Law Commons^™

Marriage Equality Comes To The Fourth Circuit, Carl Tobias

Washington and Lee Law Review

Marriage equality has come to America. Throughout 2014, several federal appellate courts and numerous district court judges across the United States invalidated state constitutional or statutory proscriptions on same-sex marriage. Therefore, it was not surprising that Eastern District of Virginia Judge Arenda Wright Allen held that Virginia’s bans were unconstitutional in February. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed her opinion that July. North Carolina, South Carolina, and West Virginia District Judges rejected these jurisdictions’ prohibitions during autumn, and the Supreme Court approved marriage equality the next year. Because marriage equality in the Fourth Circuit presents …

In Defense Of Hearth And [Foster] Home: Determining The Constitutionality Of State Regulation Of Firearm Storage In Foster Homes, Joseph G. Duchane

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appointed Counsel And Jury Trial: The Rights That Undermine The Other Rights, Russell L. Christopher

Washington and Lee Law Review

Do the Sixth Amendment rights to appointed counsel and jury trial unconstitutionally conflict with defendants’ other constitutional rights? For indigents charged with felonies, Gideon v. Wainwright guarantees the right to appointed counsel; for misdemeanors, Scott v. Illinois limits the right to indigents receiving the most severe authorized punishment—imprisonment.Duncan v. Illinois limits the right to jury trial to defendants charged with serious offenses. Consequently, the greater the jeopardy faced by defendants, the greater the eligibility for appointed counsel and jury trial. But defendants’ other constitutional rights generally facilitate just the opposite— minimizing jeopardy by reducing charges, lessening the likelihood of …

Constitutional Clause Aggregation And The Marijuana Crimes, Scott W. Howe

Washington and Lee Law Review

An important question for our time concerns whether the Constitution could establish a right to engage in certain marijuana-related activities. Several states have now legalized cannabis, within strict limits, for recreational purposes, and that number will grow. Yet, some states will not promptly legalize but, instead, continue to criminalize, or only “decriminalize” in minor ways, and the federal criminalization statutes also will likely survive for a time. There currently is no recognized right under the Constitution to possess, use, cultivate, or distribute cannabis for recreational purposes, even in small amounts, and traditional, single-clause arguments for such a right are weak. …

A Legal Frankenstein’S Monster: The Complete Bar Order In Securities Fraud Class Action Lawsuits, Jonathan C. Stanley

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Arming The Second Amendment—And Enforcing The Fourteenth, William D. Araiza

Washington and Lee Law Review

This Article considers the timely and important question of Congress’s power to enforce the Second Amendment. Such legislation would test the Court’s current enforcement power doctrine, which ostensibly acknowledges a congressional role in vindicating constitutional rights while insisting on judicial supremacy in stating constitutional meaning. Second Amendment doctrine is complex and, importantly, methodologically varied. That complexity and variety would require the Court to perform a more nuanced, granular approach to the enforcement power than it has thus far in the modern era.

Part II quickly recaps the Court’s Enforcement Clause jurisprudence. It concludes that its most recent enforcement power cases …

The Klein Rule Of Decision Puzzle And The Self-Dealing Solution, Evan C. Zoldan

Washington and Lee Law Review

Scholars and courts have struggled to make sense of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Klein, an intriguing but enigmatic opinion concerning the limits of Congress’s ability to interfere with cases pending before the federal courts. Klein is intriguing because its broad and emphatic language suggests significant limits on the power of Congress. Klein is enigmatic because the Court has never again struck down a statute because of Klein or even made clear what principle animates its result. In fact, despite reaffirming the existence of a principle based on Klein, the Court has repeatedly read it …

The “Ample Alternative Channels” Flaw In First Amendment Doctrine, Enrique Armijo

Washington and Lee Law Review

In reviewing a content-neutral regulation affecting speech, courts ask if the regulation leaves open “ample alternative channels of communication” for the restricted speaker’s expression. Substitutability is the underlying rationale. If the message could have been expressed in some other legal way, the ample alternative channels requirement is met. The court then deems the restriction’s harm to the speaker’s expressive right as de minimis and upholds the law. For decades, courts and free speech scholars have assumed the validity of this principle. It has set First Amendment jurisprudence on the wrong course. Permitting a speech restriction because the speaker could have …

Diversifying To Mitigate Risk: Can Dodd–Frank Section 342 Help Stabilize The Financial Sector?, Kristin Johnson, Steven A. Ramirez, Cary Martin Shelby

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Rhetoric Of The Fourth Amendment: Toward A More Persuasive Fourth Amendment, Timothy C. Macdonnell

Washington and Lee Law Review

In the last forty-five years, the United States Supreme Court’s jurisprudence through the lens of classical rhetoric. Opinions are assessed based on three areas of persuasion: appeals to logic (logos); appeals to emotion (pathos); and appeals to credibility (ethos). By examining the Justices’ opinions in this fashion, patterns of unpersuasive opinion writing emerge. While a common source for all unpersuasive opinions is not available, common patterns of weak persuasion in particular appeals do exist. Weak appeals to ethos commonly stem from Justices failing to fully confront the doctrine of stare decisis. Weak pathos-based appeals often involve Justices engaging in misplaced …

Guns And Alienage: Correcting A Dangerous Contradiction, D. Mcnair Nichols Jr.

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mental Illness, Severe Emotional Distress, And The Death Penalty: Reflections On The Tragic Case Of Joe Giarratano, Richard J. Bonnie

Washington and Lee Law Review

Joe Giarratano was on death row for twelve years, and remains incarcerated today, because mental illness and severe emotional distress wholly undermined reliable adjudication in his case. Using Giarratano’s remarkable story as a case study, I illustrate some of the ways in which mental illness and acute emotional distress can lead to unreliable findings and judgments and—even worse—can actually propel the criminal justice system toward a death sentence. I cover the unreliability of his confession, his impaired ability to assist counsel, his impaired capacity to make a rational decision regarding whether to initiate or continue post-conviction proceedings, his diminished mental …

The Death Penalty And Mental Illness In International Human Rights Law: Toward Abolition, Richard J. Wilson

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Post-Trial Plea Bargaining In Capital Cases: Using Conditional Clemency To Remove Weak Cases From Death Row, Adam M. Gershowitz

Washington and Lee Law Review

Plea bargaining accounts for over ninety percent of criminal convictions and it dominates the American criminal justice system. Yet, once a defendant is convicted, bargaining almost completely disappears from the system. Even though years of litigation are on the horizon, there is nearly no bargaining in the appellate and habeas corpus process. There are two reasons for this. First, prosecutors and courts typically lack the power to alter a sentence that has already been imposed. Second, even if prosecutors had the authority to negotiate following a conviction, they would have little incentive to do so. Affirmance rates in ordinary criminal …

The Commonwealth Of Virginia V. Joseph Michael Giarratano: A Cautionary Tale, Todd C. Peppers

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lethal Injection: A Horrendous Brutality, Robin C. Konrad

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Regulation Of Forensic Evidence, Brandon L. Garrett

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Solitary Confinement Until Death By State-Sponsored Homicide: An Eighth Amendment Assessment Of The Modern Execution Process, Robert Johnson

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Demise Of Capital Clemency, Paul J. Larkin Jr.

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Matters Of Strata: Race, Gender, And Class Structures In Capital Cases, Phyllis Goldfarb

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

“Merchants And Thieves, Hungry For Power”: Prosecutorial Misconduct And Passive Judicial Complicity In Death Penalty Trials Of Defendants With Mental Disabilities, Michael L. Perlin

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court’S Talmudic Debate On The Meanings Of Guilt, Innocence, And Finality, Jonathan D. Colan

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreign Governments As Plaintiffs In U.S. Courts And The Case Against “Judicial Imperialism”, Hannah L. Buxbaum

Washington and Lee Law Review

One consequence of the increasingly transnational nature of civil litigation is that U.S. courts must frequently address the interests of foreign sovereigns. These interactions arise primarily in three contexts: when a foreign government is the defendant in a U.S. court; when a claim requires a U.S. court to scrutinize actions taken by a foreign government; and when a U.S. court seeks to apply U.S. law to persons or conduct within a foreign government’s borders. Each of these contexts invokes a narrative in which the engagement of U.S. courts interferes or conflicts with the prerogatives of a foreign sovereign. As a …

Taking Patents, Gregory Dolin, Irena D. Manta

Washington and Lee Law Review

The America Invents Act (AIA) was widely hailed as a remedy to the excessive number of patents that the Patent & Trademark Office issued, and especially ones that would later turn out to be invalid. In its efforts to eradicate “patent trolls” and fend off other ills, however, the AIA introduced serious constitutional problems that this Article brings to the fore. We argue that the AIA’s new “second-look” mechanisms in the form of Inter Partes Review (IPR) and Covered Business Method Review (CBMR) have greatly altered the scope of vested patent rights by modifying the boundaries of existing patents. The …

Keeping Cases From Black Juries: An Empirical Analysis Of How Race, Income Inequality, And Regional History Affect Tort Law, Donald G. Gifford, Brian Jones

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Freedom To Pursue A Common Calling: Applying Intermediate Scrutiny To Occupational Licensing Statutes, Alexandra L. Klein

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Tale Of Two Cases, Paul J. Larkin Jr.

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Curious Call For More Judicial Activism: Comment On Alexandra Klein's "The Freedom To Pursue A Common Calling", Mark Rush

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Need Of Direction: An Evaluation Of The "Direct Effect" Requirement Under Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act, Claire L. Leonard

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Administrative Federalism As Separation Of Powers, David S. Rubenstein

Washington and Lee Law Review

Federal agencies are key players in our federalist system: they make front-line decisions about the scope of federal policy and whether such policy should preempt state law. How agencies perform these functions, and how they might fulfill them better, are questions at the heart of “administrative federalism.” Some academic proposals for administrative federalism work to enhance states’ ability to participate in federal agency decisionmaking. Other proposals work to protect state autonomy through adjustments to the Supreme Court’s administrative preemption doctrine. As jurists and scholars debate what these proposals entail for federalism, this Article doubles-down with a twist: it examines what …