Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- William & Mary Law School (4)
- Georgetown University Law Center (3)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (2)
- The University of Akron (2)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
-
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Florida A&M University College of Law (1)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (1)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (1)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (1)
- University of Missouri School of Law (1)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (1)
- University of the District of Columbia School of Law (1)
- West Virginia University (1)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (1)
Articles 1 - 22 of 22
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Lawful Searches Incident To Unlawful Arrests: A Reform Proposal, Mark A. Summers
Lawful Searches Incident To Unlawful Arrests: A Reform Proposal, Mark A. Summers
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Why Robert Mueller’S Appointment As Special Counsel Was Unlawful, Gary S. Lawson, Steven Calabresi
Why Robert Mueller’S Appointment As Special Counsel Was Unlawful, Gary S. Lawson, Steven Calabresi
Faculty Scholarship
Since 1999, when the independent counsel provisions of the Ethics in Government Act expired, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has had in place regulations providing for the appointment of Special Counsels who possess “the full power and independent authority to exercise all investigative and prosecutorial functions of any United States Attorney.” Appointments under these regulations, such as the May 17,2017 appointment of Robert S. Mueller to investigate the Trump campaign, are patently unlawful, for three distinct reasons.
First, all federal offices must be “established by Law,” and there is no statute authorizing such an office in the DOJ. We conduct …
Murr V. Wisconsin And The Inherent Limits Of Regulatory Takings, Lynda L. Butler
Murr V. Wisconsin And The Inherent Limits Of Regulatory Takings, Lynda L. Butler
Faculty Publications
This article examines the confusion surrounding constitutional protection of property under the substantive due process and takings clauses, using Murr as a springboard for reconsidering the substantive due process/takings distinction and asking whether the regulatory takings doctrine should remain a viable constitutional concept despite its muddled principles. While powerful reasons support treating as compensable economic regulations that are functionally equivalent to physical takings, important differences between physical and regulatory takings need to be recognized as limits to the degree of equivalence possible and therefore to the regulatory takings doctrine. A look back at the evolutionary paths of substantive due process, …
'Great Variety Of Relevant Conditions, Political, Social And Economic': The Constitutionality Of Congressional Deadlines On Amendment Proposals Under Article V, Danaya C. Wright
'Great Variety Of Relevant Conditions, Political, Social And Economic': The Constitutionality Of Congressional Deadlines On Amendment Proposals Under Article V, Danaya C. Wright
UF Law Faculty Publications
Within a year or two, the thirty-eighth state is likely to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), setting up an unprecedented constitutional challenge. The ERA was proposed with a seven-year deadline in the resolving clause, establishing the mode of ratification. That was a shift from earlier precedents in which a deadline had been placed in the text of the amendment proposal itself. Article V is annoyingly silent on the issue of congressional deadlines in amendment proposals, and the Supreme Court has never addressed the issue of a deadline that could void an otherwise properly ratified amendment. The practice of placing …
Rationing The Constitution: Beyond And Below, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Rationing The Constitution: Beyond And Below, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Financial Oversight And Management Board For Puerto Rico V. Aurelius Investment, Llc, Rafael Cox Alomar
Financial Oversight And Management Board For Puerto Rico V. Aurelius Investment, Llc, Rafael Cox Alomar
Court Briefs
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Amicus Curiae 290 Criminal Law And Mental Health Law Professors In Support Of Petitioner's Request For Reversal And Remand, Kahler V. Kansas, 18-6135 (U.S. June 6, 2019), Paul F. Rothstein
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Amici curiae are a group of philosophically and politically diverse law school professors and scholars in the fields of criminal law and mental health from a variety of disciplines who have been teaching and writing about the insanity defense and related issues throughout their careers. They include the authors of leading criminal law and mental health law treatises and casebooks and numerous important scholarly books and articles.
Amici believe this case raises important questions about principles of criminal responsibility, the integral role of the insanity defense in Anglo-American law, and the inadequacy of the “mens rea alternative” to the traditional …
The Supreme Court's Legitimacy Dilemma, Tara Leigh Grove
The Supreme Court's Legitimacy Dilemma, Tara Leigh Grove
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Qualified Immunity And Constitutional Structure, Katherine Mims Crocker
Qualified Immunity And Constitutional Structure, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Scholarship
A range of scholars has subjected qualified immunity to a wave of criticism—and for good reasons. But the Supreme Court continues to apply the doctrine in ever more aggressive ways. By advancing two claims, this Article seeks to make some sense of this conflict and to suggest some thoughts toward a resolution.
First, while the Court has offered and scholars have rejected several rationales for the doctrine, layering in an account grounded in structural constitutional concerns provides a historically richer and analytically thicker understanding of the current qualified-immunity regime. For suits against federal officials, qualified immunity acts as a “compensating …
Will Conservative Justices Sound The Death Knell Of State Action? Be Careful For What You Wish, Anne M. Lofaso
Will Conservative Justices Sound The Death Knell Of State Action? Be Careful For What You Wish, Anne M. Lofaso
Law Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Rediscovering The Journal Clause: The Lost History Of Legislative Constitutional Interpretation, Nicholas Handler
Rediscovering The Journal Clause: The Lost History Of Legislative Constitutional Interpretation, Nicholas Handler
Faculty Scholarship
Article I, Section 5 of the United States Constitution requires that each house of Congress keep a Journal of its proceedings. Contemporary observers have largely ignored this provision, treating it as a vestigial record-keeping requirement with little significance for modern law. This dismissive attitude is misguided. Historically, legislative Journals were one of the primary mechanisms by which Parliament, and later Congress, made and interpreted constitutional law. Journals are the official histories of legislatures’ activity. They record what legislatures do as institutions—what powers they exercise, what procedures they use, and what actions by the coordinate branches they protest or resist. In …
Government Standing And The Fallacy Of Institutional Injury, Tara Leigh Grove
Government Standing And The Fallacy Of Institutional Injury, Tara Leigh Grove
Faculty Publications
A new brand of plaintiff has come to federal court. In cases involving the Affordable Care Act, the Defense of Marriage Act, and partisan gerrymandering, government institutions have brought suit to redress “institutional injuries”—that is, claims of harm to their constitutional powers or duties. Jurists and scholars are increasingly enthusiastic about these lawsuits, arguing (for example) that the Senate should have standing to protect its power to ratify treaties; that the House of Representatives may sue to preserve its role in the appropriations process; and that the President may go to court to vindicate his Article II prerogatives. This Article …
The End Of Miller's Time: How Sensitivity Can Categorize Third-Party Data After Carpenter, Michael Gentithes
The End Of Miller's Time: How Sensitivity Can Categorize Third-Party Data After Carpenter, Michael Gentithes
Con Law Center Articles and Publications
For over 40 years, the Supreme Court has permitted government investigators to warrantlessly collect information that citizens disclose to third-party service providers. That third-party doctrine is under significant strain in the modern, networked world. Yet scholarly responses typically fall into unhelpfully extreme camps, either championing an absolute version of the doctrine or calling for its abolition. In Carpenter v. United States, the Court suggested a middle road, holding that some categories of data—such as digital location information collected from cell phones—do not neatly fall into the third-party doctrine’s dichotomy between unprotected, disclosed information and protected, undisclosed information. But the majority …
Leveling Down Gender Equality, Tracy Thomas
Leveling Down Gender Equality, Tracy Thomas
Con Law Center Articles and Publications
The U.S. Supreme Court recently revived its jurisprudence of “leveling down,” that is, curing an equal protection violation of gender discrimination by denying the requested benefit to all rather than extending the benefit to the excluded class. This article challenges the continuation of the conventional acceptance of leveling down as an equally legitimate remedial option for gender discrimination. Instead, it argues for the adoption of an alternative remedial calculus of a strong presumption of leveling up remedies, overcome only by limited equitable considerations. Such a presumption better effectuates the substantive right of gender equality, as well as the correlative due …
Enforcing The Right To Public Education, Areto A. Imoukuede
Enforcing The Right To Public Education, Areto A. Imoukuede
Journal Publications
This paper suggests that although each state within the United States currently recognizes a right to public education, the states do not provide meaningful and consistent judicial enforcement of the right. Recognizing a federal fundamental right to public education would be a step towards ensuring meaningful and consistent judicial enforcement of the right.
The Diverging Right(S) To Bear Arms: Private Armament And The Second And Fourteenth Amendments In Historical Context, Alexander Gouzoules
The Diverging Right(S) To Bear Arms: Private Armament And The Second And Fourteenth Amendments In Historical Context, Alexander Gouzoules
Faculty Publications
This article compares the historical evolution of the social understanding of private armament with contemporary legal doctrine on the right to bear arms. The District of Columbia v. Heller decision, which held that the Second Amendment protects a personal right to self-defense, and the McDonald v. City of Chicago decision, which held the Second Amendment to be incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment, both turned on extensive historical analysis. But by reading a broad “individual right to self-defense” into both the Second and Fourteenth Amendments, the Court assumed continuity between the social understandings at the time of these amendments’ respective ratifications. …
Uncovering Juror Racial Bias, Christian Sundquist
Uncovering Juror Racial Bias, Christian Sundquist
Articles
The presence of bias in the courtroom has the potential to undermine public faith in the adversarial process, distort trial outcomes, and obfuscate the search for justice. In Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado (2017), the U.S. Supreme Court held for the first time that the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments required post-verdict judicial inquiry in criminal cases where racial bias clearly served as a “significant motivating factor” in juror decision-making. Courts will nonetheless likely struggle in interpreting what constitutes a "clear statement of racial bias" and whether such bias constituted a "significant motivating factor" in a juror's verdict. This Article will examine how …
The Canadian Legal System: An Introduction For Regulated Professions, Steve Coughlan, Dale Darling
The Canadian Legal System: An Introduction For Regulated Professions, Steve Coughlan, Dale Darling
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
To understand the influence of law on any regulated profession, one must first understand the influences on the creation of law. This introductory paper sets the context for that discussion of law by explaining the structural aspects of the legal system. Those aspects include the sources of law in Canada, the forms that law can take, and the parties who are primarily responsible for creating and shaping the law. This paper is structured around the discussion of four things: constitutional law, non-constitutional law, decision-makers in the legal system and, finally, a case study illustrating those features in action.
Reynolds V. United States, Rewritten, Laura T. Kessler
Reynolds V. United States, Rewritten, Laura T. Kessler
Utah Law Faculty Scholarship
In Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1878), Chief Justice Morrison Waite, writing for a unanimous Supreme Court, upheld the federal Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act outlawing polygamy in the federal territories and providing criminal penalties for it. This is a re-writing of that opinion, presented in the form of a dissent, available in Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten (Cambridge University Press, forthcoming 2020). Unlike the Court’s opinion, this dissent concludes that religious practice, as well as belief, is protected by the First Amendment. It therefore holds that a religious duty to engage in an unlawful practice may be a …
The Difference Narrows: A Reply To Kurt Lash, Randy E. Barnett, Evan Bernick
The Difference Narrows: A Reply To Kurt Lash, Randy E. Barnett, Evan Bernick
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
No abstract provided.
The Privileges Or Immunities Clause Abridged: A Critique Of Kurt Lash On The Fourteenth Amendment, Randy E. Barnett, Evan Bernick
The Privileges Or Immunities Clause Abridged: A Critique Of Kurt Lash On The Fourteenth Amendment, Randy E. Barnett, Evan Bernick
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was virtually eliminated by the Supreme Court in three cases: The Slaughter-House Cases, Bradwell v. Illinois, and United States v. Cruikshank. Today, most constitutional scholars agree that this was a terrible mistake, the effects of which continue to reverberate through our constitutional law. But, as evidenced by the Court’s decision in McDonald v. City of Chicago, both the “left” and “right” sides of the Court are reluctant to open the “Pandora’s Box” of uncertainty created by the phrase “privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” …
Comparing Wayfair And Wynne: Lessons For The Future Of The Dormant Commerce Clause, Edward A. Zelinsky
Comparing Wayfair And Wynne: Lessons For The Future Of The Dormant Commerce Clause, Edward A. Zelinsky
Faculty Articles
A comparison of South Dakota v. Wayfair with Comptroller of the Treasury of Maryland v. Wynne indicates that the prospect of the Supreme Court jettisoning the dormant Commerce Clause altogether is unlikely. However, the justices who would abandon the dormant Commerce Clause can exercise decisive influence in particular cases as they did in Wayfair. The current Court’s dormant Commerce Clause skeptics – Justices Thomas and Gorsuch –provided the crucial fourth and fifth votes in Wayfair to overturn Quill.
It will continue to be rare for the Court to reverse its own dormant Commerce Clause decisions. Far from opening …