Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Evolving Standards Of Decency: The Intersection Of Death Penalty Theory And Supreme Court Jurisprudence, Rachel S. Sullivan
Evolving Standards Of Decency: The Intersection Of Death Penalty Theory And Supreme Court Jurisprudence, Rachel S. Sullivan
Senior Independent Study Theses
The American death penalty must be abolished in order to establish a more just system of punishment. This thesis examines the arguments of eight political theorists and their connections with five essential Supreme Court cases on capital punishment in order to determine the Court's theoretical view of the American death penalty. This theoretical view is that justices who affirm the constitutionality of capital punishment use philosophical theories, while justices who critique capital punishment rely upon context-dependent analyses. If the Court ever rules that capital punishment is unconstitutional in all circumstances, these latter theories will be dispositive.
Microaggressions, Trigger Warnings, And The Fight To Redefine Free Speech: An Analysis Of The Judiciary's Response To Campus Speech Codes Through Liberal And Communitarian Perspectives, Madeleine G. O'Neill
Microaggressions, Trigger Warnings, And The Fight To Redefine Free Speech: An Analysis Of The Judiciary's Response To Campus Speech Codes Through Liberal And Communitarian Perspectives, Madeleine G. O'Neill
Senior Independent Study Theses
As campus speech codes enjoy a renaissance surrounding microaggressions and trigger warnings, understanding how and whether such speech codes can stand up to constitutional scrutiny is crucial. This project offers a historical overview of the evolution of free speech in U.S. history, with a particular focus on the jurisprudential history of hate speech and the “first wave” of litigation surrounding campus speech codes in the 1980s and ’90s. I use two theoretical frameworks, liberalism and communitarianism, to analyze the judiciary’s response to speech codes and to understand whether that response aligns with either framework. Lastly, I offer three proposals for …
Liberty, Security, And Judicial Review In The War On Terror: An Analysis Of Supreme Court Approaches To Deference In A Post-9/11 Context, Jacob Oppler
Senior Independent Study Theses
In times of war, the government acts to suppress threats to national security, often curtailing or restricting American civil liberties. Over the course of American history, the Supreme Court has reviewed this legal conflict between civil liberties and national security policies during war. Scholars generally observe the Court’s judicial review as deferential to the government. The War on Terror presents new and different challenges to American civil liberties. While this legal conflict has emerged again under the conditions of a war against terrorism, the war itself is markedly unlike past wars in American history. This research seeks to explain how …