Digital Commons Network^™

Religious Institutionalism, Implied Consent And The Value Of Voluntarism, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

Increasingly, clashes between the demands of law and aspirations of religion center on the legal status and treatment of religious institutions. Much of the rising tensions revolving around religious institutions—exemplified by recent Supreme Court decisions such as Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC and Burwell v. Hobby Lobby—stem from conflicts between the religious objectives of those institutions and their impact on third parties who do not necessarily share those same objectives. This Article aims to provide a framework for analyzing the claims of religious institutions by grounding those claims in the principle of voluntarism. On such an account, religious institutions deserve protection because …

Religion's Footnote Four: Church Autonomy As Arbitration, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

While the Supreme Court’s decision in Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC has been hailed as an unequivocal victory for religious liberty, the Court’s holding in footnote four – that the ministerial exception is an affirmative defense and not a jurisdictional bar – undermines decades of conventional thinking about the relationship between church and state. For some time, a wide range of scholars had conceptualized the relationship between religious institutions and civil courts as “jurisdictional” – that is, scholars converged on the view that the religion clauses deprived courts of subject-matter jurisdiction over religious claims. In turn, courts could not adjudicate religious disputes …

Teague New Rules Must Apply In Initial-Review Collateral Proceedings: The Teachings Of Padilla, Chaidez And Martinez, Rebecca Sharpless, Andrew Stanton

Rebecca Sharpless

When The Cheering (For Gideon ) Stops: The Defense Bar And Representation At Initial Bail Hearings, Douglas Colbert

Douglas L. Colbert

This article suggests that the absence of representation at the beginning of a State criminal prosecution must come to a screeching halt. The criminal defense bar should take a leadership role and dedicate Gideon's anniversary to making certain that an accused's right to the effective assistance of counsel begins at the initial bail hearing. Indeed, guaranteeing vigorous representation should be the defense bar's number one priority.

Material Witness Detentions After Al-Kidd, Wesley M. Oliver

Wesley M Oliver

The Supreme Court’s decision in Ashcroft v. al-Kidd was a tempest in a teapot. The Court concluded only that a witness was no less susceptible to arrest under the Federal Material Witness Statute if the government was interested in prosecuting the witness himself. Unremarkably under the holding, it is no more difficult to detain an al-Qaeda member who witnessed a crime than it is to detain an innocent bystander who witnessed a crime. The fact that a criminal suspect can be held, however, raises concerns beyond the scope of the narrow question before the Court. If the government’s real interest …

Thurgood Marshall: The Writer, Anna P. Hemingway, Starla J. Williams, Jennifer M. Lear, Ann E. Fruth

Anna P. Hemingway

The Inherent Structure Of Free Speech Law, Joshua Davis, Joshua

Joshua P. Davis

To date no one has discovered a set of organizing principles for free speech doctrine, an area of the law that has been criticized as complex, ad hoc, and even incoherent. We provide a framework that distills free speech law down to three judgments: the first about the role of government; the second about the target of government regulation; and the third a constrained cost-benefit analysis. The framework can be summarized by three propositions: first, the Constitution constrains government if it regulates private speech, but not if government speaks, sponsors speech, or restricts expression in managing an internal governmental function; …

The Obama Phenomenon: Deliberative Conversationalism & The Pursuit Of Community Through Presidential Politics, Robert Justin Lipkin

Robert Justin Lipkin

Police Paternalism: Community Caretaking, Assistance Searches, And Fourth Amendment Reasonableness, Michael R. Dimino

Michael R Dimino

The Usual Suspect Classifications: Criminals, Aliens And The Future Of Same-Sex Marriage, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

In this Article, I argue for a new understanding of the immutability factor employed by courts in determining which classifications ought to receive suspect status under the Equal Protection Clause. Drawing on the process-based foundations of the Equal Protection Clause, this new understanding defines immutable traits not as traits that cannot be changed, but as traits that are in the words of the Supreme Court in Frontiero v. Richardson, mere "accident[s] of birth." In contrast, courts and scholars typically center the immutability inquiry on an individual’s technical ability to exit a particular class, which has led to inconsistencies in …

Establishing Separate Criminal And Civil Evidence Codes, John J. Capowski

John J. Capowski

So What Is The Real Legacy Of Oakes? Two Decades Of Proportionality Analysis Under The Canadian Charter’S Section 1, Sujit Choudhry

Sujit Choudhry

The Foggy Road For Evaluating Punitive Damages: Lifting The Haze From The Bmw/State Farm Guideposts, Steven Chanenson, John Gotanda

John Y Gotanda

In light of increasing punitive damages awards, the United States Supreme Court formulated criteria for evaluating whether a punitive damages award is so unreasonably large that it violates substantive due process. Unfortunately, these "guideposts," which were first erected in BMW v. Gore and applied last term in State Farm v. Campbell, are difficult to use and have resulted in inconsistent decisions. Indeed, Justice Scalia stated that they "mark a road to nowhere." The authors argue that the problems with the guideposts can be fixed by refining the third guidepost, which compares the punitive damages award to the criminal (or civil) …

The Mischief Of Cohen V. Cowles Media Co., Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

For a short, sloppily reasoned 5-4 decision that textbook editors have largely consigned to note status, Cohen v. Cowles Media Co. has had a remarkably insidious influence on First Amendment law. The problem is not so much the decision’s holding. The Supreme Court’s conclusion that newspapers could be liable for breaching a promise of anonymity to a source might actually further speech interests. The problem instead is in Cohen’s reasoning. It is the way in which the Supreme Court so cavalierly dismissed the argument that the First Amendment precluded punishing media defendants for the publication of truthful information. The Court …

Discipline Through Delegation: Solving The Problem Of Congressional Housecleaning, Laura K. Ray

Laura K. Ray

No abstract provided.

From Prerogative To Accountability: The Amenability Of The President To Suit, Laura K. Ray

Laura K. Ray

No abstract provided.