Digital Commons Network^™

Reconciling Data Privacy And The First Amendment, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

This article challenges the First Amendment critique of data privacy regulation–the claim that data privacy rules restrict the dissemination of truthful information and thus violate the First Amendment. The critique, which is ascendant in privacy discourse, warps legislative and judicial processes by constitutionalizing information policy. Rejection of the First Amendment critique is justified on three grounds. First, the critique mistakenly equates privacy regulation with speech regulation. Building on scholarship examining the boundaries of First Amendment protection, this article suggests that speech restrictions in a wide variety of commercial contexts have never been thought to trigger heightened First Amendment scrutiny, refuting …

A Constitutional Defence Of The Federal Ban On Human Cloning For Research Purposes, Jocelyn Downie, Jennifer Llewellyn, Françoise Baylis

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Parliament's prohibition on cloning in the Assisted Human Reproduction Act has led to divergent views on the validity of the legislation. This article responds to an article in volume 29, no. 2 of this journal by Barbara Billingsley and Timothy Caulfield, who suggested that the federal ban would likely not survive a Charter challenge. Billingsley and Caulfield argued that scientific experiments are expressive acts, deserving of protection under section 2(b) of the Charter, which guarantees freedom of expression. In their view, both the breadth of the legislative objective and the proportionality of the measure would preclude the courts from finding …

The Crime Drop And Racial Profiling: Toward An Empirical Jurisprudence Of Search And Seizure, Lawrence Rosenthal

Lawrence Rosenthal

No abstract provided.

Book Review Essay: Canada's Constitutional Cul De Sac, Richard Kay

Richard Kay

Book reivew of 'Constitutional Odyssey: Can Canadians Become a Sovereign People?', by Peter H. Russell (Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 2004).

In Incognito: The Principle Of Double Effect In American Constitutional Law, Edward Lyons

Edward C. Lyons

In Vacco v. Quill, 521 U.S. 793 (1997), the Supreme Court for the first time in American case law explicitly applied the principle of double effect to reject an equal protection claim to physician-assisted suicide. Double effect, traced historically to Thomas Aquinas, proposes that under certain circumstances it is permissible unintentionally to cause foreseen evil effects that would not be permissible to cause intentionally. The court rejected the constitutional claim on the basis of a distinction marked out by the principle, i.e., between directly intending the death of a terminally ill patient as opposed to merely foreseeing that death as …

The Non-Political Branch (Reviewing Lee Epstein & Jeffrey A. Segal, Advice And Consent: The Politics Of Judicial Appointments (2005)), Michael R. Dimino

Michael R Dimino

Subsidiarity, Federalism, And Federal Prosecution Of Street Crime, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

No abstract provided.

How The Confrontation Clause Defeated The Rape Shield Statute: Acquaintance Rape, The Consent Defense And The Nj Supreme Court's Ruling In State V. Garron, James B. Johnston

James B Johnston

Rape shield statutes are designed to limit a judge's discretion in allowing information about a rape victim's sexual past into evidence at trial. This is done to prevent dual victimization of the rape victim. First during the rape and then at trial. Despite rape shield protections the NJ Supreme Court ruled in State v. Garron that a victim's prior flirtations with the attacker, some of which occurred 6 years before the rape was admissible. The court overturned the attacker's guilty verdict and he went free. Advocates for rape victims rights were outraged. This article provides an analysis and critique of …

Vineet Narain V Union Of India: A Court Of Law And Not Justice: Is The Indian Supreme Court Bound By The Indian Constitution, Shubhankar Dam

Shubhankar Dam

The last twenty five years are an “impressive” chronicle of the Indian Supreme Court in action. Its novel functioning has changed the internal dynamics of Indian polity in a manner unknown to constitutional democracies. From an institution entrusted with the task of adjudicating disputes between parties, the Indian Supreme Court has transformed itself into an institution enjoined to promote the ideals of a socio-economic and political justice. Its prior role as an “adjudicator” has undergone a reappraisal. The judges therein are no more adjudicators but activists, energetically contributing to the accomplishment of India's constitutional vision. In this new creation, they …

Lawmaking Beyond Lawmakers: The Little Right And The Great Wrong, Shubhankar Dam

Shubhankar Dam

No abstract provided.