Digital Commons Network^™

The Cycle Of Delegitimization: Lessons From Dred Scott On The Relationship Between The Supreme Court And The Nation, Jonathon J. Booth

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

This Article examines how Chief Justice Taney’s opinion in Dred Scott v. Sandford sparked a cycle of delegitimization that parallels contemporary debates about the Supreme Court’s legitimacy crisis. Part I explicates how one family’s fight for freedom in Missouri reached the Supreme Court, the resulting radical decision, and the nation’s reaction to show the initial stages of this cycle. Part II examines the impact of Dred Scott on politics and law during the James Buchanan administration (1857–1861). During this period, the federal government, Southern states, and some Western territories swiftly implemented the decision, for example by expelling free Black residents. …

How American Society And Law Continue To Undermine People With Disabilities Seeking Education And Employment, Angelica Guevara

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

Our Founders specifically identified education as necessary to economic success and full participation in our democracy and society. However, the Supreme Court held in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez that education in America is not a constitutional right; instead, it is a commodity that few can afford. Then, in 2023, Biden v. Nebraska exposed the direct result of that ruling: the average American––regardless of their disability status––struggles to pay back their student loans, even when they have a well-paying job. The student debt crisis significantly impacts the economic future of students with disabilities, who make on average sixty-six …

Masthead

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Will The New Roberts Court Revive A Formalist Approach To Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence?, Roger Antonio Tejada

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

While all Chief Justices leave behind distinctive periods of judicial thought and practice, the quantitative and qualitative data presented in this article show that the Roberts Court in particular stands out in the development of Fourth Amendment precedent. The key cases that shaped the search and seizure doctrine before and during his rise show that, contrary to what many may expect, Chief Justice Roberts will likely oversee limited, pro-defendant decisions that could grant additional legitimacy to the Court’s crime-control jurisprudence. On the other hand, the new Justices’ voting records and writings suggest that there are several potential coalitions that could …

Rethinking The Fundamentals: Applying The Evolving Standards Of Decency Test To The Court’S Evaluation Of Fundamental Rights., Nick Wolfram

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

In 1910, the Supreme Court recognized in Weems v. United States that a constitution “must be capable of wider application than the mischief which gave it birth.” This principle led to the creation of the Court’s two-pronged “evolving standards of decency,” test: (1) evidence of an objective indicia of a national consensus, and (2) the reviewing court’s own independent judgment. To this day the Court has yet to apply this test outside of the Eighth Amendment context. But can the “evolving standards of decency,” test identify and protect other fundamental rights? This Article explores how the Court could apply the …

Terrorism Should Not Be A Crime: How Political Labels Are Dangerous To American Democracy, Abigail S. Grand

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

This Note calls for a dismantling of the United States’ current method of prosecuting terrorism, rejecting the “terrorism” label as a mechanism for charging crimes. Prosecutors should instead charge individuals in terrorism cases for their underlying criminal actions rather than rely on material support statutes and political innuendos to secure a conviction. By examining the implications of the terrorism label in post-9/11 America, this Note addresses how a moral panic enabled the executive branch to overstep its constitutional restraints and threatened the delicate balance of powers central to American democracy. Next, it proposes, as many have before, that Article III …

The Preservation Of Marine Fisheries Resources Within Asean Nations’ Eez, Ida Kurnia

Indonesia Law Review

The preservation of marine fisheries resources within ASEAN nations’ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) is an urgent and pressing challenge requiring collaborative efforts from all ASEAN nations. Challenges such as illegal fishing, climate change, and lack of coordination between ASEAN nations may cause damage to marine biota food chain, especially marine fisheries in Southeast Asia region. To solve this conundrum, collaboration between ASEAN nations pose as the key solution. The research method used in this study is normative juridical approach by analyzing primary legal materials such as International Agreements and other international laws & sources. Further analysis was also …

Dol Fiduciary Rule 3.0 Strikeout, Base Knock, Or Home Run?, Antolin Reiber

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Money Is Morphing - Cryptocurrency Can Morph To Be An Environmentally And Financially Sustainable Alternative To Traditional Banking, Clovia Hamilton

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Survey Evidence In Trademark Actions, Ioana Vasiu And Lucian Vasiu

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Corporate Governance And Compelled Speech: Do State-Imposed Board Diversity Mandates Violate Free Speech?, Salar Ghahramani

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Real Persons Are The Corporations We Made Along The Way, Leonard Brahin

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Front Matter

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Actions Speak Louder Than Words: The Supreme Court Of Georgia Textualizes “Action” In The Georgia Constitution, Abigail C. Letts

Mercer Law Review

It comes as no surprise to those tuned into Georgia jurisprudence—textualism has taken root in the Supreme Court of Georgia. Since a series of holdings in the late twenty-tens including Olevik v. State, Georgia courts have produced a steady stream of decisions committed to pointing legal interpretation back to the intent of the framers. At first glance, the court’s proclamation in State v. SASS Group, LLC that “action” as it is used in Article I, Section II, Paragraph V(b) of the Georgia Constitution refers to an entire lawsuit appears simply to be another instance of the court’s staunch commitment …

Examining The Constitutionality Of Legislative Medical Care Bans For Transgender Youth, John Mejia

Utah Law Review

As should be abundantly clear by this Article, the stakes of bans on genderaffirming health care for transgender adolescents are existential. The recent flood of state-law bans is a low point in the ongoing fight to ensure that all people truly enjoy the liberties and protections guaranteed by our state and federal constitutions. Stories like Utah’s are more likely the rule, not the exception. Legislatures around the country are rushing to push through this legislation as quickly as possible, seemingly to catch their opponents off guard. The overwhelming majority of federal district courts to consider these laws find them repulsive …

The Modern Energizer Bunny - Hopping Into The Nuclear Energy Revolution: The Tenth Circuit's Analysis In New Mexico Ex Rel. Balderas V. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Jack A. Mansur

Villanova Environmental Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Interpretation And Zombie Provisions, Michael L. Smith

Georgia State University Law Review

This Article analyzes the presence of zombie provisions in the United States Constitution and state constitutions and the danger that these provisions may influence the interpretation of still-living constitutional provisions.

Locke’S “Wild Indian” In United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence, Anthony W. Hobert Phd

American Indian Law Journal

This article explores the impact of John Locke’s Two Treatises on United States Indigenous property rights jurisprudence. After discussing Locke’s arguments, the article turns to the rationales of the first and last cases of the Marshall Trilogy—Johnson v. McIntosh (1823) and Worcester v. Georgia (1832)—arguing that, contrary to prevailing political theory, Marshall’s opinion for the Court in Johnson puts forth a fundamentally Lockean justification for the dispossession of Indigenous property. This article also provides a brief analysis of Marshall’s explicit Vattelian rationale in Worcester, commentary on recent developments regarding the precedents, and recommendations for reconciling them within contemporary …

The Right To Refuse To Deal, The Essential Facilities Doctrine, And The Digital Economy, George Sakkopoulos

St. Mary's Law Journal

Various commentators, as well as the 2020 report on competition in digital markets by the majority staff of the House Judiciary Committee, have advocated for the revival of the essential facilities doctrine, especially in the context of the digital economy. This Article examines the three phases in the development of the essential facilities doctrine and the right to refuse to deal—the foundations in the early twentieth century, the contraction of the right to refuse to deal and the expansion of the essential facilities doctrine in the mid-twentieth century, and the revival of the right to refuse to deal and the …

The Poor Man's Problem In Bankruptcy, Rylee Stanley

St. Mary's Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Lustre Oil Co., Llc V. Anadarko Minerals, Inc., Ayden D. Auer

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Montana Supreme Court held a limited liability company owned by the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes was not protected against a quiet title action by sovereign immunity.

A De-Regulated Militia: The Diminished Training Requirements For Ohio Teachers To Carry Weapons In Schools, Richard Sharp

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Rights And Retrenchment: The Elusive Promise Of Equal Citizenship, Deborah L. Brake

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Implied Consent In Administrative Adjudication, Grace Moore

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

Article III of the Constitution mandates that judges exercising the federal judicial power receive life tenure and that their pay not be diminished. Nonetheless, certain forms of adjudication have always taken place outside of Article III—in state courts, military tribunals, territorial courts, and administrative tribunals. Administrative law judges, employed by various federal administrative agencies, decide thousands of cases each year. A vast majority of the cases they decide deal with public rights, which generally include claims involving federal statutory rights or cases in which the federal government is a party. With litigant consent, however, the Supreme Court has upheld administrative …

“No Superior But God”: History, Post Presidential Immunity, And The Intent Of The Framers, Trace M. Maddox

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

This essay is directly responsive to one of the most pressing issues currently before the courts of the United States: the question of whether former Presidents enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution for acts they committed in office. Building upon the recent ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in United States v. Trump, 91 F.4th 1173 (D.C. Cir. 2024) this essay argues that the clear answer to that question is a resounding “no”.

Former President Trump, who has now appealed the D.C. Circuit’s ruling to the Supreme Court, contends that post-presidential criminal immunity is …

A Federal Inmate’S Right To Stay Home, Jordan Thorn

Texas A&M Law Review

Since the start of the COVID–19 pandemic, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) has, for the first time in history, placed tens of thousands of inmates onto home confinement. Likely due to the unprecedented nature and rapid release of inmates to contain the virus, the BOP failed to timely update their policies and procedures surrounding the disciplinary system of inmates on home confinement. This failure to update resulted in the BOP removing inmates from home confinement and placing them back in prison for minor violations. Furthermore, when the BOP chose to remove an inmate from home confinement, it did so …

Self-Evident: Why The Declaration Of Independence Is America’S True Constitution, Chelsea H. Blake

Northwestern Law Journal des Refusés

No abstract provided.

Solar Energy Industries Association V. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Brandy Keesee

Public Land & Resources Law Review

In Solar Energy Industries Association v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“Solar Energy”), the court grappled with a complex web of regulatory and environmental considerations. The overall dispute was the promulgation and implementation of Order 872, a directive issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC” or “Commission”), and its alignment with the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (“PURPA”) and the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”). The dispute in Solar Energy is about FERC’s interpretation and application of PURPA in managing qualifying facilities (“QFs”). The crux of the contention was whether FERC’s 2020 rule revisions set forth in Order 872 …

Reno-Sparks Indian Colony V. Haaland, William N. Rose

Public Land & Resources Law Review

Reno-Sparks Indian Colony v. Haaland added clarity to the scope of a federal agency’s duty to consult with Tribes under the National Historic Preservation Act. The case was the culmination of unsuccessful litigation efforts by Tribes to stop a large mining project, and it demonstrated the high hurdle Tribes face when challenging whether a federal agency has engaged in reasonable and good faith consultation.

Agency Deference After Loper: Expertise As A Casualty Of A War Against The “Administrative State”, Michael M. Epstein

Brooklyn Law Review

Chevron deference has been a foundational principle for administrative law for decades. Chevron provided a two-step analysis for determining whether an agency would be given deference in its decision-making. This deferential test finds its legitimacy on the grounds of agency expertise and accountability. However, when the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in Loper Bright Enterprise v. Raimondo, it positioned itself to potentially overrule or severely limit Chevron. An overruling of Chevron would place judicial deference to administrative agency decisions in peril by allowing courts to substitute their own views over the informed opinions of agency experts. This …