Digital Commons Network^™

Problems With Authority, Amy J. Griffin

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Judicial decision-making rests on a foundation of unwritten rules—those that govern the weight of authority. Such rules, including the cornerstone principle of stare decisis, are created informally through the internal social practices of the judiciary. Because weight-of-authority rules are largely informal and almost entirely unwritten, we lack a comprehensive account of their content. This raises serious questions—sounding in due process and access to justice—about whether judicial decision-making rests ultimately on judges’ arbitrary and unexamined preferences rather than transparent and deliberative processes. These norms of authority are largely invisible to many, including parties appearing before the courts. They govern the …

Abortion, Citizenship, And The Right To Travel, Rebecca E. Zietlow

Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal

This article considers the changed landscape for abortion rights since the United States Supreme Court’s opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. Before Dobbs, the right to choose an abortion was a fundamental right under federal law, enforceable against all state governments. After Dobbs, the scope of one’s right to choose an abortion depends on the state in which one lives, and if abortion is illegal in their home state, their right to travel to another state where abortion is legal. The right to travel is particularly important for workers who must live in an anti-abortion state because their …

The Impact Of Federalism On Immigration: A Reconstruction Of The System To Alleviate The Immigration Crisis In America, Theresa Lam

Senior Honors Theses

Illegal immigration is a complex and relevant issue in the United States. In particular, its long-term implications for American communities has elevated its significance. Within America’s federalist system, the immigration dilemma has raised tension among federal, state, and local governments, which have different perspectives on how to approach the matter. The federal government is responsible for enforcing immigration laws but delegates numerous immigration responsibilities to state and local law enforcement. However, the degree to which local officials should cooperate with federal authorities is the subject of intense debate. Should immigration enforcement be a federal or local responsibility? Under federalism and …

Symposium: Gender, Health & The Constitution: On The Constitutional Requirement For Adequate Prenatal Care Post-Dobbs, Ainslee Johnson-Brown

ConLawNOW

This Essay argues that state abortion statutes codifying government interests in the health and welfare of the unborn trigger a constitutional right to prenatal care where adequate medical care is constitutionally required in the penal system. It explores the healthcare mandates required by the U.S. Constitution in the era before the passage of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs, specifically looking at abortion access and prenatal provisions in the penological system. It then dissects abortion-related legislation passed by various states in the wake of Dobbs—emphasizing language within the legislative findings that could trigger a constitutional obligation for prenatal …

Willfully Forgetting Miranda's True Nature: Vega V. Tekoh Severs The Warnings Requirement From The Constitution, George M. Dery Iii

Marquette Law Review

This Article analyzes Vega v. Tekoh, in which the Supreme Court ruled that

a violation of Miranda was not a violation of the Fifth Amendment privilege

against self-incrimination. This Article examines the original language of the

Miranda opinion, the statements and intentions of the members of the Miranda

Court, and subsequent precedent to determine Miranda’s true nature. Further,

this Article examines the reasoning of Vega and the dangers created by its

pronouncements, especially in light of the Court’s earlier characterization of

Miranda as a constitutional rule in Dickerson v. United States. This Article

asserts that the Justices who …

Full Faith And Credit In The Post-Roe Era, Celia P. Janes

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

In 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, once again leaving the question of whether abortion should be legal to individual state legislatures. This decision allowed the Texas law known as S.B. 8, alternatively known as the Texas Heartbeat Act, to go into effect. The law allows private individuals to sue anyone who has performed or has aided and abetted the performance or inducement of an abortion in Texas. California responded to this law with Assembly Bill 2091, which prevents California state courts from issuing subpoenas arising under S.B. 8 and similar laws in other states. This Note addresses …

Abortion Politics And The Rise Of Movement Jurists, Robert L. Tsai, Mary Ziegler

Faculty Scholarship

This Article employs the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and litigation in its wake as the jumping off point to reconsider the connections between judges, the Constitution, and social movements. That movements influence constitutional law, and that judicial pronouncements in turn are reshaped by politics, is well-established. But, while these accounts of legal change depend upon judges to embrace movement ideas, less has been written about the conditions under which judicial entrenchment can be expected to take place. There may, in fact, be different types of judicial dispositions towards external political phenomena.

In this Article, …

June 24, 2022, Bisma Shoaib

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The State Of Our Republic: State Constitutions’ Role In Creating A More Perfect Union, Caroline Bullock

CMC Senior Theses

This thesis situates state constitutionalism in the modern context of federal constitutional paralysis. By tracing patterns of state constitutional development, we find that states were always the fundamental setting of democracy, and there has always been critical action happening at state legislatures, in state courts, and through state constitutional change. State constitutions provide an active means to achieve progress and protect rights not federally enshrined (and thus, endangered by the political process). The use of state constitutions to prescribe ways of life, protect individual and specialized rights, and to limit local governments has always occurred, but with the current federal …

“Improve Your Privileges While They Stay”: A Guide To Improve The Privileges Of U.S. Citizenship For Everybody, Joshua J. Schroeder

Touro Law Review

In 1767, the young Phillis Wheatley wrote from her position of slavery in the Wheatley home of Boston to “ye sons of Science” at Harvard College, telling them to “improve your privileges while they stay.” She beheld the startling privileges of learning and discovery bestowed upon an elite group of young, rich white men in Boston and celebrated their privileges. Neither did she scorn those whose luck had placed a bounty of privilege upon their laps, for she likely planned to share in that bounty herself, one day. When she was only 13 or 14, Wheatley sublimely encouraged grown men …

Reshaping Government’S Fiduciary Role Under The 1992 Constitution Of Ghana, Rose Rameau, Abdul Baasit Aziz Bamba

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

In Ghana and across many African States, the people—through the instrumentality of law or their respective Constitutions— have constituted their presidents trustees of the natural resources to be held in trust for the benefit of the people. With a few exceptions, mineral resource governance in Africa has been horrendous: Many African States have failed to leverage their natural resource endowments as a catalyst for much-needed socioeconomic development.

This Article analyzes the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana which provides that all public lands and natural resources in Ghana shall be vested in the President on behalf of, and in …

(How) Can Litigation Advance Multiracial Democracy?, Olatunde C.A. Johnson

Faculty Scholarship

Can rights litigation meaningfully advance social change in this moment? Many progressive or social justice legal scholars, lawyers, and advocates would argue “no.” Constitutional decisions issued by the U.S. Supreme Court thwart the aims of progressive social movements. Further, contemporary social movements often decenter courts as a primary domain of social change. In addition, a new wave of legal commentary urges progressives to de-emphasize courts and constitutionalism, not simply tactically but as a matter of democratic survival.

This Essay considers the continuing role of rights litigation, using the litigation over race-conscious affirmative action as an illustration. Courts are a key …

The Author-Ity Of Ai: Navigating The Legal Landscape Of Artificial Intelligence Authorship, John R. Sepúlveda

Touro Law Review

This Article discusses the problems that arise when trying to protect works that involve generative AI. It will detail how authorship currently is interpreted under U.S. law and how the courts and the U.S. Copyright Office interpret the authorship requirement. This Article will also present some practical tips on how to navigate current U.S. law and obtain a copyright registration.

Law, Society, And Religion: Islam And The West, Paolo Davide Farah

Book Chapters

Law and religion are present in almost every society, where the predominance of one over the other can greatly vary, and, in some cases, they both contend for authority over the citizenry. From a historical standpoint, this resulted in a constant change in the relationship between law and religion. Globalization also had a role in this regard. In some instances, globalization exacerbates differences between religions instead of encouraging mediation; it seeks to fill the gap left by the diminishing role of religion in the West. Globalization also competes with religion; both are looking for ways to regulate conduct and push …

State Sovereign Immunity And The New Purposivism, Anthony J. Bellia, Bradford R. Clark

Journal Articles

Since the Constitution was first proposed, courts and commentators have debated the extent to which it alienated the States’ preexisting sovereign immunity from suit by individuals. During the ratification period, these debates focused on the language of the citizen-state diversity provisions of Article III. After the Supreme Court read these provisions to abrogate state sovereign immunity in Chisholm v. Georgia, Congress and the States adopted the Eleventh Amendment to prohibit this construction. The Court subsequently ruled that States enjoy sovereign immunity independent of the Eleventh Amendment, which neither conferred nor diminished it. In the late twentieth-century, Congress began enacting statutes …

Limiting Tourism To Sustainable Levels: Options For HawaiʻI, Barry D. Solomon

Natural Resources Journal

Many popular tourist destinations across the world are experiencing overtourism, which can cause a variety of negative environmental and socio-cultural impacts. As a result, an increasing number of governments are searching for solutions to overtourism. In the United States, Hawaiʻi needs such solutions. Until recently, many legal scholars and other observers believed that restricting tourism may be unconstitutional. However, a careful examination of the United States Supreme Court’s decisions on the Dormant Commerce Clause and the interstate right to travel show that certain restrictions on tourism may be constitutionally permissible. Indeed, recent federal court rulings support state action designed to …

Subjectively Speaking, The Applicable Standard For Deficient Medical Treatment Of Pretrial Detainees Should Be One Of Objective Reasonableness, Benjamin R. Black

Touro Law Review

There is no uniformity amongst the circuits when it comes to pretrial detainees claims for inadequate medical care. The circuits are currently grappling with this problem, applying two separate tests to pretrial detainees’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims depending on the jurisdiction in which the incident arose. The test that should be applied across all circuits is one of objective reasonableness. However, some circuits do not see it that way, applying the deliberate indifference standard, also known as the subjective standard test. The circuits applying the subjective standard are relying on case law that does not properly analyze the rights …

Development Of The Right To Privacy In Montana Discourse And The Montana Constitution, Scott A. O'Donnell

Undergraduate Theses, Professional Papers, and Capstone Artifacts

No abstract provided.

State Sovereign Immunity And The New Purposivism, Anthony J. Bellia, Bradford R. Clark

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

Since the Constitution was first proposed, courts and commentators have debated the extent to which it alienated the States’ preexisting sovereign immunity from suit by individuals. During the ratification period, these debates focused on the language of the citizen-state diversity provisions of Article III. After the Supreme Court read these provisions to abrogate state sovereign immunity in Chisholm v. Georgia, Congress and the States adopted the Eleventh Amendment to prohibit this construction. The Court subsequently ruled that States enjoy sovereign immunity independent of the Eleventh Amendment, which neither conferred nor diminished it. In the late twentieth-century, Congress began enacting statutes …

Originalism & Judicially-Enacted Religious Exemptions: Revisiting Employment Division Of Oregon V. Smith, Eric Russell Coykendall

CGU Theses & Dissertations

In the 1963 case Sherbert v. Verner , the Supreme Court read the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause to mean that, in certain cases, religious believers should be exempted from otherwise applicable laws. In 1990, the Supreme Court essentially overturned that framework in the case Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith . The Smith case has proved quite controversial, and numerous public-interest law firms, especially those that defend religious litigants, have regularly asked the Court to overturn it in favor of a re-application of the Sherbert precedent. Their contention is often that the Smith ruling is inconsistent with the original …

The Wages Of Hitching Wagons, Thomas B. Bennett

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article examines the challenges faced by states that align their constitutions with federal doctrine through the practice of "lockstepping"—adopting federal legal standards into state law. Lockstepping binds states to federal law, regardless of its trajectory. Part I traces the evolution of standing doctrine in both federal courts under Article III and Kentucky courts under its constitution. Part II presents an originalist critique of the federal injury-in-fact requirement, highlighting emerging efforts to abandon this requirement in federal courts. Part III discusses the dilemma states like Kentucky face, balancing constitutional interpretation, federalism, and legal stability.

The Constitution's Blind Spots: A Discourse Analysis Of Marginalization Within The United States Constitution, Ellie Martel

Honors Program Theses and Projects

The United States Constitution begins with the words "We the People,” yet several groups of people were overlooked as it was being crafted. The alienated populace felt that the governing constitution should reflect people of all sexes, genders, races, and nationalities, given the diversity of this nation. Although it took time and effort, the abolitionist and women's rights movements contributed to the formulation of the amendments that would extend constitutional rights to underrepresented groups. The purpose of this thesis is to look deeper at the phrases used in texts to uncover feelings and common themes that presented themselves in speeches …

Vega V. Tekoh And The Erosion Of Miranda: A Reframing Of Miranda As A Procedural Due Process Requirement, Tess A. Chaffee

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Must Courts Recalibrate Tort Law Governing Firearms In Light Of The Second Amendment?, Lars Noah

University of Cincinnati Law Review

The rules governing the scope of liability in cases where firearms cause injuries—some well-established, others fairly novel—help to define the responsibilities of users, owners, and sellers of these popular but dangerous products. As the U.S. Supreme Court has recently expanded an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, some have wondered whether the Second Amendment might operate to limit the reach of these various tort doctrines. Sixty years ago, the Court started to constitutionalize various aspects of state common law, most famously using the First Amendment to limit defamation claims but in other respects as well. A comparable approach to …

Originalism's Time Machine: A Resurrected Relationship To The State, Douglas B. Mckechnie J.D.

Lincoln Memorial University Law Review Archive

For almost sixty years, the constitutional understanding of physical autonomy in the U.S. included the right to end a pregnancy. This modern understanding of constitutional rights began with the Supreme Court’s evolutive interpretation of the Constitution in the mid-Twentieth Century and continued to expand into the Twenty-first Century. In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, however, the Court reasoned that the right to physical autonomy it had identified fifty years earlier, in Roe vs. Wade, was not deeply rooted in the nation’s history and thus wrongly established by the Court. This Originalist interpretation of the Constitution rearranged the constitutional order. …

Parting The Red Sea: Prescriptions For The Rluipa Equal Terms Provision's Expanding Circuit Split, Braden T. Meadows

Georgia Law Review

Congress unanimously passed the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) in 2000. The Act marked the culmination of a decades-long dialogue between Congress and the Supreme Court. RLUIPA’s passage embodied Congress’s resolve to provide religious free exercise protections—particularly as it pertained to religious land use. Since 2000, however, RLUIPA’s Equal Terms Provision has been subject to differing judicial interpretations, resulting in an expanding circuit split. This Note analyzes the circuit split and offers guidance to future interpreters.

First, this Note examines the social, legislative, and judicial history leading to RLUIPA’s enactment. Second, it analyzes the contours of interpretations …

121st Sibley Lecture: American Democracy In Peril, J. Michael Luttig

Georgia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Billionaire Taxes And The Constitution, Andy Grewal

Georgia Law Review

The United States now has ten times as many billionaires as it had just a few decades ago. This ever-growing class has sparked congressional interest in “billionaire tax” proposals. These proposals would generally require that billionaires recognize income when their asset values increase, even if they have not sold their assets.

Under existing doctrine, billionaire taxes likely violate the realization requirement embedded in the Sixteenth Amendment of the Constitution. However, this Article argues that existing Sixteenth Amendment doctrine suffers from deep infirmities and theoretical inconsistencies. With the conceptually sound interpretive approach advanced in this Article, a billionaire tax could pass …

Originalism After Dobbs, Bruen, And Kennedy: The Role Of History And Tradition, Randy E. Barnett, Lawrence B. Solum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In three recent cases, the constitutional concepts of history and tradition have played important roles in the reasoning of the Supreme Court. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization relied on history and tradition to overrule Roe v. Wade. New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen articulated a history and tradition test for the validity of laws regulating the right to bear arms recognized by the Second Amendment. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District looked to history and tradition in formulating the test for the consistency of state action with the Establishment Clause.

These cases raise important questions about …

Command And Control: Operationalizing The Unitary Executive, Gary S. Lawson

Faculty Scholarship

The concept of the unitary executive is written into the Constitution by virtue of Article II’s vesting of the “executive Power” in the President and not in executive officers created by Congress. Defenders and opponents alike of the “unitary executive” often equate the idea of presidential control of executive action with the power to remove executive personnel. But an unlimitable presidential removal power cannot be derived from the vesting of executive power in the President for the simple reason that it would not actually result in full presidential control of executive action, as the actions of now-fired subordinates would still …