Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional law (2)
- Absent Declarants (1)
- As-applied challenges (1)
- Bail (1)
- Citizenship (1)
-
- Civil War (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Confrontation Clause (1)
- Congress (1)
- Constitution (1)
- Crawford v. Washington (1)
- Eighth Amendment (1)
- Evidence Rules (1)
- Facial (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Hearsay Exception (1)
- Immigration law (1)
- Jury (1)
- Laws of War (1)
- National security (1)
- Nonhearsay (1)
- Proof (1)
- Roberts (1)
- Severability (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Testimonial Hearsay (1)
- Unintended Assertions (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
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 …
Muscular Procedure: Conditional Deference In The Executive Detention Cases, Joseph Landau
Muscular Procedure: Conditional Deference In The Executive Detention Cases, Joseph Landau
Faculty Scholarship
Although much of the prevailing scholarship surrounding the 9/11 decisions tends to downgrade procedural decisions of law as weak and inadequate, procedural rulings have affected the law of national security in remarkable ways. The Supreme Court and lower courts have used procedural devices to require, as a condition of deference, that the coordinate branches respect transsubstantive procedural values like transparency and deliberation. This is “muscular procedure,” the judicial invocation of a procedural rule to ensure the integrity of coordinate branch decision-making processes. Through muscular procedure, courts have accelerated the resolution of large numbers of highly charged cases. Moreover, they have …
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler
Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler
Faculty Scholarship
Crawford v. Washington’s historical approach to the confrontation clause establishes that testimonial hearsay inadmissible without confrontation at the founding is similarly inadmissible today, despite whether it fits a subsequently developed hearsay exception. Consequently, the requirement of confrontation depends upon whether an out-of-court statement is hearsay, testimonial, and, if so, whether it was nonetheless admissible without confrontation at the founding. A substantial literature has developed about whether hearsay statements are testimonial or were, like dying declarations, otherwise admissible at the founding. In contrast, this article focuses on the first question – whether statements are hearsay – which scholars have thus far …
Eighth Amedment Gaps: Can Conditions Of Confinement Litigation Benefit From Proportionality Theory?, Alexander A. Reinert
Eighth Amedment Gaps: Can Conditions Of Confinement Litigation Benefit From Proportionality Theory?, Alexander A. Reinert
Fordham Urban Law Journal
This Article focuses on two separate issues deriving from the Eighth Amendment's "cruel and unusual punishment" clause. Specifically, it discusses classic conditions of confinement litigation and sentencing proportionality litigation. Confinement litigation includes cases challenging the lived experiences of prisoners such as overcrowding, excessive force, failure to provide adequate medical care, and deprivation of material needs. Sentencing proportionality litigation involves challenges to the length of a prison sentence or mode of punishment. The Article, unlike modern contemporary scholarship, attempts to draw connections between each doctrinal area, ultimately suggesting ways in which proportionality litigation can invigorate conditions litigation. Part I consists of …
Discrimination, Coercion, And The Bail Reform Act Of 1984: The Loss Of The Core Constitutional Protections Of The Excessive Bail Clause, Samuel Wiseman
Discrimination, Coercion, And The Bail Reform Act Of 1984: The Loss Of The Core Constitutional Protections Of The Excessive Bail Clause, Samuel Wiseman
Fordham Urban Law Journal
This Article examines the history and judicial interpretation of the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Bail Clause, which reads "excessive bail shall not be required." Debate on this topic has centered around two questions: whether the Clause binds only the courts or Congress as well and whether it creates any substantive right to bail. Specifically, the Article discusses the Bail Reform Act of 1984, and the Supreme Court's subsequent interpretation of the Act in United States v. Salerno. The Salerno court suggested that the Excessive Bail Clause limits only the judiciary and found, at a maximum, only an extremely limited substantive right …
Facial And As-Applied Challenges Under The Roberts Court, Gillan E. Metzger
Facial And As-Applied Challenges Under The Roberts Court, Gillan E. Metzger
Fordham Urban Law Journal
Resistance to facial challenges is a recurring theme of the Roberts Court’s early years. Yet close analysis of the Court’s decisions suggests that its approach to facial and as-applied challenges is largely consistent with prior practice. Despite occasional description of as-applied challenges in narrow terms, it has expressly preserved the possibility that as-applied challenges could be brought pre-enforcement and allowed an as-applied challenge to be the vehicle for broad relief. It has also followed the Rehnquist Court in asserting wide remedial discretion to sever statutes to fit constitutional requirements, and even its strategic use of the facial/as-applied distinction is not …