Digital Commons Network^™

Allen V. Milligan: Anticlassification And The Voting Rights Act, Graham Stinnett

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The "crown jewel" of the Civil Rights Movement, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 has been called "one of the most effective statutes ever enacted." However, in 2013 the Supreme Court famously gutted the Voting Rights Act in Shelby County v. Holder. Nearly a decade later, in Allen v. Milligan, the Court is now signaling that Section 2, the last remaining core provision of the Voting Rights Act, could be on the chopping block. With Milligan, the Court may be preparing to inject race-neutrality into Section 2, which could destroy the vestiges of the onetime "super-statute."

This …

Name And Shame: How International Pressure Allows Civil Rights Activists To Incorporate Human Rights Norms Into American Jurisprudence, Lily Talerman

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The United States has ratified international human rights treaties sparingly. Where it has ratified, it has provided such a large number of reservations that the treaties’ domestic effects are effectively nullified. Even though international human rights law has not been directly incorporated into American jurisprudence, however, international human rights norms have greatly affected civil rights provisions in the United States by naming and shaming American civil rights abuses. Recognizing the relatively low success rate of tackling systemic racism in the United States through treaty implementation, this Note instead argues that naming and shaming American civil and human rights abuses more …

Ohio V. Clark: Testimonial Statements Under The Confrontation Clause, Mesha Sloss

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court declared that an accused right under the Constitution to confront the witnesses against him applied only to “testimonial statements.” That decision, however, did not attempt to fully define the scope of testimonial statements. This commentary analyzes Ohio v. Clark, a case which will decide the question of whether statements made by a child to a person with a duty to report allegations of child abuse are testimonial statements. In this case a young child was questioned at school by a teaching assistant about his injuries. This statement was then offered in …

Keeping Civil Rights Debates Civil: Removing Opportunities For Prejudice, Steven Saracco

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion in employment decisions made by private employers. This commentary analyzes Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch, a case before the Supreme Court on the issue of whether a job applicant bears the burden of expressly notifying an employer of a conflict between the applicant’s religious beliefs and the employer’s policies before the employer must offer a reasonable accommodation. This case deals with a Muslim woman who was denied employment at a clothing store because her headdress was deemed to be a …

Up In The Air: Department Of Homeland Security V. Maclean And The Whistleblower Protection Act, Mike Brett

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary analyzes the Supreme Court case Department of Homeland Security v. MacLean deciding whether an employee of the Department of Homeland Security comes under the protection of the Whistleblower Protection Act when they release potentially sensitive information to the media. Generally, the Act protects whistleblowers unless the information they release is not allowed "as specified by law." The particular statutory question in this case is whether the "law" prohibiting release must be contained in a statute, or can include the Department of Homeland Security's own promulgated regulation. The Author profiles the background of the case, applicable legal precedent, and …

A Bridge Too Far: The Limits Of The Political Process Doctrine In Schuette V. Coalition To Defend Affirmative Action, Christopher E. D'Alessio

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, in which the Court will consider whether Michigan violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by amending its constitution to prohibit race-based preferential treatment in public-university admissions decisions.

Kaley V. United States: The Right To Counsel Of Choice Caught In The Wide Net Of Asset Forfeiture, Adam J. Fine

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Kaley v. United States, in which the Court may decide whether a defendant who needs potentially forfeitable assets to retain counsel of choice is entitled, under the Due Process Clause, to a hearing to challenge the grand jury's finding of probable cause.

At Home In The Outer Limits: Daimlerchrysler V. Bauman And The Bounds Of General Personal Jurisdiction, Todd W. Noelle

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, DaimlerChrysler v. Bauman, in which the Court may decide whether maintaining a wholly-owned subsidiary in a forum state can render a foreign parent corporation "essentially at home" in that state, thereby permitting the forum state to exercise general personal jurisdiction over the parent corporation.

The Voting Rights Act's Fight To Stay Rational: Shelby County V. Holder, Sudeep Paul

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Shelby County v. Holder, in which the Court may decide whether Congress's 2006 reauthorization of Section 5 and Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act was constitutional.

Maryland V. King: The Fourth Amendment Spirals Down The Double Helix, Sitara V. Witanachchi

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Maryland v. King, in which the Court may decide whether requiring an arrestee to submit to a buccal swab for identification purposes violates the arrestee's privacy interests under the Fourth Amendment.

Hollingsworth V. Perry: Expressive Harm And The Stakes Of "Marriage", Corinne Blalock

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Hollingsworth v. Perry, in which the Court may decide whether Proposition 8 violates either the Equal Protection Clause or the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Mcburney V. Young: Testing The Limits Of Citizens-Only Freedom Of Information Laws, Patrick Jamieson

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, McBurney v. Young, in which the Court will decide whether the citizens-only provision of Virginia's Freedom of Information Act violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause or the dormant Commmerce Clause.

The Prying Nose: Florida V. Jardines And Warrantless Dog-Sniff Tests On Private Property, Ali Mirsaidi

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Florida v. Jardines, in which the Court will decide whether a dog-sniff test at the front door of a home constitutes a Fourth Amendment search. The case asks the Court to resolve its prior decisions holding that dog-sniff tests are minimally intrusive when conducted in public with its decisions affording higher protections for searches of private residences.

Clapper V. Amnesty International: Who Has Standing To Challenge Government Surveillance?, Elisa Sielski

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Clapper v. Amnesty International, in which the Court will examine whether plaintiffs have standing to challenge possible government surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. In so doing, the Court will have to revisit the standards for standing in surveillance cases in light of Laird v. Tatum and a circuit split stemming from that case.

Evans V. Michigan: The Impact Of Judicial Error On Double Jeopardy Protection, Zi-Xiang Shen

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Evans v. Michigan, in which the Court has an opportunity to clarify the bounds of the prohibition on double jeopardy. More specifically, the Court will determine what, if any, impact judicial error has on double jeopardy protection under the Fifth Amendment.

Take The Money And Run: Detainment Incident To A Search Warrant In Bailey V. United States, Alexander Hall

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Bailey v. United States, in which the Court will examine the scope of permissible non-arrest seizures in the context of a detainment incident to a search warrant. The case offers the Court an opportunity to clarify its holding in Michigan v. Summers--that occupants of premises being searched pursuant to a valid warrant may be detained during the search--by determining whether such a detainment is permissible when the occupants have left the premises.

Affirmative Action On Life Support: Fisher V. University Of Texas At Austin And The End Of Not-So-Strict Scrutiny, Jonathan W. Rash

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Minneci V. Pollard And The Uphill Climb To Bivens Relief, Elliot J. Weingarten

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Briscoe V. Virginia: Reexamining The Scope Of Melendez-Diaz, Caroline Mix

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Padilla V. Kentucky: Immigration Consequences Due To The Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel, Evangeline Pittman

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Ricci V. Destefano: “Fanning The Flames” Of Reverse Discrimination In Civil Service Selection, Lauren Klein

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Safford Unified School District No. 1 V. Redding: Balancing Students’ Rights Against The Governments Interest In Protecting The Educational Process, Chris Suedekum

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Ashcroft V. Iqbal: The Question Of A Heightened Standard Of Pleading In Qualified Immunity Cases, Michelle Spiegel

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Gross V. Fbl Financial Services, Inc.: Determining The Evidentiary Requirements For Bringing A Non-Title Vii Mixed-Motive Case, Matthew Brod

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Snyder V. Louisiana: Demand For Judicial Scrutiny Of The Use Of Peremptory Challenges, Jennifer Ross

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Boumediene V. Bush: Another Chapter In The Court’S Jurisprudence On Civil Liberties At Guantanamo Bay, Amanda Mcrae

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Harbison V. Bell, Sarah Rutledge

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

The Problems Of Self-Execution: Medellin V. Texas, Taryn Marks

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Louisiana V. Kennedy, Caroline Stevenson

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Melendez-Diaz V. Massachusetts: Laboratory Testing And The Confrontation Clause, David Mansfield

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.