Law Commons^™

The Transnational Judicial Discourse And Felon Disenfranchisement: Re-Examining The Textual Premise Of Richardson V. Ramirez, Jason G. Morgan-Foster

ExpressO

This article is simultaneously an international comparative law piece about prisoner disenfranchisement in various countries, a transnational work of legal theory providing a framework for the use of foreign law in domestic constitutional courts, and a domestic analysis of the constitutional underpinnings of felon disenfranchisement.

The article begins with a comprehensive comparative analysis of the recent prisoner disenfranchisement decisions in Canada, South Africa, and Europe. It notes that the over-arching theme of these decisions is to view the acceptability of prisoner disenfranchisement along a continuum, where it becomes more acceptable the more serious the offense committed.

The article then examines …

The Constitutional Rhetoric Of White Innocence, Cecil J. Hunt

ExpressO

This article discusses the Supreme Court’s use of the rhetoric of white innocence in deciding racially inflected claims of constitutional shelter. It argues that the Court’s use of this rhetoric reveals that it has adopted a distinctly white-centered-perspective which reveals only a one-sided view of racial reality and thus distorts its ability to accurately appreciate the true nature of racial reality in contemporary America. This article examines the Court’s habit of consistently choosing a white-centered-perspective in constitutional race cases by looking at the Court’s use of the rhetoric of white innocence first in the context of the Court’s concern with …

Broken Borders: Decanas V. Bica, And The Standards That Govern The Validity Of State Measures Designed To Deter Undocumented Immigration, Joshua J. Herndon

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

The Recognition Of Same-Sex Relationships: Comparative Institutional Analysis, Contested Social Goals, And Strategic Institutional Choice, Nancy J. Knauer

ExpressO

The emerging field of comparative institutional analysis (CIA) has much to offer public policy analysts. However, the failure of CIA to address the dynamic process through which social goals are articulated limits the scope of its application to the largely prescriptive pronouncements of legal scholars. By examining the movement for equal recognition of same-sex relationships, this Essay builds on the basic observations of CIA and introduces a new dimension, namely the dynamic process through which social goals are articulated and social change is pursued. The acknowledgment that the production of social goals involves institutional behavior, as well as multiple sites …

Breaking The Bank: Revisiting Central Bank Of Denver After Enron And Sarbanes-Oxley, Celia Taylor

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Adjudication, Civil Rights, And Social Change, Suzanne B. Goldberg

Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers

Judicial opinions typically rely on “facts” about a social group to justify or reject limitations on group members’ rights, especially when traditional views about the status or capacity of group members are in contest. Yet the fact-based approach to decision-making obscures the normative judgments that actually determine whether restrictions on individual rights are reasonable. This article offers an account of how and why courts intervene in social conflicts by focusing on facts rather than declaring norms. In part, it argues that this approach preserves judicial power to retain traditional justifications for restricting group members’ rights in some settings but not …

Lost In The Shuffle: State-Recognized Tribes And The Tribal Gaming Industry, Alexa Koenig, Jonathan Stein

ExpressO

This article presents the emerging argument that Native American tribes that have received state but not federal recognition have a legal right to engage in gaming under state law. This argument is based on five points: that 1) the regulation of gaming is generally a state right; 2) state tribes are sovereign governments with the right to game, except as preempted by the federal government; 3) federal law does not preempt gaming by state tribes; 4) state tribal gaming does not violate Equal Protection guarantees; and 5) significant policy arguments weigh in favor of gaming by state tribes under state …

Another Case In Lochner’S Legacy, The Court’S Assault On New Property: The Right To The Mandatory Enforcement Of A Restraining Order Is “A Sham, Nullity And Cruel Deception” , Christopher J. Roederer

ExpressO

This article provides a thorough critique of the Supreme Court decision of Castle Rock v. Gonzales 125 S. Ct. 2796 (2005) which dismissed respondent’s case for failing to establish that she had a property right in the enforcement of a restraining order that was worthy of procedural due process protection. The article critiques the Court’s methodology and substantive arguments. The article concludes by situating the decision in “Lochner’s legacy,” a legacy of decisions that Cass Sunstein has identified as privileging “government inaction,” and “the existing distribution of entitlements” as set by the common law. Just as the Lochner Court decided …

Rhetorical Holy War: Polygamy, Homosexuality, And The Paradox Of Community And Autonomy, Gregory C. Pingree

ExpressO

The article explores the rhetorical strategies deployed in both legal and cultural narratives of Mormon polygamy in nineteenth-century America. It demonstrates how an understanding of that unique communal experience, and the narratives by which it was represented, informs the classic paradox of community and autonomy – the tension between the collective and the individual. The article concludes by using the Mormon polygamy analysis to illuminate a contemporary social situation that underscores the paradox of community and autonomy – homosexuality and the so-called culture wars over family values and the meaning of marriage.

Counter-Majoritarian Power And Judges' Political Speech, Michael R. Dimino

ExpressO

Canons of ethics restrict judicial campaigning and prohibit sitting judges from engaging in political activity. Only recently, in Republican Party v. White, 536 U.S. 765 (2002), has the Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of these restrictions, concluding that judicial candidates must be allowed some opportunity to discuss legal and political issues in their campaigns. But White left many questions unanswered about the permissible scope of restrictions on judges’ political activity.

This Article suggests that those questions will be answered not by applying principles of free speech, but by analyzing the opportunities the restrictions provide for independent judicial policy-making. Restrictions on …

Race Against The Machine: An Argument For The Standardization Of Voting Technology, Jason Belmont Conn

ExpressO

In this article/note, I examine a lingering question from the court cases arising out of the 2000 election: Does Bush v. Gore and the relevant equal protection case law open the door for a legal challenge to a state’s use of different voting machines/technologies and how do racial disparities in machine error rates impact this analysis? In addition to reviewing the current literature and case law on voting machine standardization, I also present an unrecognized and undocumented connection between the “all deliberate speed” order in Brown and the Court’s discussion of voting technology in Bush v. Gore.

Bolling, Equal Protection, Due Process, And Lochnerphobia, David E. Bernstein

George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series

In Brown v. Board of Education, the United States Supreme Court invalidated state and local school segregation laws as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. That same day, in Bolling v. Sharpe, the Court held unconstitutional de jure segregation in Washington, D.C.'s public schools under the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Fifty years after it was decided, Bolling remains one of the Warren Court's most controversial decisions.

The controversy reflects the widespread belief that the outcome in Bolling reflected the Justices' political preferences and was not a sound interpretation of the Due Process Clause. The Bolling Court …

It's Not The Thought That Counts, Deborah S. Hellman

ExpressO

The article considers a central question about discrimination – are an actor’s intentions relevant to whether an action wrongfully discriminates – and takes issue with a familiar answer to this question. If one thinks of “discrimination” in its literal sense, as simply drawing distinctions among people on the basis of possessing or lacking some trait, it becomes clear that discrimination is ubiquitous and often benign. The challenge is to distinguish when discrimination is permissible and when it is not. One common answer to this question is that it is the intentions of the actor who adopts or enacts a law, …

Reviving A Natural Right: The Freedom Of Autonomy, Michael Anthony Lawrence

ExpressO

America in the early twenty-first century is a place where oppressive state constitutional amendments discriminate against millions of gay Americans; where compassionate end-of-life choice is illegal in 49 states and where the one state where it is legal is being sued by the U.S. government; where hundreds of thousands are arrested yearly and tens of thousands are in prison for private possession or use of marijuana; where a woman’s right to maintain control over her own reproductive decisions hangs by a thread; and where religious freedom is under relentless attack.

Whatever became of the ideal that represented the very foundation …

Cleaning Up The Eighth Amendment Mess, Tom Stacy

ExpressO

This article criticizes the Court’s interpretation of the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause and proposes its own understanding. The Court’s jurisprudence is plagued by deep inconsistencies concerning the text, the Court’s own role, and a constitutional requirement of proportionate punishment.

In search of ways to redress these fundamental shortcomings, the article explores three alternative interpretations: 1) A textualist approach; 2) Justice Scalia’s understanding that the Clause forbids only punishments unacceptable for all offenses; and 3) a majoritarian approach that would consistently define cruel and unusual punishment in terms of legislative judgments and penal custom. As evidenced by the …

The Disability Integration Presumption: Thirty Years Later, Ruth Colker

The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Working Paper Series

The fiftieth anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision has spurred a lively debate about the merits of “integration.” This article brings that debate to a new context – the integration presumption under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”). The IDEA has contained an “integration presumption” for more than thirty years under which school districts should presumptively educate disabled children with children who are not disabled in a fully inclusive educational environment. This article traces the history of this presumption and argues that it was borrowed from the racial civil rights movement without any empirical justification. In …

Book Review: Forensic Linguistics, Dru Stevenson

ExpressO

Review of John Gibbons' text "Forensic Linguistics"

In Or Out? Groups And The Fourteenth Amendment After Lawrence V. Texas, Miranda Mcgowan

ExpressO

This article explores a line of Supreme Court cases that have struck down state laws using a rigorous form of rational basis scrutiny, culminating in Lawrence v. Texas. The facts of these rigorous rational basis cases are diverse, but they share a common denominator: the Court has applied more rigorous rational basis scrutiny when a government has restricted the liberties of, or denied some state benefit, to a group—specifically, gays, lesbians, persons with disabilities, illegal immigrant children, and hippies.

Rigorous rational basis scrutiny has not wholly supplanted regular rational basis scrutiny. Courts still use regular rational basis scrutiny to review …

Compliance Theory And The Inter-American Court Of Human Rights, Morse Hyun-Myung Tan

ExpressO

This essay fills a gap by exploring compliance theory in international law to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. After introducing the topic and setting the context, it delves into the question of why nations follow international law. Interacting with prominent theoretical models (including the managerial model, fairness and legitimacy, transnational legal process, self-interest, and a comparative perspective with Europe), it arrives at a critical synthesis in the conclusion.

Reclaiming The Public Forum: Courts Must Stand Firm Against Governmental Efforts To Displace Dissidence, Christopher B. Ford

ExpressO

Recognizing that the right to free speech for dissidents is increasingly at risk in the United States, this submission catalogs manifold methods the government has employed to constrain free speech and urges that courts not only serve as a bulwark against further erosion of public expression of dissent but endeavor to restore access to the public forum that recently has been lost. The submission surveys the background of the right to free expression and provides details and examples of the government’s increasing tendency to suppress dissident speech by deploying heavily armed police in demonstrations, committing violent acts against peaceful protesters, …

Awakening An Empire Of Liberty: Exploring The Roots Of Socratic Inquiry And Political Nihilism In American Democracy, Maurice R. Dyson

ExpressO

This book review timely examines Cornel West’s latest sequel to his 1992 best seller, Race Matters. In Democracy Matters, West unflinchingly examines the waning of democratic energies and nihilistic practices of private and public sector in our present age of democracy. This review takes a critical examination of the logic underpinning West’s arguments, his nomenclature of various nihilism plaguing our society, the sometimes clumsy employment of literary devices and his thesis regarding the ‘niggerization’ of America after 9/11 that can serve as a basis for unifying collective action against imperialism. West makes a compelling argument that the public needs to …

The Paperless Chase: Electronic Voting And Democratic Values, Daniel P. Tokaji

The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Working Paper Series

The 2000 election ignited a fierce controversy over the machinery used for voting. Civil rights advocates have called for the replacement of outdated paper-based voting equipment, like the infamous “hanging chad” punch card. Yet the introduction of paperless technology, especially electronic “touchscreen” machines, has induced widespread concern that software might be rigged to alter election results. This article examines the debate over electronic voting, which raises fundamental questions about the democratic values that should guide the administration of elections. It frames the debate by defining four equality norms embodied in federal voting rights laws and the Constitution. Electronic voting has …

Judicial Power & Civil Rights Reconsidered, David E. Bernstein, Ilya Somin

George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series

Michael Klarman's "From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality" is an important contribution to the scholarly literature on both the history of the civil rights struggle and judicial power more generally. Klarman argues that for much of the twentieth century, the Supreme Court was very reluctant to rule in favor of African American civil rights claimants, and had little impact when it did.

Klarman is right to reject traditional accounts that greatly exaggerated the Supreme Court's willingness and ability to protect minorities. However, he overstates his case. The Court's views on the …

Towards An Establishment Clause Theory Of Race-Based Allocation After Grutter: Administering Race-Conscious Financial Aid, Maurice R. Dyson

ExpressO

The novel application of the Establishment Clause doctrine by way of analogy to race0based financial aid after Grutter and Grats, while not identical, speaks to real issue of neutrality that is implicit in the debate of administering race-based scholarships that should be truthfully acknowledged. There is no concern about improper university indoctrination of race as the Grutter court has already established race-based diversity as worthy of a compelling state interest. Moreover, there is no concern that a college or university would establish an imprimatur on race-based scholarships merely or solely because it identifies potential candidates meeting specified eligibility criteria which …

National Security Capps Individual Civil Liberties In Times Of Crisis, Matthew D. Greenwell

ExpressO

This note attempts to objectively compare and contrast instances of past national emergencies with the ongoing “war on terror;” from the Supreme Court’s World War II decision of Korematsu, through the Warren Court and the Communist threat, then ending with the Rehnquist Court’s recent decisions of Hamdi, Rasul, and Padilla. In addition, the Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-screening System [CAPPS II] is used as an illustration of a current erosion of individual rights as a result of the “war on terror.” Finally, the note concludes by suggesting that when the war-making branches, based on a perceived threat to national security, infringe …

Apprendi's Limits, Roger Craig Green

ExpressO

This article argues that Blakely v. Washington did not decide (explicitly or implicitly) whether the Federal Sentencing Guidelines are constitutional. It also claims that the best interpretation of Apprendi v. New Jersey would uphold the Guidelines because they do not result in a punishment above the crime of conviction's statutory maximum. The notion that statutory maxima are constitutionally important stems from separation of power principles. Congress, not the Commission, is responsible for defining crimes, and thereby for prescribing how much punishment is authorized by a jury's guilty verdict.

A State's Power To Enter Into A Consent Decree That Violates State Law Provisions: What "Findings" Of A Federal Violation Are Sufficient To Justify A Consent Decree That Trumps State Law?, David W. Swift

ExpressO

In the last forty years federal courts have played a prominent role in reshaping our public institutions. And while some scholars question the efficacy of these structural injuctions, the authority of federal courts to order such relief is generally unquestioned. What is open to debate, however, is whether state officials can agree to a remedy they would not have had the authority to order themselves; and if so, to what extent must an underlying constitutional violation be proved so as to justify the remedy?

This article discusses the competing theories and concludes that a remedy that violates state law may …

A Case Study In The Banning Of Political Parties: The Pan-Arab Movement El Ard And The Israeli Supreme Court, Ron Harris

ExpressO

Attempts to outlaw political groups that are alleged to approve the use of violence, to limit the expression of views that challenge the core values of democratic nation-states, and to ban radical, separatist, or religious political parties are more widespread in recent years than at any other time since 1945. They gave rise in the last few years to litigation in Constitutional Courts and Supreme Courts in Spain, Germany, Turkey, France, Israel, and Latvia, as well as in the European courts.

The present article tells the story of the encounter in the years 1959-1965 between the Pan-Arab national movement El …

Brown And Tee-Hit-Ton, Earl Maltz

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Another Limit On Federal Court Jurisdiction? Immigrant Access To Class-Wide Injunctive Relief, Jill E. Family

ExpressO

This article examines a statute that may embody another limit on the power of the federal courts. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) implemented sweeping changes that substantially restrict federal court review of administrative immigration decisions. One provision implemented as a part of IIRIRA, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(f)(1), appears, at least at first glance, to prohibit courts from issuing class-wide injunctive relief in immigration cases. Such a restriction would be significant because federal courts have issued class-wide injunctions in the past to stop unconstitutional immigration practices and policies of the federal government. The Supreme Court …