Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Article III (2)
- Criminal Justice (2)
- Supreme Court (2)
- Abortion (1)
- Acquitted-Conduct Sentencing (1)
-
- Administrative proceedings (1)
- Allegheny County v. ACLU (1)
- As-Of-Right Review (1)
- Bremerton (1)
- Brown (1)
- Carpenter v. United States (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Discretion (1)
- Dobbs (1)
- Equity (1)
- Establishment Clause (1)
- Ethics (1)
- Federal Courts (1)
- Federal Judiciary (1)
- Fifth Circuit (1)
- Financial crisis (1)
- Financial markets (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- History and tradition test (1)
- In-house administrative proceedings (1)
- Interpretation (1)
- Investors (1)
- James Wilson (1)
- Jarkesy v. SEC (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Quit Using Acquittals: The Unconstitutionality And Immorality Of Acquitted-Conduct Sentencing, Brenna Nouray
Quit Using Acquittals: The Unconstitutionality And Immorality Of Acquitted-Conduct Sentencing, Brenna Nouray
Pepperdine Law Review
This Comment examines the phenomenon of acquitted-conduct sentencing—a practice that allows a sentencing judge to enhance a criminal defendant’s sentence due to conduct for which he has already been acquitted. Seventeen-year-old Dayonta McClinton is one of many criminal defendants who have unjustly suffered at the hands of this practice when he received a thirteen-year enhancement because of conduct for which he already received a verdict of not guilty from a jury. This Comment argues that acquitted-conduct sentencing is unconstitutional, as it violates both the reasonable doubt standard required under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the jury …
The Post-Dobbs Reality: Privacy Expectations For Period-Tracking Apps In Criminal Abortion Prosecutions, Sophie L. Nelson
The Post-Dobbs Reality: Privacy Expectations For Period-Tracking Apps In Criminal Abortion Prosecutions, Sophie L. Nelson
Pepperdine Law Review
The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in June 2022 was met with waves of both support and criticism throughout the United States. Several states immediately implemented or began drafting trigger laws that criminalize seeking and providing an abortion. These laws prompted several period-tracking app companies to encrypt their users’ data to make it more difficult for the government to access period- and pregnancy-related information for criminal investigations. This Comment explores whether the Fourth Amendment and U.S. privacy statutes protect users of period-tracking apps from government surveillance. More specifically, this Comment argues that …
The Nonexistent Speedy Trial Right, Colleen Cullen
The Nonexistent Speedy Trial Right, Colleen Cullen
Pepperdine Law Review
The United States Constitution and all fifty states guarantee a speedy trial right for individuals accused of crimes. The controlling United States Supreme Court case, decided over fifty years ago, described the Sixth Amendment as a fundamental right with Fourteenth Amendment Due Process implications. Although the right to a speedy trial is a universally recognized right, this Article compellingly demonstrates the right is actually nonexistent throughout the United States. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted and exacerbated this previously unrecognized problem in courthouses across the country, which has led to news outlets finally covering the issue of the nonexistent speedy trial. This …
The Supreme Court, Article Iii, And Jurisdiction Stuffing, James E. Pfander
The Supreme Court, Article Iii, And Jurisdiction Stuffing, James E. Pfander
Pepperdine Law Review
Reflecting on the state of the federal judiciary in the aftermath of the Biden Commission report and subsequent controversies, this Article identifies problems with the current operation of both the Supreme Court and the lower courts that make up the Article III judicial pyramid. Many federal issues have been assigned to non-Article III tribunals, courts poorly structured to offer the independent legal assessment that such Founders as James Wilson prized as they structured the federal judiciary. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court devotes growing attention to a slice of highly salient public law questions, including those presented on the shadow docket, thereby …
Jarkesy V. Sec: Are Federal Courts Pushing The U.S. Toward The Next Financial Crisis?, Jennifer Hill
Jarkesy V. Sec: Are Federal Courts Pushing The U.S. Toward The Next Financial Crisis?, Jennifer Hill
Pepperdine Law Review
In the wake of both the Great Depression and the Financial Crisis of 2008, Congress established and expanded the powers of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). As part of this expansion, the SEC in-house administrative proceedings, designed to adjudicate SEC violations before the SEC’s administrative law judges (ALJs), were born. These in-house proceedings have faced multiple constitutional attacks in the past decade. In the most recent iteration of such challenges, Jarkesy v. SEC, the Fifth Circuit held that the SEC’s in-house proceedings were unconstitutional on three grounds: (1) the in-house proceedings deprived petitioners of their constitutional right to jury …
Who Let The Ghouls Out? The History And Tradition Test’S Embrace Of Neutrality And Pluralism In Establishment Cases, Jake S. Neill
Who Let The Ghouls Out? The History And Tradition Test’S Embrace Of Neutrality And Pluralism In Establishment Cases, Jake S. Neill
Pepperdine Law Review
In June of 2022, the Supreme Court decided in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District that an Establishment Clause inquiry “focused on original meaning and history” would replace Lemon’s endorsement test. But after announcing the test, the Court neglected to describe or apply it. This Comment attempts to fill that void. After analyzing the Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence, this Comment proposes tenets of the history and tradition test and applies those tenets to Allegheny County v. ACLU, a case decided under Lemon. Finally, this Comment concludes by arguing that the history and tradition inquiry supports pluralism, humility, tolerance, and a healthy …
Judicial Fidelity, Caprice L. Roberts
Judicial Fidelity, Caprice L. Roberts
Pepperdine Law Review
Judicial critics abound. Some say the rule of law is dead across all three branches of government. Four are dead if you count the media as the fourth estate. All are in trouble, even if one approves of each branch’s headlines, but none of them are dead. Not yet. Pundits and scholars see the latest term of the Supreme Court as clear evidence of partisan politics and unbridled power. They decry an upheaval of laws and norms demonstrating the dire situation across the federal judiciary. Democracy is not dead even when the Court issues opinions that overturn precedent, upends long-standing …