Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Pepperdine University (4)
- SelectedWorks (4)
- Duke Law (2)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (2)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (2)
-
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Columbia Law School (1)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- Osgoode Hall Law School of York University (1)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (1)
- The University of Akron (1)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (1)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1 - 22 of 22
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Navigating The Space Between Dueling Sovereigns, Miriam Galston
Navigating The Space Between Dueling Sovereigns, Miriam Galston
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The First Amendment: Religious Freedom For All, Including Muslims, Asma Uddin
The First Amendment: Religious Freedom For All, Including Muslims, Asma Uddin
Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Violating Due Process: The Case For Changing Texas State Trafficking Laws For Minors, Cristina M. Becker
Violating Due Process: The Case For Changing Texas State Trafficking Laws For Minors, Cristina M. Becker
Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Gay Talk: Protecting Free Speech For Public School Teachers, Stephen J. Elkind, Peter D. Kauffman
Gay Talk: Protecting Free Speech For Public School Teachers, Stephen J. Elkind, Peter D. Kauffman
Stephen J Elkind
In Garcetti v. Ceballos, the Supreme Court held that public employees are not entitled to free speech when speaking “pursuant to their official duties.” In most situations, this strips teachers of First Amendment protection when they discuss controversial subjects, such as homosexuality, with their students. To ensure their classrooms are tolerant and accepting environments for homosexual and questioning youth, teachers need free speech protection against adverse employment action their schools might take. The Garcetti Court, acknowledging that “expression related to academic scholarship and classroom instruction implicates” unique constitutional concerns, explicitly left open whether its decision applied in the education …
Fundamental Rights, Private Law, And Societal Constitution: On The Logic Of The So-Called Horizontal Effect, Florian Roedl
Fundamental Rights, Private Law, And Societal Constitution: On The Logic Of The So-Called Horizontal Effect, Florian Roedl
Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies
The paper raises the issue of a normative justification of the horizontal effect of fundamental rights in private law. Justification in this sense means that the reasons given are neither functional nor instrumental, but that the reasons are supposed to be subject to the intrinsic logic of private law. In traditional doctrine, the reason usually given to confer horizontal effect to fundamental rights is a deferral to the constitution: The constitutional text decides whether and how fundamental rights apply to private legal relationships. This answer implies that fundamental rights are either logically or normatively alien to private law, that they …
Against Agnosticism: Why The Liberal State Isn't Just One (Authority) Among The Many, Linda C. Mcclain
Against Agnosticism: Why The Liberal State Isn't Just One (Authority) Among The Many, Linda C. Mcclain
Faculty Scholarship
This article takes up the gauntlet thrown down by Professor Abner Greene’s recent book, Against Obligation: The Multiple Sources of Authority in a Liberal Democracy, to those scholars, politicians, and activists who believe that realizing the ideal of e pluribus unum (out of many, one) as well as constitutional principles of liberty and equality require a robust role for government. Government, Greene argues, is just one source of authority among many others, and citizens – or even public officials – have no general moral duty to obey the law. The political and constitutional order of the United States, he contends, …
The Question Of Constitutionality: How Separate Are The Powers? The Administrative And Social Ramifications Of Lockyer V. City And County Of San Francisco, Kristin Ecklund
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Is "Different But Equal" The New "Separate But Equal"? Nclb's Single-Sex Schooling Option Signals New Horizons For Some While Challenging Equal Education Convictions For Others , Elaine Ekpo
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Think Of The Children: Advancing Marriage Equality By Renewing The Focus On Same-Sex Adoption Litigation, Jacob M. Reif
Think Of The Children: Advancing Marriage Equality By Renewing The Focus On Same-Sex Adoption Litigation, Jacob M. Reif
Jacob M Reif
No abstract provided.
Benign Sex Discrimination Revisited: Constitutional And Moral Issues In Banning Sex-Selection Abortion , George Schedler
Benign Sex Discrimination Revisited: Constitutional And Moral Issues In Banning Sex-Selection Abortion , George Schedler
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Unwed Father's Custody Claim In California: When Does The Parental Preference Doctrine Apply?, Jeffrey S. Boyd
The Unwed Father's Custody Claim In California: When Does The Parental Preference Doctrine Apply?, Jeffrey S. Boyd
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Supreme Court Update: 2012-2013 Term (Civil Cases In Constitutional Law), Wilson Huhn
Supreme Court Update: 2012-2013 Term (Civil Cases In Constitutional Law), Wilson Huhn
Akron Law Faculty Publications
During 2012-2013 the Supreme Court handed down several significant constitutional law, including United States v. Windsor (striking down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act) and Shelby County v. Holder (striking down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act). These and other decisions are summarized in this presentation.
Why Justice Kennedy's Opinion In Windsor Short-Changed Same-Sex Couples, Adam Lamparello
Why Justice Kennedy's Opinion In Windsor Short-Changed Same-Sex Couples, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s decision in United States v. Windsor—invalidating the Defense of Marriage Act—made the same mistake as his decision in Lawrence v. Texas: it relied upon abstract notions of ‘liberty’ rather than the text-based guarantee of equality. Same-sex couples deserve more. They are entitled to equal treatment under the United States Constitution. Bans on same-sex marriage cannot be supported by a rational state interest, and instead constitute impermissible discrimination under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. By issuing a doctrinally muddled decision that included discussions of federalism, liberty, due process, and equal protection, Justice Kennedy missed an …
Supreme Court Update: 2012-2013 Term (Civil Cases In Constitutional Law), Wilson Huhn
Supreme Court Update: 2012-2013 Term (Civil Cases In Constitutional Law), Wilson Huhn
Wilson R. Huhn
During 2012-2013 the Supreme Court handed down several significant constitutional law, including United States v. Windsor (striking down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act) and Shelby County v. Holder (striking down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act). These and other decisions are summarized in this presentation.
Hollingsworth V. Perry, Brief For Foreign And Comparative Law Experts Harold Hongju Koh Et. Al. As Amici Curiae Supporting Respondents, Harold Hongju Koh, Sarah H. Cleveland, Laurence R. Helfer, Ryan Goodman
Hollingsworth V. Perry, Brief For Foreign And Comparative Law Experts Harold Hongju Koh Et. Al. As Amici Curiae Supporting Respondents, Harold Hongju Koh, Sarah H. Cleveland, Laurence R. Helfer, Ryan Goodman
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The New Textualism, Progressive Constitutionalism, And Abortion Rights: A Reply To Jeffrey Rosen, Neil S. Siegel
The New Textualism, Progressive Constitutionalism, And Abortion Rights: A Reply To Jeffrey Rosen, Neil S. Siegel
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
No Promo Hetero: Children's Right To Be Queer, Clifford Rosky
No Promo Hetero: Children's Right To Be Queer, Clifford Rosky
Utah Law Faculty Scholarship
This Article argues that the government has no legitimate interest in promoting heterosexuality or gender conformity during childhood. Although opponents of LGBT rights have longed cited this goal as one of the primary justifications for discrimination against LGBT people, it has no constitutional foundation upon which to stand. Building upon a familiar schema of legal scholarship on LGBT rights, this Article challenges the state’s interest in promoting heterosexuality by articulating a tripartite defense of children’s speech, status, and conduct. It argues that these three aspects of homosexuality are connected to and protected by three constitutional clauses — the First Amendment, …
Valid Rule Due Process Challenges: Bond V. United States And Erie’S Constitutional Source, Kermit Roosevelt Iii
Valid Rule Due Process Challenges: Bond V. United States And Erie’S Constitutional Source, Kermit Roosevelt Iii
All Faculty Scholarship
This article begins by asking what constitutional provision is violated by the enforcement of law without a lawmaker. Taking a positivist view—i.e., that law does not exist without a lawmaker—it concludes that the problem of law without a lawmaker collapses into the problem of coercion without law. Coercion without law violates the Due Process Clause in an obvious way: it is deprivation of something “without … law.” The article then explores the existence of this form of substantive due process in American law, arguing that we find it in three somewhat surprising places: Lochner-era substantive due process; modern federalism …
Abolition Of The Insanity Defense Violates Due Process, Stephen J. Morse, Richard J. Bonnie
Abolition Of The Insanity Defense Violates Due Process, Stephen J. Morse, Richard J. Bonnie
All Faculty Scholarship
This article, which is based on and expands on an amicus brief the authors submitted to the United States Supreme Court, first provides the moral argument in favor of the insanity defense. It considers and rejects the most important moral counterargument and suggests that jurisdictions have considerable leeway in deciding what test best meets their legal and moral policies. The article then discusses why the two primary alternatives to the insanity defense, the negation of mens rea and considering mental disorder at sentencing, are insufficient to achieve the goal of responding justly to severely mentally disordered offenders. The last section …
The Charter's Influence Around The World, Mark Tushnet
The Charter's Influence Around The World, Mark Tushnet
Osgoode Hall Law Journal
Over the past several decades, the influence of the United States Constitution and Supreme Court around the world has waned while that of the Canadian Charter and Supreme Court has increased. This article examines several reasons for these changes, including: the relative ages of the constitutions; the US Supreme Court’s recent conservatism; the Canadian Supreme Court’s role in developing the doctrine of proportionality; the US Supreme Court’s interest in originalism; differing structures of constitutional review and judicial supremacy; and the two Courts’ relative openness to transnational influences.
Does The Constitution Protect Abortions Based On Fetal Anomaly?: Examining The Potential For Disability-Selective Abortion Bans In The Age Of Prenatal Whole Genome Sequencing, Greer Donley
Articles
This Note examines whether the state or federal government has the power to enact a law that prevents women from obtaining abortions based on their fetus’s genetic abnormality. Such a ban has already been enacted in North Dakota and introduced in Indiana and Missouri. I argue below that this law presents a novel state intrusion on a woman’s right to obtain a pre-viability abortion. Moreover, these pieces of legislation contain an outdated understanding of prenatal genetic testing—the landscape of which is quickly evolving as a result of a new technology: prenatal whole genome sequencing. This Note argues that the incorporation …
The Missing Due Process Argument, Jamal Greene
The Missing Due Process Argument, Jamal Greene
Faculty Scholarship
The argument that eventually persuaded five members of the Supreme Court to conclude that the individual mandate exceeded Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce is one most observers originally considered frivolous. In that respect, it is similar to another potential argument against the mandate — that forcing someone to pay for insurance violates the liberty interests guaranteed by the Constitution’s Due Process Clause. The Commerce Clause argument was the centerpiece of the challenge to the mandate; the due process argument was not meaningfully advanced at all. This chapter suggests reasons why.