Law Commons^™

Tinhatting The Constitution: Originalism As A Fandom, Stacey M. Lantagne

Faculty Scholarship

Several recent Supreme Court cases, most notably Bruen and Dobbs, have employed originalist methods to interpreting the Constitution, seeking to give the Second and Fourteenth Amendments, respectively, the meaning that was understood by the public in 1791 and 1868. In this imaginative exercise compiling massive amounts of textual evidence to arrive at conclusions regarding what unknown people were thinking, originalism resembles a type of fandom practice called RPF, or Real Person Fiction. This type of fan activity likewise compiles massive amounts of textual evidence to arrive at conclusions regarding what unknown people were thinking. It’s just that RPF revolves …

Transgender Rights & The Eighth Amendment, Jennifer Levi, Kevin M. Barry

Faculty Scholarship

The past decades have witnessed a dramatic shift in the visibility, acceptance, and integration of transgender people across all aspects of culture and the law. The treatment of incarcerated transgender people is no exception. Historically, transgender people have been routinely denied access to medically necessary hormone therapy, surgery, and other gender-affirming procedures; subjected to cross-gender strip searches; and housed according to their birth sex. But these policies and practices have begun to change. State departments of corrections are now providing some, though by no means all, appropriate care to transgender people, culminating in the Ninth Circuit’s historic decision in Edmo …

Title Ix And Official Policy Liability: Maximizing The Law’S Potential To Hold Education Institutions Accountable For Their Responses To Sexual Misconduct, Erin E. Buzuvis

Faculty Scholarship

Title IX, the federal statute that prohibits sex discrimination in education, plays a key role in institutional accountability for sexual misconduct that is perpetrated by a school’s students, faculty, and staff. The Supreme Court has confirmed that Title IX includes an implied right of action for money damages when the institution had actual notice that sexual harassment had occurred, or was likely to occur, and responded to that threat with deliberate indifference. But the deliberate indifference standard has proven to be a high and unpredictable bar for plaintiffs. For this reason, many institutions required the threat of government enforcement—issued in …

Attorney General V. Miaa At Forty Years: A Critical Examination Of Gender Segregation In High School Athletics In Massachusetts, Erin E. Buzuvis

Faculty Scholarship

Forty years ago, the highest court in Massachusetts ruled in Attorney General v. Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association that the state constitution's newly-added equal rights amendment prohibited the blanket exclusion of boys from girls' athletic teams. The state’s constitutional law departed from Title IX, as well as that of other states, in providing a legal foundation for a wider selection of gender-integrated high school sports. However, most sports remain segregated by sex.

The Author opines that sport organizers in Massachusetts have missed an opportunity to provide students a more balanced menu of athletic opportunities that incorporate both sex-segregated and gender-free sports …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Glbtq Legal Advocates & Defenders Et Al. In Support Of Respondent In Gloucester County School Board V. G.G., Sjc 16-273, Jennifer Levi, Shannon P. Minter, Dean Richlin, Amanda Hainsworth, Rachel Hutchinson, Emily J. Nash

Faculty Scholarship

Amici brief submitted by the GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and Foley Hoag, LLP. to the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Gloucester County School Board v. G.G., by His Next Friend and Mother, Deirdre Grimm. The brief argues that the Court should reject the school board’s claim that privacy interests justify its discriminatory policy for three reasons. First, there is no basis for the creation of a new privacy right that justifies excluding transgender students from shared restrooms. Second, nothing in Title IX or its regulations supports the School …

Review Of David Cole. Engines Of Liberty: The Power Of Citizen Activists To Make Constitutional Law., Pat Newcombe

Faculty Scholarship

In Engines of Liberty: The Power of Citizen Activists to Make Constitutional Law, David Cole presents a fascinating perspective on constitutional law by recounting three engaging stories of enormous constitutional change and of the organizations and individuals, whose efforts achieved such change. Cole’s accounts are well supported with citations to documents and personal interviews, all written in an accessible, engaging, and clear style. The Author highly recommends this first-rate work to law, general academic, and public libraries.

Introduction: Constitutional Conflict And Development: Perspectives From South Asia And Africa, Sudha Setty, Matthew H. Charity

Faculty Scholarship

This Introduction was written for an eponymous joint program held on January 4, 2014 and hosted by the Section on Africa and the Section of Law & South Asian Studies, both of the Association of American Law Schools.

Preferential Judicial Activism, Sudha Setty

Faculty Scholarship

The Author examines the Supreme Court’s use of “preferential judicial activism”—whereby justices decide whether to formalistically dismiss cases or instead choose to engage judicial activism based on their policy preferences—through contrasting the Court’s reasoning in Shelby v. Holder with its decisions in cases concerning national security. In Shelby, the majority characterized the Court’s review of the Voting Rights Act of 2006 as necessary given the fundamental rights at stake and the unusually broad reach of the Act in mandating federal jurisdiction over voting matters. However, in national security-related cases in which plaintiffs have alleged violations of fundamental rights, the …

The Fourth Amendment And Surveillance In A Digital World, Arthur Leavens

Faculty Scholarship

Technology has transformed government surveillance and opened traditionally private information to official scrutiny. The current privacy-based approach to the Fourth Amendment is unable to cope with the changes. This Article offers a solution to the problems that technological surveillance techniques present. Starting with the introduction of the approach in Katz, the Article reviews the development of privacy-based approach. It then looks at three 21st century Supreme Court cases that grappled with applying the Katz test to advanced technological surveillance techniques: Kyllo, Quon, and Jones. These cases demonstrate the problems that the privacy-based approach creates and the …

Unmistakably Clear: Human Rights, The Right To Representation, And Remedial Voting Rights Of People Of Color, Matthew H. Charity

Faculty Scholarship

The Author critiques the Supreme Court’s analysis in its Shelby County v. Holder decision, which found the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional by applying a disparate treatment analysis to how States were treated under the Act. Such a reading of the Act makes a number of tacit and explicit assumptions with regard to the choice by the Federal Government and by the States of whose rights governmental actors must protect. The Court reached its conclusion by decontextualizing the Civil Rights movement and the Voting Rights Act from decolonization and post-World War II expressions of human rights, a …

Petition For Writ Of Certiorari, Kosilek V. O'Brien, Jennifer Levi, Joseph L. Sulman, Abigail K. Hemani, Michele E. Connolly, James P. Devendorf, Jamie A. Santos, Christine Dieter

Faculty Scholarship

Jennifer Levi, on behalf of Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, was one of the Authors of the Petition for Writ of Certiorari, filed in the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of the Petitioner, Michelle Kosilek, in Kosilek v. O'Brien. Questions presented to the Court by the Petitioner were 1.) whether appellate courts must parse “ques­tions that present elements both factual and legal” into their factual and legal components, so that all factual findings can be reviewed for clear error, or whether, as the First Circuit ruled, they may review such questions as a whole along …

Was The First Justice Harlan Anti-Chinese?, James W. Gordon

Faculty Scholarship

The first Justice John Marshall Harlan has long been recognized as a defender of Black civil rights. Yet some scholars challenge Harlan’s egalitarian reputation by arguing that he was anti-Chinese. In this Article, the Author discusses the evidence which has been offered to support the claim that Harlan was anti-Chinese and offers additional evidence never before presented to argue against this hypothesis. Harlan’s critics have assembled some evidence in a way that suggests Harlan had an anti-Chinese bias. The Author suggests that the evidence is ambiguous and that it can be assembled to produce a different picture from the one …

Federal Equal Protection, Taylor Flynn

Faculty Scholarship

The Author explores the use of due process and equal protection guarantees from the U.S. Constitution as a means to challenge workplace discrimination faced by LGBT government employees. The Author also discusses how private employees must rely on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to assert similar claims. Because sex discrimination is prohibited under both the Constitution and Title VII, federal courts have relied on reasoning in the former context when analyzing the latter, and vice versa. This means that a watershed case regarding one law can contain reasoning for the other. The Author goes on to the discuss …

Preliminary Injunction Standards In Massachusetts State And Federal Courts, Arthur D. Wolf

Faculty Scholarship

Concurrent jurisdiction frequently allows attorneys the choice of filing a complaint in state or federal court. State courts presumptively have jurisdiction over claims rooted in federal law. At times, state courts are required to entertain federal claims. Similarly, federal courts have authority over state claims because of diversity, federal question, and supplemental jurisdiction. Many claims are rooted in both state and federal law, such as antitrust, civil rights, environmental, consumer protection, and civil liberties. Confronted with the choice of state or federal court, the attorney must evaluate a variety of factors before deciding in which court to file.

In a …

Judicial Formalism And The State Secrets Privilege, Sudha Setty

Faculty Scholarship

Congress has, in the last few years, toyed with the idea of attempting to rein in the executive’s increasing reliance on the state secrets privilege as a means of escaping the possibility of accountability. The Author examines one high-profile case, that of Binyam Mohamed and other plaintiffs claiming that they had been subject to extraordinary rendition, torture, and prolonged detention. The Mohamed litigation offers evidence of a disturbing trend of U.S. courts retreating to formalistic reasoning to extend unwarranted deference to the executive branch in security-related contexts. In this essay the Author limits her analysis to the recent jurisprudence surrounding …

State Constitutionalism: State-Court Deference Or Dissonance?, Arthur Leavens

Faculty Scholarship

This Article focuses on the debate concerning state constitutional expansion of criminal-procedure protections. It examines two such rights: (1) the protection against unreasonable searches and seizures; and (2) the right to the assistance of counsel in defending a criminal case. Each of these rights is embodied in both the federal and most, if not all, state constitutions. Each right is thus doubly applicable to the states, first, through the federal version by virtue of its incorporation into the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process protection and, second, through the state constitution’s version of the cognate right. So focused, the question is, what …

No Virtue In Passivity: The Supreme Court And Ali Al-Marri, Bruce K. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

This Article discusses the case of Al-Marri v. Spagone, which the U.S. Supreme Court unjustifiably dismissed as moot on March 6, 2009. By dismissing this appeal, the Court ignored its duty to determine whether the military detention of a non-citizen residing lawfully in the United States was authorized by law. And that failure has in turn contributed significantly, and unnecessarily, to the cloud of legal uncertainty which now hovers over the preventive detention measures adopted and proposed by the Obama Administration.

Prophylactic Rules And State Constitutionalism, Arthur Leavens

Faculty Scholarship

When the post-Warren Supreme Court began trimming back individual rights, some state courts responded by interpreting analogous or cognate state constitutional provisions to find broader protections, prompting a vigorous debate concerning the legitimacy and interpretive methodology of such state constitutionalism. How can two constitutional provisions, sharing the same language and history, mean different things? This Article looks at that question in the context of so-called prophylactic rules—those specific constitutional rules meant to guide the implementation of broader federal constitutional principles. Miranda ’s warning-and-waiver construct is probably the best known prophylactic rule, but such rules abound, particularly in criminal procedure.

This …

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 …

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 …

Student Speech: Whose Speech Is It Anyway And Why Does The First Amendment Care?, Leora Harpaz

Faculty Scholarship

A key feature of First Amendment speech analysis in the public schools focuses on speaker identity. Speaker identity can play a crucial role in designing the First Amendment landscape on a variety of issues including the right of speakers to gain access to public school forums for expression, the right of student editors to control the content of school-sponsored publications, and the right of school administrators to permit religious speech in the public school setting. Courts faced with decisions about whether speech in the public school setting is private or government speech must consider the context in which the speech …

Initiating A New Constitutional Dialogue: The Increased Importance Under Aedpa Of Seeking Certiorari From Judgments Of State Courts, Giovanna Shay, Christopher Lasch

Faculty Scholarship

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) contains a provision restricting federal courts from considering any authority other than holdings of the Supreme Court in determining whether to grant a state prisoner’s petition for habeas corpus. Through an empirical study of cert filings and cases decided by the Supreme Court, the Authors assess this provision’s impact on the development of federal constitutional criminal doctrine. Before AEDPA and other restrictions on federal habeas corpus, lower federal courts and state courts contributed to doctrinal development by engaging in a dialogue. This dialogue served to articulate the broad constitutional principles set forth …

The President’S Question Time: Power, Information, And The Executive Credibility Gap, Sudha Setty

Faculty Scholarship

The rule of law depends on a working separation of powers and transparency and accountability in government. If information is power, the ability of one branch of government to control information represents the ability to control federal legislation, policy, and decision-making. The Framers of the United States Constitution developed the Madisonian model of separated powers and functions, and a system of checks and balances to maintain those separations, with this in mind. History has shown a progressive shift of the power to control information toward the executive branch and away from the Legislature. Particularly when unified, one-party government precludes effective …

Beyond The Schoolhouse Gate: Do Student First Amendment Rights Apply To Classroom Assignments?, Leora Harpaz

Faculty Scholarship

While it has long been apparent that the First Amendment protection for freedom of expression limits the discretion of public school teachers and administrators, it has been assumed that those limitations do not constrain equally all aspects of a school's operation. One area that has seemed somewhat immune from First Amendment free speech oversight has been the pedagogic choices made by schools in defining their own educational objectives. Public schools have been permitted to select curricular materials for use in their classrooms and have been able to evaluate whether students have fulfilled course requirements without concern that they may be …

The Paper Wars: First Amendment Challenges To School Material Distribution Policies, Leora Harpaz

Faculty Scholarship

Public schools are faced with an array of requests seeking permission to distribute material on school property. These requests may come from students, teachers or outside organizations. To respond to these requests, some school districts have adopted written policies to guide their determinations while others lack formal policies and respond on an ad hoc basis. Whether based on formal or informal policies, in deciding whether to permit distribution school officials typically take into account a variety of factors including the content of the material, the identity of the individual or group seeking permission and the time, place or manner of …

Manson V. Brathwaite Revisited: Towards A New Rule Of Decision For Due Process Challenges To Eyewitness Identification Procedures, Timothy P. O'Toole, Giovanna Shay

Faculty Scholarship

Almost 30 years ago, in Manson v. Brathwaite--the Supreme Court set out a test for determining when due process requires suppression of an out-of-court identification produced by suggestive police procedures. The Manson Court rejected a per se exclusion rule in favor of a test focusing on whether an identification infected by suggestive procedures is nonetheless reliable when judged in the totality of the circumstances. The purpose of this Article is two-fold: to demonstrate that the Manson rule of decision fails to safeguard due process values, in part because it does not account for the intervening social science research, and to …

The Ten Commandments Return To School And Legal Controversy Follows Them, Leora Harpaz

Faculty Scholarship

The United States Supreme Court confronted the issue of a classroom display of the Ten Commandments almost 25 years ago in the case of Stone v. Graham. In that case, the Court struck down a Kentucky statute that required the posting of the Ten Commandments in all public school classrooms. In a per curiam opinion, the Court summarily reversed a decision of the Supreme Court of Kentucky and concluded that the statute violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause because it had no secular purpose. The outcomes of recent judicial decisions considering the constitutionality of the display of the Ten Commandments …

Introduction: What Does Oakley Tell Us About The Failures Of Constitutional Decision-Making?, Taylor Flynn

Faculty Scholarship

The Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision in State v. Oakley, in which the court upheld a probation order prohibiting Mr. Oakley from fathering additional children until he could support them, is a compelling example of a troubling flaw in our constitutional jurisprudence. Absent the countervailing check perhaps provided by the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions, each path of doctrinal analysis, considered separately, arguably leads to the conclusion that the probation order is valid. This is so even though a number of institutional, structural, and process-based considerations converge to render the order's constitutionality highly suspect. The prevailing doctrinal approach is to disaggregate the …

The Equal Access Act: Still Controversial After All These Years, Leora Harpaz

Faculty Scholarship

Over its twenty-year history, the Equal Access Act has continued to spark controversy. Despite a large number of court decisions that have interpreted the scope of the statute, those controversies have not yet subsided nor are they likely to for the foreseeable future. Interpretation of the Equal Access Act is complicated by ambiguities in the statute's language and the complex relationship that exists between the statute and the First Amendment's prohibition on religious establishments combined with its protection for freedom of expression. The delicate constitutional balancing act that the statute attempts to accomplish complicates the task of statutory interpretation in …

The Equal Access Act: Still Controversial After All These Years, Leora Harpaz

Faculty Scholarship

Over its twenty-year history, the Equal Access Act has continued to spark controversy. Despite a large number of court decisions that have interpreted the scope of the statute, those controversies have not yet subsided nor are they likely to for the foreseeable future. Interpretation of the Equal Access Act is complicated by ambiguities in the statute's language and the complex relationship that exists between the statute and the First Amendment's prohibition on religious establishments combined with its protection for freedom of expression. The delicate constitutional balancing act that the statute attempts to accomplish complicates the task of statutory interpretation in …