Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional law (11)
- Originalism (5)
- Constitutional interpretation (4)
- SSRN (4)
- Supreme Court (4)
-
- Congress (3)
- Constitution. 1st Amendment (3)
- Constitution. 2nd Amendment (3)
- Constitutional theory (3)
- District of Columbia v. Heller (3)
- Firearms--Law and legislation (3)
- First Amendment (3)
- Deterrence (2)
- Equality before the law--United States (2)
- Executive power (2)
- Firearms (2)
- Gun control (2)
- Judicial review (2)
- Jury (2)
- Legislative power (2)
- National security (2)
- Notre Dame Law Review (2)
- PCAOB (2)
- President (2)
- Race (2)
- Regulation (2)
- Religion (2)
- SEC (2)
- Second Amendment (2)
- Jr. (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 67
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The 'Principal' Reason Why The Pcaob Is Unconstitutional, Gary S. Lawson
The 'Principal' Reason Why The Pcaob Is Unconstitutional, Gary S. Lawson
Faculty Scholarship
The Constitution creates very few federal offices. It creates the House and Senate,1 the Speaker of the House2 and the President pro tempore of the Senate,3 the President,4 the Vice President,5 and the Supreme Court6--and that is it. The Constitution clearly contemplates that there will be other federal “Officers,” who the President must commission7 and who Congress may impeach and remove,8 but the document does not itself create those positions. Instead, it provides general authorization to Congress (in conjunction with the President's presentment power9 and the Vice President's modest voting …
When Students Speak Away From School How Much Does The First Amendment Hear?, Leora Harpaz
When Students Speak Away From School How Much Does The First Amendment Hear?, Leora Harpaz
Faculty Scholarship
Controversies arising over the extent of the First Amendment speech rights of public school students while at school are resolved by an analysis of the familiar quartet of major decisions of the United States Supreme Court: Tinker, Fraser, Kuhlmeier, and Morse. While these decisions have not removed all uncertainty over the scope of student speech rights, they at least have divided these cases into distinct categories and identified the standard to be applied within each category. The wide range of judicial views on the issue of when student off-campus speech can be the basis of discipline by school authorities makes …
New Groups And Old Doctrine: Rethiking Congressional Power To Enforce The Equal Protection Clause, William D. Araiza
New Groups And Old Doctrine: Rethiking Congressional Power To Enforce The Equal Protection Clause, William D. Araiza
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Constitution's Congress, Gary S. Lawson
The Constitution's Congress, Gary S. Lawson
Faculty Scholarship
In order to know whether Congress is (as the title of this panel wonders)1 "the broken branch,"'2 one needs a baseline describing how a normallyfunctioning Congress would look.3 Congress is a creation of the Constitution, and so the Constitution seems to be the obvious place to look for this baseline: what sort of people does the Constitution expect to serve in Congress and how does it expect those people to behave once they arrive?
Toward A More Democratic Congress?, James E. Fleming
Toward A More Democratic Congress?, James E. Fleming
Faculty Scholarship
There is considerable talk of failure in the air these days - including constitutional failure, moral failure, political failure and institutional failure - and criticisms of Congress figure prominently in this discourse. First, I shall ask whether talk about Congress being "the broken branch," the topic of the first panel in this symposium, is talk of constitutional failure or failure of some other sort. Second, to link the topic of that panel to the topic of the panel in which I participated, I will ask whether some call Congress the broken branch because it is not adequately or appropriately democratic. …
Constitutional Rules And Institutional Roles: The Fate Of The Equal Protection Class Of One And What It Means For Congressional Power To Enforce Constitutional Rights, William Araiza
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Symposium: Defining Race: Colorblind Diversity: The Changing Significance Of "Race" In The Post-Bakke Era, Bridgette Baldwin
Symposium: Defining Race: Colorblind Diversity: The Changing Significance Of "Race" In The Post-Bakke Era, Bridgette Baldwin
Faculty Scholarship
In 1954, fifty-eight years after the Plessy v. Ferguson decision, the Supreme Court was afforded another opportunity to reverse the “separate but equal doctrine” in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (Brown I). Brown I was a consolidation of five civil rights cases from the District of Columbia, Delaware, Kansas, Virginia, and South Carolina that attempted to change race relations in America by affording African Americans a piece of the pie. A few other cases soon followed Brown I. In 1963, Goss v. Board of Education of Knoxville proclaimed that any program that structurally appeared to maintain segregation would …
Condemning Religion: Rluipa And The Politics Of Eminent Domain, Nelson Tebbe, Christopher Serkin
Condemning Religion: Rluipa And The Politics Of Eminent Domain, Nelson Tebbe, Christopher Serkin
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Dr. King And The Battle For Hearts And Minds, Wendy B. Scott
Dr. King And The Battle For Hearts And Minds, Wendy B. Scott
Faculty Scholarship
In 1954, a unanimous Supreme Court held that laws requiring dual public school systems, separated solely on the basis of race, violated the rights afforded to African American children under the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection and Due Process clauses. Brown v. Board of Education marked the beginning of a judicial assault on what the Court in Loving v. Virginia called statutory schemes and state court decisions that served as “an endorsement of the doctrine of White Supremacy.” Both Chief Justice Earl Warren and Dr. King recognized that the practice of White Supremacy did more than keep people separated. In Brown, …
Rebuilding The Slaughter-House: The Cases' Support For Civil Rights, David S. Bogen
Rebuilding The Slaughter-House: The Cases' Support For Civil Rights, David S. Bogen
Faculty Scholarship
The Slaughter-House Cases have a bad reputation for good reason. Justice Miller’s narrow reading of the Privileges or Immunities Clause was used to prevent the federal government from adequately protecting African-Americans after the Civil War. Further, his opinion for the Court significantly delayed the application of the Bill of Rights to the states. But no one knows whether the world would be better with a different decision, because counter-factuals are never certain. The case did not involve either racial discrimination or incorporation, and total condemnation of the opinion for weakening civil rights misses its context and misreads its design. This …
Running Cars, Constitutions And Metaphors Into The Ground, Mark A. Graber
Running Cars, Constitutions And Metaphors Into The Ground, Mark A. Graber
Faculty Scholarship
Professor Sanford Levinson frequently analogizes the Constitution of the United States to a vehicle that desperately needs repairs. “[R]elying on the present Constitution.” he writes, “is similar to driving a car with very bad brakes and slick tires.” Much commentary on Our Undemocratic Constitution implicitly challenges the automotive metaphor. The Constitution of the United States, supporters profess, is not really as bad as Levinson would have us believe. The following pages take a road less traveled. Ancient constitutional institutions in the United States are suffering from severe wear and tear. Nevertheless, decisions to drive a comparatively unsafe car are often …
The Universal Declaration And South African Constitutional Law: A Response To Justice Arthur Chaskalson, Peter E. Quint
The Universal Declaration And South African Constitutional Law: A Response To Justice Arthur Chaskalson, Peter E. Quint
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Faith And Dynamic Stability: Thoughts On Religion, Constitutions, And Transitions To Democracy, David C. Gray
Constitutional Faith And Dynamic Stability: Thoughts On Religion, Constitutions, And Transitions To Democracy, David C. Gray
Faculty Scholarship
This essay, written for the 2009 Constitutional Schmooze, explores the complex role of religion as a source of both stability and instability. Drawing on a broader body of work in transitional justice, this essay argues that religion has an important role to play in the complex web of overlapping associations and oppositions constitutive of a dynamically stable society and further contends that constitutional protections which encourage a diversity of religions provide the best hope of harnessing that potential while limiting the dangers of religion evidenced in numerous cases of mass atrocity.
Brief For Amicus Curiae David A. Super: Supporting Plaintiff-Appellants Urging Reversal, In Howard V. Hawkins (2009)., David A. Super
Brief For Amicus Curiae David A. Super: Supporting Plaintiff-Appellants Urging Reversal, In Howard V. Hawkins (2009)., David A. Super
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court has consistently held that congressional intent governs whether federal statutes are privately enforceable. Where Congress has been silent, a line of cases culminating in Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 (2002), prescribes a formula for inferring congressional intent from the structure of a statute. Here, however, Congress has not been silent: the Food and Nutrition Act specifies the amount of retroactive benefits that may be awarded households in “any judicial action arising under this Act” and makes certain records of state agencies “available for review in any action filed by a household to enforce any provision …
60 Years Of The Basic Law And Its Interpretation: An American Perspective, Peter E. Quint
60 Years Of The Basic Law And Its Interpretation: An American Perspective, Peter E. Quint
Faculty Scholarship
In commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the adoption of the German Basic Law (Constitution) , the author discusses certain aspects of the Basic Law, in comparison with the Constitution of the United States, and examines important developments in the jurisprudence if the German Constitutional Court interpreting the Basic Law.
Foreword: Our Paradoxical Religion Clauses, Mark A. Graber
Foreword: Our Paradoxical Religion Clauses, Mark A. Graber
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Judicial Diversity, Sherrilyn A. Ifill
Constitutional Necessity And Presidential Prerogative: Does Presidential Discretion Undergird Or Undermine The Constitution?, Michael P. Van Alstine
Constitutional Necessity And Presidential Prerogative: Does Presidential Discretion Undergird Or Undermine The Constitution?, Michael P. Van Alstine
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Heller’S Problematic Second Amendment Categoricalism, Joseph Blocher
Heller’S Problematic Second Amendment Categoricalism, Joseph Blocher
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Religion In The Workplace: A Report On The Layers Of Relevant Law In The United States, William W. Van Alstyne
Religion In The Workplace: A Report On The Layers Of Relevant Law In The United States, William W. Van Alstyne
Faculty Scholarship
This article reports on the thick layers of law applicable to claims of religious exception to public and private employment workplaces in the United States. It reviews the Supreme Court's First and Fourteenth Amendment salient holdings, distinguishing public sector (government) workplaces, and the extent to which legislative bodies may and may not oblige private employers to "accommodate" religiously-asserted requirements. It also provides exhaustive footnote analyses of all major federal statutes (plus some representative state and local law variations) pertinent to the topic. Its principal conclusions are these: In the currently prevailing view of the U.S. Supreme Court, neither public nor …
Judicial Nullification Of Juries: Use Of Acquitted Conduct At Sentencing, Eang L. Ngov
Judicial Nullification Of Juries: Use Of Acquitted Conduct At Sentencing, Eang L. Ngov
Faculty Scholarship
At trial, defendants are afforded a panoply of rights right to counsel, to proof beyond a reasonable doubt, to confront witnesses, and to exclude inadmissible evidence. However, these rights, except for the right to counsel, disappear at sentencing. In deciding a defendant’s sentence, a court may consider conduct that has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt and even conduct of which the jury has acquitted the defendant. Consideration of acquitted conduct has resulted in dramatic increases in the length of defendants’ sentences sometimes resulting in life imprisonment based merely on a judge’s finding that a defendant more likely than …
Can We Talk? How Triggers For Unconscious Racism Strengthen The Importance Of Dialogue, Adjoa A. Aiyetoro
Can We Talk? How Triggers For Unconscious Racism Strengthen The Importance Of Dialogue, Adjoa A. Aiyetoro
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Developing A State Constitutional Law Strategy In New Mexico Criminal Prosecutions, J. Thomas Sullivan
Developing A State Constitutional Law Strategy In New Mexico Criminal Prosecutions, J. Thomas Sullivan
Faculty Scholarship
This article includes a review of the process by which the New Mexico courts have developed an independent state constitutional jurisprudence reflecting more expansive protections of individual rights than those afforded by the Federal Constitution, as interpreted in the decisions of the United States Supreme Court. It addresses the existing body of state constitutional law and suggests possibilities for further developments, including both the substantive aspects of state constitutional topics and the procedural requirements for asserting state constitutional protections as alternative sources for protection of individual rights. It documents how far New Mexico has come in developing a state constitutional …
Pregnancy And Sex-Role Stereotyping: From ‘Struck’ To ‘Carhart’, Neil S. Siegel, Reva B. Siegel
Pregnancy And Sex-Role Stereotyping: From ‘Struck’ To ‘Carhart’, Neil S. Siegel, Reva B. Siegel
Faculty Scholarship
The guarantee of equal protection of the laws extends to women as well as men. Yet for the first 100 years of the Fourteenth Amendment’s life, the Supreme Court never found a law unconstitutional on the grounds that it discriminated on the basis of sex. Between 1970 and 1980, social movement advocacy and brilliant litigation by Ruth Bader Ginsburg and others changed our constitutional law. Over the course of the decade, the Court extended the anti-stereotyping principle from discrimination on the basis of race to discrimination on the basis of sex. But fidelity to the principle had its limits. In …
Presidential Popular Constitutionalism, Jedediah Purdy
Presidential Popular Constitutionalism, Jedediah Purdy
Faculty Scholarship
This Article adds a new dimension to the most important and influential strand of recent constitutional theory: popular or democratic constitutionalism, the investigation into how the U.S. Constitution is interpreted (1) as a set of defining national commitments and practices, not necessarily anchored in the text of the document, and (2) by citizens and elected politicians outside the judiciary. Wide-ranging and groundbreaking scholarship in this area has neglected the role of the President as a popular constitutional interpreter, articulating and revising normative accounts of the nation that interact dynamically with citizens’ constitutional understandings. This Article sets out a “grammar” of …
Islam’S Fourth Amendment: Search And Seizure In Islamic Doctrine And Muslim Practice, Sadiq Reza
Islam’S Fourth Amendment: Search And Seizure In Islamic Doctrine And Muslim Practice, Sadiq Reza
Faculty Scholarship
Modern scholars regularly assert that Islamic law contains privacy protections similar to those of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Two Quranic verses in particular - one that commands Muslims not to enter homes without permission, and one that commands them not to 'spy' - are held up, along with reports from the Traditions (Sunna) that repeat and embellish on these commands, as establishing rules that forbid warrantless searches and seizures by state actors and require the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of these rules. This Article tests these assertions by: (1) presenting rules and doctrines Muslim jurists …
The Shrunken Power Of The Purse, Alan L. Feld
The Shrunken Power Of The Purse, Alan L. Feld
Faculty Scholarship
The Constitution places control of the federal government's funds in the hands of Congress. This article examines Congress' exercise of discretion in connection with expenditures, impoundments, debt and taxation. It concludes that its actual control over the government's funds has become limited over time and makes recommendations for more robust exercise of its traditional authority.
Heller High Water? The Future Of Originalism, Jamal Greene
Heller High Water? The Future Of Originalism, Jamal Greene
Faculty Scholarship
Has originalism won? It's easy to think so, judging from some of the reaction to the Supreme Court's recent decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. The Heller Court held that the District of Columbia could neither ban possession of handguns nor require that all other firearms be either unloaded and disassembled or guarded by a trigger lock. In finding for the first time in the Court's history that a gun control law violated the Second Amendment, Justice Scalia's opinion for the 5-4 majority appeared to be a sterling exemplar of originalism, the method of constitutional interpretation that he …
Constitution And The Laws Of War During The Civil War, The Federal Courts, Practice & Procedure, Andrew Kent
Constitution And The Laws Of War During The Civil War, The Federal Courts, Practice & Procedure, Andrew Kent
Faculty Scholarship
This Article uncovers the forgotten complex of relationships between the U.S. Constitution, citizenship and the laws of war. The Supreme Court today believes that both noncitizens and citizens who are military enemies in a congressionally-authorized war are entitled to judicially-enforceable rights under the Constitution. The older view was that the U.S. government’s military actions against noncitizen enemies were not limited by the Constitution, but only by the international laws of war. On the other hand, in the antebellum period, the prevailing view was U.S. citizenship should carry with it protection from ever being treated as a military enemy under the …
Heller And Constitutional Interpretation: Originalism's Last Gasp, Rory K. Little
Heller And Constitutional Interpretation: Originalism's Last Gasp, Rory K. Little
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.