Law Commons^™

Jury Bias Resulting In Indefinite Commitment: Expanding Procedural Protections In Svp Civil Commitment Proceedings Under The Mathews Test, Alli M. Mentch

William & Mary Law Review

Twenty states, the District of Columbia, and the federal government have enacted Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) laws that permit the civil commitment of sex offenders. Under these laws, imprisoned sex offenders serving criminal sentences are transferred to treatment facilities and held indefinitely. As one individual describes civil commitment, “It’s worse than prison. In prison I wasn’t happy, but I was content because I knew I had a release date.” An estimated 5,400 individuals are currently civilly committed under these laws.

This Note argues that such laws do not adequately protect respondents’ due process rights. To that end, this Note proposes …

Force-Feeding Pretrial Detainees: A Constitutional Violation, Bryn L. Clegg

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Epistemic Function Of Fusing Equal Protection And Due Process, Deborah Hellman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The fusion of equal protection and due process has attracted significant attention with scholars offering varied accounts of its purpose and function. Some see the combination as productive, creating a constitutional violation that neither clause would generate alone. Others see the combination as merely strategic, offered to make a claim acceptable at a particular historical moment but not genuinely necessary. This Article offers a third alternative. Judges have and should bring both equal protection and due process together to learn what each clause independently requires. On this Epistemic vision of constitutional fusion, a focus on equality helps judges learn what …

The Forgotten Relatives In The Fight Against Family Separation: A Constitutional Analysis Of The Statutory Definition Of Unaccompanied Minors In Immigration Detention, Alysa Williams

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

No Arbitrary Power: An Originalist Theory Of The Due Process Of Law, Randy E. Barnett, Evan D. Bernick

William & Mary Law Review

“Due process of law” is arguably the most controversial and frequently litigated phrase in the Constitution of the United States. Although the dominant originalist view has long been that the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process of Law Clauses are solely “process” guarantees that do not constrain the content or “substance” of legislation at all, originalist scholars have in recent years made fresh inquiries into the historical evidence and concluded that there is a weighty case for some form of substantive due process. In this Article, we review and critique those findings, employing our theory of good-faith originalist interpretation and …

Highway Robbery: Due Process, Equal Protection, And Punishing Poverty With Driver’S License Suspensions, Thomas Capretta

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Lawfulness Of The Same-Sex Marriage Decisions: Charles Black On Obergefell, Toni M. Massaro

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

(Same) Sex, Lies, And Democracy: Tradition, Religion, And Substantive Due Process (With An Emphasis On Obergefell V. Hodges), Stephen M. Feldman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Substantive due process issues implicitly concern voice. Whose voice will be heard? Although such issues often remain submerged, the Justices occasionally translate them into disputes over democratic participation and power. The Supreme Court’s most important substantive due process decision in years, Obergefell v. Hodges, entailed such a battle over democracy. The multiple dissenting opinions insisted that the decision demeaned the opponents of same-sex marriage, many of whom were inspired by traditional values and religious convictions. The majority explicitly disagreed, reasoning that the case resolved the rights of same-sex couples to marry and did not diminish the opponents’ voices. The dissenters …

Historically Unappealing: Boumediene V. Bush, Appellate Avoidance Mechanisms, And Black Holes Extending Beyond Guantanamo Bay, Dennis Schmelzer

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Knowledge Is Power: The Fundamental Right To Record Present Observations In Public, Travis Gunn

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mackey V. Montrym: Clarification On A Matter Of Timing , Alan J. Cohen

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

A General Theory Of Governance: Due Process And Lawmaking Power, Louise Weinberg

William & Mary Law Review

This Article proposes a general theory describing the nature and sources of law in American courts. Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins is rejected for this purpose. Better, more general theory is available, flowing from the Due Process Clauses. At its narrowest, the proposed theory is consonant with Erie but generalizes it, embracing federal as well as state law and statutory as well as decisional law in both state and federal courts. More broadly, beyond this unification of systemic thinking, the interest-analytic methodology characteristic of due process extends to a range of substantive constitutional problems. These include problems concerning both the …

Valid Rule Due Process Challenges: Bond V. United States And Erie's Constitutional Source, Kermit Roosevelt Iii

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dodging A Bullet: Mcdonald V. City Of Chicago And The Limits Of Progessive Originalism, Dale E. Ho

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Supreme Court’s decision in last term’s gun rights case, McDonald v. City of Chicago, punctured the conventional wisdom after District of Columbia v. Heller that “we are all originalists now.” Surprisingly, many progressive academics were disappointed. For “progressive originalists,” McDonald was a missed opportunity to overrule the Slaughter-House Cases and to revitalize the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In their view, such a ruling could have realigned progressive constitutional achievements with originalism and relieved progressives of the albatross of substantive due process, while also unlocking long-dormant constitutional text to serve as the source of new unenumerated …

The Texas Mis-Step: Why The Largest Child Removal In Modern U.S. History Failed, Jessica Dixon Weaver

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

This Article sets forth the historical and legal reasons as to how the State of Texas botched the removal of 439 children from the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints parents residing in Eldorado, Texas. The Department of Family and Protective Services in Texas overreached its authority by treating this case like a class-action removal based on an impermissible legal argument, rather than focusing on the facts and circumstances that could have been substantiated for a select group of children at risk. This impermissible legal argument regarding the “pervasive belief system” of a polygamist sect that allowed minor …

Avoiding Another Eldorado: Balancing Parental Liberty And The Risk Of Error With Governmental Interest In The Well-Being Of Children In Complex Cases Of Child Removal, Andrew T. Erwin

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Unbearable Lightness Of Marriage In The Abortion Decisions Of The Supreme Court: Altered States In Constitutional Law, William W. Van Alstyne

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Roe At Thirty-Six And Beyond: Enhancing Protection For Abortion Rights Through State Constitutions, Linda J. Wharton

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

In a series of decisions over the past three decades, the Supreme Court has seriously undermined Roe v. Wade's promise of full and meaningful federal constitutional protection for women's access to abortion. While the new Obama administration will enhance protection for reproductive rights at the federal level, the reality remains that reconstituting the Supreme Court with a majority of Justices amenable to fully restoring Roe's strict protections will likely take many years. This Article considers whether state constitutions are a promising avenue for enhancing protection for abortion rights.

This Article looks back on thirty years of reproductive rights litigation under …

Whither Sexual Orientation Analysis?: The Proper Methodology When Due Process And Equal Protection Intersect, Sharon E. Rush

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article suggests that there is Proper Methodology that courts apply when reviewing cases at the intersection of due process and equal protection. Briefly, courts operate under a rule that heightened review applies if either a fundamental right or a suspect class is involved in a case, and that rational basis review applies if neither is involved (the "Rule"). Two primary exceptions to the Rule exist, and this Article identifies them as the "Logical" and "Ill Motives" Exceptions. The Logical Exception applies when a court need not apply heightened review because a law fails rational basis review. The Ill Motives …

Is Economic Exclusion A Legitimate State Interest? Four Recent Cases Test The Boundaries, Timothy Sandefur

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Comparative And Noncomparative Justice: Some Guidelines For Constitutional Adjudication, Raleigh Hannah Levine, Russell Pannier

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Adam And Steve And Eve: Why Sexuality Segregation In Assisted Reproduction In Virginia Is No Longer Acceptable, Brooke D. Rodgers-Miller

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Righteous Shooting, Unreasonable Seizure? The Relevance Of An Officer's Pre-Seizure Conduct In An Excessive Force Claim, Aaron Kimber

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Not So Landmark After All? Lawrence V. Texas: Classical Liberalism And Due Process Jurisprudence, Davin J. Hall

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Beyond Gay Rights: Lawrence V. Texas And The Promise Of Liberty, Philip Chapman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Did The Government Finally Get It Right? An Analysis Of The Former Ins, The Office Of Refugee Resettlement And Unaccompanied Minor Aliens' Due Process Rights, Jessica G. Taverna

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Even Aliens Are Entitled To Due Process: Extending Mathews V. Eldridge Balancing To Board Of Immigration Appeals Procedural Reform, Bradley J. Wyatt

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Justice By Any Other Name: The Right To A Jury Trial And The Criminal Nature Of Juvenile Justice In Louisiana, Kerrin C. Wolf

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The juvenile justice system has become increasingly punitive in recent decades. While the juvenile justice system has come to resemble the adult system in this way, juveniles facing adjudication nevertheless are denied the essential Sixth Amendment due process right. This Note will argue that the Louisiana Supreme Court decided State ex rel. D.J. incorrectly and, further, will demonstrate that the nation as a whole should revisit the place of juries in juvenile proceedings.

The Fragmented Liberty Clause, Rebecca L. Brown

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lochner, Parity, And The Chinese Laundry Cases, David E. Bernstein

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.