Law Commons^™

Reining In Abuses Of Executive Power Through Substantive Due Process, Rosalie Berger Levinson

Law Faculty Publications

Although substantive due process is one of the most confusing and controversial areas of constitutional law, it is well established that the Due Process Clause includes a substantive component that “bars certain arbitrary wrongful government actions ‘regardless of the fairness of the procedures used to implement them.’” The Court has recognized substantive due process limitations on law-enforcement personnel, publicschool officials, government employers, and those who render decisions that affect our property rights. Government officials who act with intent to harm or with deliberate indifference to our rights have been found to engage in conduct that “shocks the judicial conscience” contrary …

Misinterpreting "Sounds Of Silence": Why Courts Should Not "Imply" Congressional Preclusion Of § 1983 Constitutional Claims, Rosalie Berger Levinson

Law Faculty Publications

Despite the clear text of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, its promise to protect constitutional rights has been obfuscated by the theory that Congress, by enacting civil rights laws, has “impliedly” foreclosed the historic use of § 1983 to vindicate constitutional wrongdoing. Increasingly, plaintiffs are being denied their right to vindicate constitutional wrongdoing, either because the new “preempting” federal statute does not trigger individual liability or because it makes institutional liability more difficult to establish.

It is counterintuitive to believe that Congress, in an attempt to expand equality or due process, intended to cut off existing remedies for constitutional violations. Nonetheless, …