Digital Commons Network^™

Revitalizing The Ban On Conversion Therapy: An Affirmation Of The Constitutionality Of Conversion Therapy Bans, Logan Kline

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Equal, But Only Conceptually: Explaining The Phenomenon Of Religious Losses In Contemporary Canadian Constitutional Cases Involving Conflicting Rights, Mike Madden

Dalhousie Law Journal

If there is no hierarchy of rights in Canada, then why does freedom of religion so often seem to lose in cases of conflicts with other rights? This article discusses five recent Canadian cases (involving same-sex marriages, controversial medical practices, the wearing of a niqab, and a Christian university’s sexual conduct policy) in order to expose how the courts regularly characterize freedom of religion as being conceptually equal to other rights, before ruling against freedom of religion on the facts of the particular cases. This phenomenon within Canadian rights jurisprudence is then justified within the article by reference to a …

Appendix: Board Gender Diversity: A Path To Achieving Substantive Equality In The United States, Kimberly A. Houser, Jamillah Bowman Williams

William & Mary Law Review Online

Appendix to article in William & Mary Law Review vol. 63, no. 2 (2021), "Board Gender Diversity: A Path to Achieving Substantive Equality in the United States" by Kimberly A. Houser and Jamillah Bowen Williams.

Board Gender Diversity: A Path To Achieving Substantive Equality In The United States, Kimberly A. Houser, Jamillah Bowen Williams

William & Mary Law Review

While the European Union (EU) was founded on the concept of equality as a fundamental value in 1993, the United States was created at a time when women were considered legally inferior to men. This has had the lasting effect of preventing women in the United States from making inroads into positions of power. While legislated board gender diversity (BGD) mandates have been instituted in some EU countries, the United States has been loath to take that route, relying instead on the goodwill of corporate boards, with little progress. On September 30, 2018, however, California enacted a law that has …

Reviving The Poll Tax: Voter Id And Debt Laws, Cynthia Boyer

ConLawNOW

In the United States, disenfranchisement is deeply rooted in history as a form of punishment—a dual penalty. In the late nineteenth century, the poll tax first emerged to restrict voting and limit the expansion of suffrage to Black men. Primarily aimed at minorities, these laws on disenfranchisement became a significant barrier to U.S. ballot boxes. Even though the poll tax was finally outlawed in federal elections in 1964, nowadays it takes another subtle form through the prism of voter identification laws. Thirty-five states currently have voter ID laws, with varying criteria and accepted forms of documentation, thus requesting or requiring …

Book Talk: The Cult Of The Constitution, Mary Anne Franks

ConLawNOW

In this essay based on remarks delivered as the 2020 Constitution Day lecture at the Center for Constitutional Law, Professor Franks previews her book, The Cult of the Constitution. It addresses Franks’ key thesis about fundamentalist approaches to legal texts and Constitution, which read texts in selective and self-interested ways that verify a particular world view and ignore interpretations or passages that complicate it. Her work highlights debates over guns and the Second Amendment and Black Lives Matter protests and the First Amendment as examples of this problematic constitutional fundamentalism. Instead, the book and essay point to the Fourteenth …

With Unanimity And Justice For All: The Case For Retroactive Application Of The Unanimous Jury Verdict Requirement, Kara Kurland

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

Until the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in Ramos v. Louisiana, non-unanimous jury verdicts were constitutional and utilized in two states: Louisiana and Oregon. The Ramos decision not only declared the practice of non-unanimous jury verdicts unconstitutional, but it also emphasized the essential nature of jury verdict unanimity in criminal trials throughout American history and legal jurisprudence. A year later, in Edwards v. Vannoy, the Court considered retroactive application of Ramos. Utilizing the test created in Teague v. Lane that assessed the retroactivity of new rules of criminal procedure, the Court announced that, despite the essential nature of the unanimous jury …

Removing Police From Schools Using State Law Heightened Scrutiny, Christina Payne-Tsoupros

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

This Article argues that school police, often called school resource officers, interfere with the state law right to education and proposes using the constitutional right to education under state law as a mechanism to remove police from schools.

Disparities in school discipline for Black and brown children are well-known. After discussing the legal structures of school policing, this Article uses the Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit) theoretical framework developed by Subini Annamma, David Connor, and Beth Ferri to explain why police are unacceptable in schools. Operating under the premise that school police are unacceptable, this Article then analyzes mechanisms to …

Education, Antidomination, And The Republican Guarantee, Kip M. Hustace

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article offers a new interpretation of the United States Constitution’s republican guarantee and theorizes its protection of a fundamental right to education. Courts and education law scholars have identified the republican guarantee as a plausible source of educational rights but have not detailed how. Drawing on recent work by legal scholars, historians, political scientists, and philosophers, this Article reinterprets the guarantee as the federal government’s obligation to secure freedom as nondomination, and it argues that excellent, equitable public education is necessary to fulfilling this duty. Nondomination, a robust conception of freedom, is freedom from subjection to the will of …

Justice Gorsuch's Choice: From Bostock V. Clayton County To Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Marc Spindelman

ConLawNOW

Informed speculation holds that the Supreme Court’s decision to hear and decide Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization spells bad news for constitutional abortion rights. Recognizing both the stakes and the odds, this brief commentary engages Justice Neil Gorsuch’s majority opinion in Bostock v. Clayton County and the prospects that it opens up in Dobbs for a future for—not against—abortion rights. Bostock’s pro-gay and pro-trans sex discrimination rulings are built atop—and go out of their way to reaffirm—women’s statutorily-grounded economic and social rights, and hence women’s equal citizenship stature. Moreover, the final decision in the case emerges after judicial wrestling …

Identical Constitutional Language: What Is A State Court To Do? The Ohio Case Of State V. Robinette, Marianna Brown Bettman

Akron Law Review

We are in the era of rediscovery of state constitutional law. In Ohio, there has been an official announcement of this in the syllabus of a highly significant case, Arnold v. City of Cleveland. In Ohio, the syllabus is the law of the case. The syllabus of Arnold begins with the simple but dramatic statement, "The Ohio Constitution is a document of independent force." It goes on to state, in the remainder of the paragraph, the basic guidepost of federal/state relations in the area of individual rights: In the areas of individual rights and civil liberties, the United States Constitution, …

Abortion Rights In The Supreme Court: A Tale Of Three Wedges, Jennifer S. Hendricks

ConLawNOW

In May 2021, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in a case designed to overrule Roe v. Wade. The assumption is that six justices are inclined to repudiate Roe, and that some of those six would like to go further, declaring a constitutional right to life that would prevent the abortion issue from going “back to the states” at all. The question for the next year is not whether Roe will be overruled—it already was, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey—but how far the Court will go. This essay describes the arc of the Supreme Court’s abortion jurisprudence in …

Moral Truth And Constitutional Conservatism, Gerard V. Bradley

Louisiana Law Review

Conservative constitutionalism is committed to "originalism," that is, to interpreting the Constitution according to its original public understanding. This defining commitment of constitutional interpretation is sound. For decades, however, constitutional conservatives have diluted it with a methodology of restraint, a normative approach to the judicial task marked by an overriding aversion to critical moral reasoning. In any event, the methodology eclipsed originalism and the partnership with moral truth that originalism actually entails. Conservative constitutionalism is presently a mélange of mostly unsound arguments against the worst depredations of Casey's Mystery Passage. The reason for the methodological moral reticence is easy to …

Symposium: Examining Black Citizenship From Reconstruction To Black Lives Matter: Falling Short Of The Promise Of The Thirteenth Amendment: Time For Change, Michael A. Lawrence

ConLawNOW

This Essay seeks to shine additional light on the potential of the underutilized Thirteenth Amendment (as contrasted to the much-litigated Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause) for advancing racial justice and equity. The Essay suggests the Thirteenth Amendment provides strong constitutional basis for an unapologetic embrace of the sorts of new, race-conscious measures that will be necessary to begin to achieve true racial equity in a country that for centuries has erected massive structural barriers to Black opportunity and advancement

Lengthy Minimum Parole Requirements: A Denial Of Hope, Heather Walker

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

Using the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, the Supreme Court has made sweeping changes to juvenile sentencing in the last fifteen years. The Court has stated that mandatory life sentences without the possibility of parole and life sentences without the possibility of parole for non-homicide offenders are unconstitutional. Nevertheless, there are still unanswered questions in juvenile sentencing. One under-researched aspect of this is the role that lengthy minimum parole requirements play in the constitutionality of juvenile sentencing. This type of sentencing lacks express legislative support, it does not have a legitimate penological justification, and it denies juveniles …

Marriage Equality's Lessons For Social Movements And Constitutional Change, William N. Eskridge Jr.

William & Mary Law Review

The marriage equality movement won its first state victory in 2003, and within a dozen years fifty states were handing out marriage licenses. The swiftness of the constitutional triumph was only possible because public opinion underwent a sea change in that period. Sexual and gender minorities achieved this remarkable turnaround once a critical mass, widely dispersed in the country, came out of their closets as committed couples (often raising children), and mainstream America found their stories more consistent with their own lives than they did a generation earlier. Other lessons of marriage equality’s success, however, are how hard it is …

Reanimating The Foreign Compacts Clause, Thomas Liefke Eaton

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

On October 23, 2019, the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) filed a complaint against the State of California “for unlawfully entering a cap and trade agreement with the Canadian Providence of Quebec.” In many ways, the complaint reflects a conventional disagreement between states and the federal government over the contours of federalism, but the complaint’s second cause of action, alleging a violation of the “Compacts Clause,” Article I, section 10(3) of the United States Constitution, is unique. The body of law and scholarship surrounding the Compacts Clause is often guesswork at best, for jurists and scholars alike, because typically …

Overruling Roe V. Wade: Lessons From The Death Penalty, Paul Benjamin Linton

Pepperdine Law Review

In Furman v. Georgia (1972), the Supreme Court struck down the Georgia and Texas death penalty statutes, thereby calling into question the validity of every other state death penalty statute. In their concurring opinions, Justices Brennan and Marshall expressed the view that, given society’s gradual abandonment of the death penalty, capital punishment violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishments.” Justice Powell and three other justices dissented, arguing that the Court had misread the state of the law regarding society’s acceptance of the death penalty. Four years after Furman, in a quintet of cases, the Court held that …

How Far Are Fundamental, Basic Rights Morally Explicit In Constitutional Laws? (A Judicial, Constitutional Comparative Study), Eid Ah. Alhosban

UAEU Law Journal

The importance of the complimentary role of constitutionaljurisdiction in comparative constitutionalregimes is inherent in Basic, fundamental Rights and Public Freedoms and Liberties legislation. The acknowledgement of these rights morally is ambiguous in contemporary constitutionallaws.

This study deals with how far the aforementioned rights are morally explicit in constitutional laws.

Federalism Limits On Non-Article Iii Adjudication, F. Andrew Hessick

Pepperdine Law Review

Although Article III of the Constitution vests the federal judicial power in the Article III courts, the Supreme Court has created a patchwork of exceptions permitting non-Article III tribunals to adjudicate various disputes. In doing so, the Court has focused on the separation of powers, concluding that these non-Article III adjudications do not unduly infringe on the judicial power of the Article III courts. But separation of powers is not the only consideration relevant to the lawfulness of non-Article III adjudication. Article I adjudications also implicate federalism. Permitting Article I tribunals threatens the role of state courts by expanding federal …

Free Speech, Strict Scrutiny And A Better Way To Handle Speech Restrictions, Aaron Pinsoneault

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

When it comes to unprotected speech categories, the Roberts Court has taken an amoral and inaccurate approach. When the Court first created unprotected speech categories-- defined categories of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment-- it was unclear what rendered a category of speech unprotected. One school of thought argued that speech was unprotected if it provided little or no value to society. The other school of thought argued that speech was unprotected if it fell into a certain category of speech that was simply categorically unprotected. Then, in 2010, the Court strongly sided with the latter approach, …

George R. R. Martin's Faith Militant In Modern America: The Establishment Clause And A State's Ability To Delegate Policing Powers To Private Police Forces Operated By Religious Institutions, Andrew Gardner

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Since the very founding of the United States, the complex relationship between government and religion has troubled and concerned lawmakers. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution was one of the first attempts to help define and restrain the government's role in that nexus. Thomas Jefferson, in a letter praising the Establishment Clause, famously wrote that the clause "buil[t] a wall of separation between Church [and] State." However, the extent of the protections that the Establishment Clause was intended to provide is unclear, and judges as well as legal scholars have struggled with interpreting the …

Second Amendment Background Principles And Heller's Sensitive Places, Adam B. Sopko

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Judges and commentators have widely acknowledge that history enjoys a privileged status in Second Amendment cases, but its precise role is undertheorized and rarely controls case outcomes. In particular, courts have been unable to decide "sensitive places" cases-- challenges to location-based gun laws-- in a manner that adheres to Supreme Court precedent because existing Second Amendment doctrine lacks a test for sensitive places cases that uses history and tradition in a principled way. This Article proposes a solution to address that problem.

An untapped source of guidance is the Court's takings jurisprudence. Interpreting their respective constitutional provisions, Justice Scalia observed …

From Civil Rights To Blackmail: How The Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act Of 1976 (42 U.S.C. § 1988) Has Perverted One Of America's Most Historic Civil Rights Statutes, Steven W. Fitschen

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

For fourteen years, members of Congress repeatedly introduced legislation directed at a single subject. A key underpinning for the necessity of the legislation was provided by the opinions of two Supreme Court justices. Yet, for the past nine years, Congress has gone silent on the same topic. This Article argues that it is past time for Congress to reconsider this topic, and that if it will not do so, the Supreme Court can rectify the situation without engaging in judicial legislation.

Perhaps the best view of Congress's efforts can be seen by examining the high-water mark of those efforts, which …

The Nature Of Standing, Matthew Hall, Christian Turner

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Most academic studies of standing have focused on restrictions on federal court jurisdiction drawn from Article III of U.S. Constitution and related doctrinal schemes developed by state courts. These rules are constructed atop a few words of the Constitution: "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity," arising under various circumstances. The Supreme Court has interpreted these words to require federal courts to assess whether a plaintiff has suffered an injury in fact that is both fairly traceable to the actions of the defendant and redressable by a favorable ruling before proceeding to the merits of …

Democratizing Education Rights, Joshua E. Weishart

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

If the United States is to reverse its creeping, illiberal descent, generations of youth must emerge from this tribal, post-truth, pandemic-shattered era to mend democracy. Hope for that uncertain future lies in re-engineering how schoolchildren learn democracy-- not from a civics textbook but by experiencing it in the classroom. The sad irony is that we still lack a knowledge base, grounded in research, for that type of democratic education. Nearly two and a half centuries into the republic's existence, our commitment to democratic education is honored more in the breach than in observance. And our uninformed, polarized, and disaffected electorate …

The Global Rise Of Judicial Review Since 1945, Steven G. Calabresi

Catholic University Law Review

This article expands upon the theory put forth in Professor Bruce Ackerman’s book, Revolutionary Constitutions: Charismatic Leadership and the Rule of Law, in which he posits that twentieth century revolutions in a variety of countries led to the constitutionalization of charisma, thus binding countries to the written constitutions established by their revolutionary leaders.

Constitutional law scholar, Steven G. Calabresi, argues here that world constitutionalism, in fact, existed prior to 1945, and what is especially striking about the post-1945 experience is that the constitutionalism of charisma included not only the adoption of written constitutions, but also the adoption of meaningful …

Cruel And Unusual: Closing The Door On Juvenile De Facto Life Sentences, Thomas Garrity

Catholic University Law Review

There currently exists a split amongst the Federal Circuit Courts that stands ripe for review. The Supreme Court laid down clear precedent in its landmark decisions of Roper v. Simmons, Graham v. Florida, and Miller v. Alabama that capital punishment and life without parole are cruel and unusual as applied to juvenile non-homicidal offenders categorically and as applied to juvenile homicidal offenders without consideration of youth as a mitigating factor. There, however, was a door left open by these cases that allowed for judges to side-step the Court’s mandate. Using excessively long term-of-years sentences—longer than the most hopeful of estimates …

Against Congressional Case Snatching, Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Atticus Deprospro

William & Mary Law Review

Congress has developed a deeply problematic habit of aggrandizing itself by snatching cases from the Article III courts. One form of contemporary case snatching involves directly legislating the outcome of pending litigation by statute. These laws do not involve generic amendments to existing statutes but rather dictate specific rulings by the Article III courts in particular cases. Another form of congressional case snatching involves rendering ongoing judicial proceedings essentially advisory by unilaterally permitting a disgruntled litigant to transfer a pending case from an Article III court to an executive agency for resolution. Both practices involve Congress reallocating the business of …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents and Special Thanks.