Digital Commons Network^™

Symposium: 50 Years With The 25th Amendment: Interpreting The Twenty-Fifth Amendment: Major Controversies, Harold Hongju Koh

ConLawNOW

In recent months, probably no constitutional provision has been more discussed, but less well understood, than Section Four of the Twenty-fifth Amendment. In its fifty-year history, the provision has never been triggered. But were that to happen, that constitutional provision could lead to the permanent separation of an American President from his powers and duties within less than one month. The Amendment's text raises numerous interpretive questions. This lecture functions as a reader's guide to Yale Law School Rule of Law Clinic's Reader's Guide to the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which seeks to answer those questions. The …

Symposium: Erie At Eighty: Choice Of Law Across The Disciplines: Erie, Remedies, And Trade Secrets, Camilla A. Hrdy

ConLawNOW

At “Erie at Eighty: Choice of Law Across the Disciplines,” I learned a lot from my colleagues on the intellectual property law panel. I also learned a lot from remedies expert Professor Michael Morley. Professor Morley argued quite vociferously that federal courts have wrongly been applying federal rules in deciding whether to grant injunctions for state law claims in diversity cases. In other words, federal courts regularly violate the Erie doctrine.

This has some fascinating implications for trade secret law. Prior to federalization, when plaintiffs could only bring state civil trade secret claims, federal courts in diversity cases naturally …

Symposium: Erie At Eighty: Choice Of Law Across The Disciplines: Erie Doctrine, State Law, And Civil Rights Litigation, Alexander A. Reinert

ConLawNOW

How should state law questions and claims be resolved when they arise in federal civil rights litigation? In prior work, I have criticized the given wisdom that the Erie doctrine, while originating in diversity cases, applies in all cases whatever the basis for federal jurisdiction. In that work, I proposed a framework, “Erie Step Zero,” to place Erie questions in their jurisdictional context. As I have argued, the concern with forum shopping and unequal treatment that prompted Erie have less salience in federal question cases. Different concerns emerge when one focuses on the presence of state law issues in …

Symposium: Erie At Eighty: Choice Of Law Across The Disciplines: An Erie Approach To Privilege Doctrine, Megan M. La Belle

ConLawNOW

Privilege rules, which determine whether information is discoverable in a particular litigation, often vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Consequently, the Erie doctrine and other choice-of-law principles play an important role in shaping privilege law. This essay, written for the Sixth Annual Constitutional Law Conference at the University of Akron School of Law, considers two recent privilege cases—HannStar Display Corp. v. Sony Electronics, Inc. and In re Silver—which involved the California mediation privilege and the federal patent-agent privilege, respectively. While the HannStar court ignored well-established choice-of-law principles, the Silver decision shows that, when applied and interpreted appropriately, doctrines …

Symposium: Erie At Eighty: Choice Of Law Across The Disciplines: Erie'S Intellectual History, Craig Green

ConLawNOW

Erie R.R. v. Tompkins is an iconic case in American law, and it has held that status for a very long time. One byproduct of such longevity is that the decision’s meaning and context have changed dramatically through the ages. Indeed, the sheer variability of Erie’s interpretations helps to explain why the decision has remained such an important, controversial, and influential feature of American legal thought for eighty years. This essay offers a brief and schematic account of Erie’s intellectual history, while also offering cautionary signals about Erie’s most recent group of interpreters. Even for observers who might endorse Erie’s …

The End Of Miller's Time: How Sensitivity Can Categorize Third-Party Data After Carpenter, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

For over 40 years, the Supreme Court has permitted government investigators to warrantlessly collect information that citizens disclose to third-party service providers. That third-party doctrine is under significant strain in the modern, networked world. Yet scholarly responses typically fall into unhelpfully extreme camps, either championing an absolute version of the doctrine or calling for its abolition. In Carpenter v. United States, the Court suggested a middle road, holding that some categories of data—such as digital location information collected from cell phones—do not neatly fall into the third-party doctrine’s dichotomy between unprotected, disclosed information and protected, undisclosed information. But the majority …

Leveling Down Gender Equality, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

The U.S. Supreme Court recently revived its jurisprudence of “leveling down,” that is, curing an equal protection violation of gender discrimination by denying the requested benefit to all rather than extending the benefit to the excluded class. This article challenges the continuation of the conventional acceptance of leveling down as an equally legitimate remedial option for gender discrimination. Instead, it argues for the adoption of an alternative remedial calculus of a strong presumption of leveling up remedies, overcome only by limited equitable considerations. Such a presumption better effectuates the substantive right of gender equality, as well as the correlative due …