Digital Commons Network^™

The Illusory Eighth Amendment, John F. Stinneford

UF Law Faculty Publications

Although there is no obvious doctrinal connection between the Supreme Court’s Miranda jurisprudence and its Eighth Amendment excessive punishments jurisprudence, the two are deeply connected at the level of methodology. In both areas, the Supreme Court has been criticized for creating “prophylactic” rules that invalidate government actions because they create a mere risk of constitutional violation. In reality, however, both sets of rules deny constitutional protection to a far greater number of individuals with plausible claims of unconstitutional treatment than they protect.

This dysfunctional combination of over- and underprotection arises from the Supreme Court’s use of implementation rules as a …

State Action Problems, Christian Turner

Florida Law Review

The state action doctrine is a mess. Explanations for why federal courts sometimes treat the private actions of private parties as public actions subject to the Constitution, as the Supreme Court did in Shelley v. Kraemer, are either vastly over-inclusive or fail to explain our law and values. A better approach is to understand the state action doctrine in institutional terms. I introduce a two-step, institutionally focused state action theory that is a natural consequence of a broader public–private theory of legal systems. In the first step, a court identifies a “state action problem,” meaning a privately made law that …

The First Amendment, Equal Protection And Felon Disenfranchisement: A New Viewpoint, Janai S. Nelson

Florida Law Review

This Article engages the equality principles of the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause to reconsider the constitutionality of one of the last and most entrenched barriers to universal suffrage—felon disenfranchisement. A deeply racialized problem, felon disenfranchisement is additionally and independently a legislative judgment as to which citizen‘s ideas are worthy of inclusion in the electorate. Relying on a series of cases involving state interests in protecting the ballot and promoting its intelligent use, this Article demonstrates that felon disenfranchisement is open to attack under the Supreme Court‘s fundamental rights jurisprudence when it is motivated by a desire to …

Constitutional Authority Statements In Congress, Hanah Metchis Volokh

Florida Law Review

“Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant to the following: This bill is enacted pursuant to the power granted to Congress under Article I, Section 8, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution.” “Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant to the following: The Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Act is constitutionally authorized under Article I, Section 8, Clause 18, the Necessary and Proper Clause. The Necessary and Proper Clause supports the expansion of congressional authority beyond the explicit authorities that are directly discernible from the text. Additionally, the Preamble to the Constitution provides support of …

Youth Matters: Miller V. Alabama And The Future Of Juvenile Sentencing, John F. Stinneford

UF Law Faculty Publications

In the Supreme Court's latest Eighth Amendment decision, Miller v. Alabama, the Court held that statutes authorizing mandatory sentences of life in prison with no possibility of parole are unconstitutional as applied to offenders who were under eighteen when they committed their crimes. This short essay examines several themes presented in Miller, including the constitutional significance of youth and science, the legitimacy of mandatory life sentences and juvenile transfer statutes, and the conflict between “evolving standards of decency” and the Supreme Court’s “independent judgment.”

This essay also introduces important articles by Richard Frase, Carol Steiker and Jordan Steiker, …

Imagining The Open Road, Brooks Holland

Florida Law Review

I first read a draft of Nancy Leong’s Article, The Open Road and the Traffic Stop: Narratives and Counter-Narratives of the American Dream (“Open Road”), while my law school was preparing to host a conference on race and criminal justice. To our great fortune, Professor Leong accepted our invitation to present this thoughtful paper. I now have re-read the Open Road to write this response paper while additionally considering Articles by David Segal, Stanley Fish, and others debating aspects of legal education—in particular, the role of faculty scholarship. My repeated engagements with the Open Road confirm that it contributes beautifully …

The End Of An Era: The Supreme Court (Finally) Butts Out Of Punitive Damages For Good, Jim Gash

Florida Law Review

It is finally over. The Supreme Court’s incursion into punitive damages jurisprudence has unceremoniously ended, but not before the Court, under the guise of substantive due process, erected a complex and constitutionally dubious set of rules in an effort to fix the heretofore-intractable multiple punishments problem. As is often the case, the incrementalist approach taken by the Court allowed this conquest to occur somewhat quietly. Professor Pamela Karlan observes that “most constitutional law scholars have hardly noticed that the most significant innovation in substantive due process during the Rehnquist and Roberts Court years” has been the Court’s punitive damages jurisprudence. …

Two Faces Of Judicial Restraint (Or Are There More?) In Mcdonald V. City Of Chicago, Nelson Lund

Florida Law Review

Since the days of the Warren Court, conservatives have attacked “judicial activism.” Beginning with Judge Robert Bork’s Supreme Court nomination hearings, and lately with increasing frequency, liberals have sought to turn the tables. Critics now charge that conservative judges are activists, especially when they undermine liberal precedents or strike down liberal legislation. Defenders of judicial activism have all but disappeared. One sign of this apparent consensus is that all Supreme Court nominees now promise to be paragons of judicial restraint. Any of the following quotes, for example, could easily have been uttered by any of the four most recent nominees: …

Student Speech And The First Amendment: A Comprehensive Approach, Lee Goldman

Florida Law Review

Can a school discipline a student for creating a vulgar parody profile of the school principal or another student on the website MySpace? Can it preclude a student from wearing at school a T-shirt that reads, “Homosexuality is shameful”? These are some of the difficult issues raised when students’ First Amendment rights clash with schools’ operational needs and custodial responsibilities. The Supreme Court has addressed students’ First Amendment speech rights on several occasions, most recently in Morse v. Frederick. Lower courts, however, have had great difficulty applying these precedents, particularly when the speech involves the Internet or other new media. …

Civil Rights, Charter Schools, And Lessons To Be Learned, Derek W. Black

Florida Law Review

Two major structural shifts have occurred in education reform in the past two decades: the decline of civil rights reforms and the rise of charter schools. Courts and policy makers have relegated traditional civil rights reforms that address segregation, poverty, disability, and language barriers to near irrelevance, while charter schools and policies supporting their creation and expansion have rapidly increased and now dominate federal policy. Advocates of traditional civil rights reforms interpret the success of charter schools as a threat to their cause, and, consequently, have fought the expansion of charter schools. This Article argues that the civil rights community …

Seeing Red: The Legal Backlash Against Red-Light Cameras In Florida, Nicole Kuncl

Florida Law Review

This Note will examine Florida’s Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Act, which authorizes the use of traffic infraction detectors (red-light cameras) to enforce traffic laws. Florida, like many other states, currently finds itself in the midst of a heated debate over the use of red-light cameras to issue traffic citations. Strong arguments can be made both for and against this policy, but there are some who absolutely refuse to accept it, for both constitutional and practical reasons. If opponents hope to end all use of red-light cameras in the state, however, they will need to acknowledge that judicial opinion is overwhelmingly …

Confronting Coventurers: Coconspirator Hearsay, Sir Walter Raleigh, And The Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause, Ben Trachtenberg

Florida Law Review

Using the example of a recent major terrorism prosecution, this Article addresses “coventurer hearsay” in the context of the ongoing Confrontation Clause debate concerning the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Crawford v. Washington. Courts have recently begun admitting hearsay evidence pursuant to a revisionist interpretation of the coconspirator statement exception to the hearsay rule. Under the new “lawful joint venture” theory, a hearsay statement may be admitted as a coconspirator statement if made in furtherance of a “joint undertaking”—defined as pretty much any cooperative activity—even if the “conspiracy” is not illegal. Because this new interpretation of an old hearsay …

No History, No Certainty, No Legitimacy . . . No Problem: Originalism And The Limits Of Legal Theory, Gary Lawson

Florida Law Review

Professor Martin H. Redish is on the warpath. Like General Sherman marching toward Atlanta (or Justin Tuck marching toward Tom Brady), Professor Redish, together with Matthew Arnould, lays waste to every constitutional theory that he encounters. Originalism, with its “belief that constitutional interpretation should be characterized exclusively by an effort to determine the Constitution’s meaning by means of some form of historical inquiry,” generates “an often contrived and opaque veil of historical inquiry” that provides “an ideal smokescreen behind which judges may pursue their personal[,] moral, political[,] or economic goals with relative impunity.” Nontextual theories, for their part, “permit[] selective …

Judicial Review, Constitutional Interpretation, And The Democratic Dilemma: Proposing A “Controlled Activism” Alternative, Martin H. Redish, Matthew B. Arnould

Florida Law Review

No problem generates more debate among constitutional scholars than how to approach constitutional interpretation. This Article critiques two representative theories (or families of theories), originalism and nontextualism, and offers a principled alternative, which we call “controlled activism.” By candidly acknowledging the judge’s creative role in constitutional lawmaking, controlled activism promises real limits on judicial discretion.

The Elusive Quest For Value Neutral Judging: A Response To Redish And Arnould, Erwin Chemerinsky

Florida Law Review

In October 2012, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin and again faced the question of whether colleges and universities can consider race as a factor in admissions decisions to benefit minorities and enhance diversity. As was true when the Court last considered this issue in Grutter v. Bollinger in 2003, the central question for the Justices was whether colleges and universities have a compelling interest in having a diverse student body. As I read the paper by Martin Redish and Mathew Arnould, I wondered how they would have the Court …

Random, Suspicionless Searches Of Students' Belongings: A Legal, Empirical, And Normative Analysis, Jason P. Nance

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article provides a legal, empirical, and normative analysis of an intrusive search practice used by schools officials to prevent school crime: random, suspicionless searches of students’ belongings. First, it argues that these searches are not permitted under the Fourth Amendment unless schools have particularized evidence of a weapons or substance problem in their schools. Second, it provides normative considerations against implementing strict security measures in schools, especially when they are applied disproportionately on minority students. Third, drawing on recent restricted data from the U.S. Department of Education’s School Survey on Crime and Safety, it provides empirical findings that raise …

Students, Security, And Race, Jason P. Nance

UF Law Faculty Publications

In the wake of the terrible shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, our nation has turned its attention to school security. For example, several states have passed or are considering passing legislation that will provide new funding to schools for security equipment and law enforcement officers. Strict security measures in schools are certainly not new. In response to prior acts of school violence, many public schools for years have relied on metal detectors, random sweeps, locked gates, surveillance cameras, and law enforcement officers to promote school safety. Before policymakers and school officials invest more money in strict security measures, this Article provides …

Constitutional Law - Due Process Clause - The Due Process Clause Of The Fifth Amendment Requires Fair Notice Of What Violates Federal Indecency Standards, Jon L. Mills

UF Law Faculty Publications

Casenote regarding Fed. Commc’ns Comm’n v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 2307 (2012).