Digital Commons Network^™

The Constitutionality Of Prison Privatization: An Analysis Of Prison Privatization In The United States And Israel, Stacey Jacovetti

Global Business Law Review

This note analyzes the constitutionality of the current state of prison privatization in the United States under the non-delegation doctrine and the due process clause. Furthermore, this note analyzes the Israeli Supreme Court's ruling holding prison privatization as unconstitutional under the Basic Law of the Right to Human Dignity and Liberty. Subsequently, an argument is made that the current authority for the utilization of private prisons in the United States is insufficient to establish the use of private prisons as constitutional. As such, this note argues that the overall scheme of privatization should provide for more detailed contracts--similar to those …

Brief Of Appellant, John Hill V. State Of Maryland, No. 2740, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Silva Georgian

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—Extraditing The Foreign Fugitive: Disentitlement In Civil Forfeiture, United States V. All Assets Listed In Attachment A, 89 F. Supp. 3d 817 (E.D. Va. 2015), Nicole Murray

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

How Much Are You Worth?: A Statutory Alternative To The Unconstitutionality Of Experts’ Use Of Minority-Based Statistics, Anne M. Anderson

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

“Criminal Records” - A Comparative Approach, Sigmund A. Cohn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Judicial Recusation In The Federal Republic Of Germany, Sigmund A. Cohn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Due Process As Choice Of Law: A Study In The History Of A Judicial Doctrine, Matthew J. Steilen

Journal Articles

This Article argues that procedural due process can be understood as a choice-of-law doctrine. Many procedural due process cases require courts to choose between a procedural regime characteristic of the common law - personal notice, oral hearing, neutral judge, and jury trial - and summary procedures employed in administrative agencies.

This way of thinking about procedural due process is at odds with the current balancing test associated with the Supreme Court’s opinion in Mathews v. Eldridge. This Article aims to show, however, that it is consistent with case law over a much longer period, indeed, most of American history. It …

Foreign Policy And The Government Legal Adviser, Henry Darwin

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Procedural Due Process Claims, Erwin Chemerinsky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—Fourth Amendment And Seizures— Accidental Seizures By Deadly Force: Who Is Seized During A Police Shootout? Plumhoff V. Rickard, 134 S. Ct. 2012 (2014)., Adam D. Franks

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Homer Plessy's Forgotten Plea For Inclusion: Seeing Color, Erasing Color-Lines, Sheldon Novick

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Newsroom: Closing Guantanamo Isn't Enough 03-14-2016, Jared Goldstein

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

First Department, People V. Mason, Kathleen Byrne

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. David, Courtney Blakeslee

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Constitutional Right To Discovery? Creating And Reinforcing Due Process Norms Through The Procedural Laboratory Of Arbitration, Imre Stephen Szalai

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article explores an overlooked dynamic between arbitration and the more formal court system. As developed in more detail below, this article's thesis is that arbitration can help define and reinforce due process norms applicable in court, and a due process-like norm regarding discovery is beginning to develop. Courts often review arbitration agreements for fairness, and through this judicial review, courts have developed a body of law discussing and defining whether certain procedures (or the lack thereof) violate fairness norms in connection with the resolution of a particular dispute. Through this body of law exploring procedural fairness, one can identify …

Martin Luther King, Jr. Celebration Keynote Address: The Honorable Carlton W. Reeves, United States District Court For The Southern District Of Mississippi, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Waive Goodbye To Appellate Review Of Plea Bargaining: Specific Performance Of Appellate Waiver Provisions Should Be Limited To Extraordinary Circumstances, Holly P. Pratesi

Brooklyn Law Review

In the federal criminal justice system, plea bargaining remains the predominant method for disposing of cases. An important provision in most plea agreements consists of the waiver of the defendant’s right to appeal the conviction or sentence. This note explores the constitutional, contractual, and policy implications of a recent Third Circuit decision that would allow specific performance as a remedy where a defendant’s only breach of the plea agreement consists of filing an appeal arguably precluded by an appellate waiver provision. This note argues that the approach taken by the Third Circuit in United States v. Erwin could effectively preclude …

Shock Incarceration And Parole: A Process Without Process, Adam Yefet

Brooklyn Law Review

The idea that an inmate could possess a liberty interest in parole is a relatively recent development in Fourteenth Amendment law. It was not until 1979, in Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex, that the Supreme Court examined Nebraska’s parole scheme and found that inmates could have a liberty interest in parole. The primary implication of Greenholtz was that parole statutes that contained certain mandatory language could confer upon inmates a liberty interest in parole. Applying the Greenholtz analysis, numerous parole schemes across the country were held to create a liberty interest and to require …

The Incest Horrible: Delimiting The Lawrence V. Texas Right To Sexual Autonomy, Y. Carson Zhou

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

Is the criminalization of consensual sex between close relatives constitutional in the wake of Lawrence v. Texas and Obergefell v. Hodges? Justice Scalia thought not. The substantive due process landscape has changed dramatically in response to the LGBTQ movement. Yet, when a girl in a sexual relationship with her father recently revealed in an anonymous interview with New York Magazine that they were planning to move to New Jersey, one of the only two states where incest was legal, the New Jersey legislature introduced with unprecedented speed a bill criminalizing incest. But who has the couple harmed? The very …

Comparing Supreme Court Jurisprudence In Obergefell V. Hodges And Town Of Castle Rock V. Gonzales: A Watershed Moment For Due Process Liberty, Jill C. Engle

Journal Articles

“The nature of injustice is that we may not always see it in our own times. The generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not presume to know the extent of freedom in all of its dimensions, and so they entrusted to future generations a charter protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we learn its meaning. When new insight reveals discord between the Constitution’s central protections and a received legal stricture, a claim to liberty must be addressed.” -- Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584, …

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. …

The Freedom To Pursue A Common Calling: Applying Intermediate Scrutiny To Occupational Licensing Statutes, Alexandra L. Klein

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Challenges Of Fitting Principled Modern Government – A Unified Public Law – To An Eighteenth Century Constitution, Peter L. Strauss

Faculty Scholarship

The papers presented at a fall 2016 conference at Cambridge University, The Unity of Public Law?, generally addressed issues of judicial review in the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, often from a comparative perspective and the view that unifying impulses in “public law” arose from the common law. Accepting what Justice Harlan Fisk Stone once characterized as the ideal of “a unified system of judge-made and statute law woven into a seamless whole by [judges],” The Common Law in the United States, 50 Harvard L Rev 4 (1936), this paper considers a variety of issues that have complicated maintaining …

A Tale Of Two Cases, Paul J. Larkin Jr.

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Curious Call For More Judicial Activism: Comment On Alexandra Klein's "The Freedom To Pursue A Common Calling", Mark Rush

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confessions In An International Age: Re-Examining Admissibility Through The Lens Of Foreign Interrogations, Julie Tanaka Siegel

Michigan Law Review

In Colorado v. Connelly the Supreme Court held that police misconduct is necessary for an inadmissible confession. Since the Connelly decision, courts and scholars have framed the admissibility of a confession in terms of whether it successfully deters future police misconduct. As a result, the admissibility of a confession turns largely on whether U.S. police acted poorly, and only after overcoming this threshold have courts considered factors pointing to the reliability and voluntariness of the confession. In the international context, this translates into the routine and almost mechanic admission of confessions— even when there is clear indication that the confession …

Constitutionalizing Systemic Administration, Gillian E. Metzger

Faculty Scholarship

Will the national administrative state as we know it survive? That question has risen to the fore with the advent of the Trump presidency. The President’s chief strategist has proclaimed “deconstructing the administrative state” to be one of the main pillars of the Trump Administration. Philip Rucker & Robert Costa, Bannon Vows a Daily Fight for ‘Deconstruction of the Administrative State,’ WASH. POST (Feb. 23, 2017). Early Trump actions have been notably anti-regulatory, including requirements that agencies repeal two regulations for each new regulation they propose, keep additional regulatory costs at zero, and plan for reorganization.

What Gideon Did, Sara Mayeux

All Faculty Scholarship

Many accounts of Gideon v. Wainwright’s legacy focus on what Gideon did not do—its doctrinal and practical limits. For constitutional theorists, Gideon imposed a preexisting national consensus upon a few “outlier” states, and therefore did not represent a dramatic doctrinal shift. For criminal procedure scholars, advocates, and journalists, Gideon has failed, in practice, to guarantee meaningful legal help for poor people charged with crimes.

Drawing on original historical research, this Article instead chronicles what Gideon did—the doctrinal and institutional changes it inspired between 1963 and the early 1970s. Gideon shifted the legal profession’s policy consensus on indigent defense away from …

Give Them A Reason They Can Understand: An Examination Of Rhode Island's Medicaid Ineligibility Notices To The State's Most Vulnerable Populations, Laura Pickering

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.