically treated impartiality as procedural in nature, meaning that the Constitution requires certain prophylactic procedures that secure a jury that is more likely to reach verdicts impartially. But in Peña- Rodriguez v. Colorado, 137 S. Ct. 855 (2017), the Supreme Court recognized for the first time an enforceable, substantive component to the mandate. There, the Court held that criminal litigants have a Sixth Amendment right to jury decisions made without reliance on extreme bias, specifically on the basis of race or national origin. The Court did not …

Justice Jackson In The Jehovah’S Witnesses’ Cases, John Q. Barrett

FIU Law Review

No abstract provided.