Law Commons^™

The Buck Does Not Stop Here: Supervisory Liability In Section 1983 Cases, Kit Kinports

Kit Kinports

The appropriate standard for supervisory liability in Section 1983 cases has been a source of considerable disagreement among federal courts of appeals. In the absence of established Supreme Court authority on the subject, courts have rejected vicarious and negligence liability in favor of a higher culpability requirement, but they have not agreed on precisely what form this higher standard should take. In this article, the Author addresses the need for a uniform standard consistent with the statute's twin goals of compensating the victims of constitutional violations and deterring constitutional infractions.

The author notes at the outset that lower courts have …

Immigrant Rights In The Shadows Of Citizenship, Rachel Bluff, Victor Romero

Victor C. Romero

Victor C. Romero is a contributing author: "Who Should Manage Immigration - Congress or the States? An Introduction to Constitutional Immigration Law." Chapter 12, page 286.

Punctuated by marches across the United States in the spring of 2006, immigrant rights has reemerged as a significant and highly visible political issue. Immigrant Rights in the Shadows of U.S. Citizenship brings prominent activists and scholars together to examine the emergence and significance of the contemporary immigrant rights movement. Contributors place the contemporary immigrant rights movement in historical and comparative contexts by looking at the ways immigrants and their allies have staked claims …

Demanding Individual Rights And Civil Liberties: An Iranian Approach, Zahra Takhshid

Zahra Takhshid

Iran has a long history of social movements and revolutions. The 1906 Constitutional Revolution led to the recognition of individual rights as part of Iran’s first Constitution. With the Islamic Revolution of 1979, a new constitution was enacted, which devoted one chapter to “the Rights of the Nation.”

The Constitution has introduced several methods to protect the recognized rights: the Guardian Council, the Tribunal of Administrative Justice, and the Commission of Article 90.

In addition to the institutions introduced in the Constitution, the Legislature and the Executive branch proposed new safeguarding procedures and adopted new statutes, which recognized broader range …

Global Environmental Constitutionalism, Erin Daly, James May

Erin Daly

No abstract provided.

The Life And Times Of Targeted Killing, Markus Gunneflo

Markus Gunneflo

Against the background of the ongoing shift in the perception of the legality and legitimacy of extraterritorial lethal force in counterterrorism, my doctoral thesis analyses the emergence of so-called “targeted killing” in the history of Israel and the US, as well as in international law. It finds that the relationship between targeted killing and law, particularly international law, is not a straightforward case of more or less determinate and legally binding norms being applied to state measures adopted in situations of insecurity (in this case, those of the second Intifada and 9/11) but rather one of a much longer and …

The Future We Want And Constitutionally Enshrined Procedural Rights In Environmental Matters, James May, Erin Daly

Erin Daly

No abstract provided.

Holdings, Dicta, And The Paradigms Of Precedent, Randy J. Kozel

Randy J Kozel

In United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court invalidated a key provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. In doing so, it raised significant questions about the power of states to limit the institution of marriage to opposite-sex couples. That issue was not presented in Windsor itself, but Windsor’s reasoning and rhetoric have already begun to play a pivotal role in ensuing challenges to state laws. Determining the future effects of Windsor, or of any other Supreme Court decision, requires defining the scope of judicial precedent. One account of precedent is restrictive: Only a court’s holdings must …

When Religion And Law Conflict, Alan Garfield

Alan E Garfield

Dignity Rights: Courts, Constitutions, And The Worth Of The Human Person, Erin Daly

Erin Daly

The right to dignity is now recognized in most of the world's constitutions, and hardly a new constitution is adopted without it. Over the last sixty years, courts in Latin America, Europe, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and North America have developed a robust jurisprudence of dignity on subjects as diverse as health care, imprisonment, privacy, education, culture, the environment, sexuality, and death. As the range and growing number of cases about dignity attest, it is invoked and recognized by courts far more frequently than other constitutional guarantees. Dignity Rights is the first book to explore the constitutional law of …

Beyond Interpretation: The "Cultural Approach" To Understanding Extra-Formal Change In Religious And Constitutional Law (Invited Symposium Contribution), Mark Rosen

Mark D. Rosen

No abstract provided.

American Constitutionalism: Volume Ii: Rights & Liberties, Howard Gillman, Mark Graber, Keith Whittington

Mark Graber

Constitutionalism in the United States is not determined solely by decisions made by the Supreme Court. Moving beyond traditional casebooks, renowned scholars Howard Gillman, Mark A. Graber, and Keith E. Whittington take a refreshingly innovative approach in American Constitutionalism. Organized according to the standard two-semester sequence--in which Volume I covers Structures of Government and Volume II covers Rights and Liberties--this text is unique in that it presents the material in a historical organization within each volume, as opposed to the typical issues-based organization.

The Ecuadorian Exemplar: The First Ever Vindications Of Constitutional Rights Of Nature, Erin Daly

Erin Daly

The 'Sala de le Corte Provincial' - a provincial court in Ecuador - became the first court ever to vindicate the recently constitutionalized rights of nature. Recognizing the indisputable importance of the rights of nature for present and future generations, the court held the provincial government liable for flooding damages caused by dumping of construction debris. This judicial victory is arguably overshadowed by challenges facing the plaintiffs in seeing the courts order enforced, however. A subsequent case bears witness to the judiciary’s vindication of rights of nature in Ecuador with ever increasing legal effect.

Strategies And Techniques For Teaching Constitutional Law, Robert Power

Robert C Power

No abstract provided.

Western Union, The American Federation Of Labor, Google, And The Changing Face Of Privacy Advocates, Wesley Oliver

Wesley M Oliver

No abstract provided.

Pennsylvania Constitutional Conventions: Discarding The Myths, John Gedid

John L. Gedid

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, American Electric Power Co. V. State Of Connecticut, No. 10-174, James R. May, Stuart Banner

James R. May

No abstract provided.

Should Pennsylvania Amend Its Constitution? The Pennsylvania Bar Association Considers Calls For Reform, John Gedid

John L. Gedid

No abstract provided.

Senate Debate Served Us All Well, Erin Daly, Paul Regan

Paul L Regan

No abstract provided.

Senate Debate Served Us All Well, Erin Daly, Paul Regan

Erin Daly

No abstract provided.

In Search Of A Theory Of Deference: The Eighth Amendment, Democratic Pedigree, And Constitutional Decisionmaking, Eric Berger

Eric Berger

The Supreme Court’s recent Eighth Amendment death penalty case law is in disarray, and the confusion is symptomatic of a larger problem in constitutional doctrine. In Baze v. Rees and Kennedy v. Louisiana, the Court approached the challenged state policies with vastly different levels of deference. Though the Court purported to apply longstanding Eighth Amendment tests in both cases, Baze was highly deferential to state policy, and Kennedy was not deferential at all. Remarkably, neither the Court nor legal scholars have acknowledged, let alone justified, these contrasting approaches. This article proposes a theory of deference to address this discrepancy. Courts …

Death Is Different, But Not Really, Corinna Barrett Lain

Corinna Lain

The Supreme Court’s landmark death penalty rulings over the past several years have renewed scholarly criticism of the Eighth Amendment’s “evolving standards of decency” doctrine, which invalidates a punishment when a national consensus has formed against it. Critics claim that it makes no sense for constitutional protection to follow majoritarian sentiment—particularly in the capital context, where death penalty politics make “tyranny of the majority” more than a theoretical concern. Defenders contend that while majoritarian constitutional protection may be problematic in general, Eighth Amendment protection is different; the text of the “cruel and unusual punishments” clause invites, if not requires, protection …

In A Dissenting Voice: Justice Ginsburg's Federalism, Russell Miller

Russell A. Miller

No abstract provided.

The Geography Of Discrimination: The Seattle And Louisville Cases And The Legacy Of Brown V. Board Of Education, Robert Hayman

Robert L. Hayman

No abstract provided.

Haunted By Brown, Robert Lipkin

Robert Justin Lipkin

No abstract provided.

Introduction, Robert Hayman, Leland Ware

Robert L. Hayman

No abstract provided.

Boumediene V. Bush And Guantanamo, Cuba: Does The 'Empire Strike Back'?, Ernesto A. Hernandez-Lopez

Ernesto A. Hernandez

Commenting on the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Boumediene v. Bush (2008) and the U.S. occupation of the Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, this Article argues that anomaly on the base heavily influences "War on Terror" detention jurisprudence. Anomaly is created by agreements between the U.S. and Cuba in 1903 and 1934. They affirm that the U.S. lacks sovereignty over Guantanamo but retains "complete jurisdiction and control" for an indefinite period; while Cuba has "ultimate sovereignty." Gerald Neuman labels this an "anomalous zone" with fundamental legal rules locally suspended. The base was chosen as a detention center because of …

Boumediene V. Bush And Guantánamo, Cuba: Does The "Empire Strike Back"?, Ernesto A. Hernandez

Ernesto A. Hernandez

Focusing on the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Boumediene v. Bush (2008) and the U.S. occupation of the Naval Station at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, this article argues that the base’s legal anomaly heavily influences “War on Terror” detention jurisprudence. Anomaly is created by agreements between the U.S. and Cuba in 1903 and 1934. They affirm that the U.S. lacks sovereignty over Guantánamo but retains “complete jurisdiction and control” for an indefinite period; while Cuba has “ultimate sovereignty.” Gerald Neuman labels this as an anomalous zone with fundamental legal rules locally suspended. The base was chosen as a detention center because …

Unconstitutional On Its Face, Robert Lipkin

Robert Justin Lipkin

No abstract provided.

Wrestling With God: The Courts' Tortuous Treatment Of Religion (Paperback), Patrick Garry

Patrick M. Garry

The relationship between church and state is both controversial and unsettled. For decades, the courts have vacillated dramatically in their rulings on when a particular governmental accommodation rises to the level of an impermissible state establishment of religion. Without a comprehensive theory of the First Amendment establishment clause, religion cases have devolved into a jurisprudence of minutiae. Seemingly insignificant occurrences, such as a student reading a religious story or a teacher wearing a cross on a necklace, have led to years of litigation. And because of the constant threat of judicial intrusion, a pervasive social anxiety exists about the presence …

Editorial, Upholding Separation Of Power Was Proper, John Gedid

John L. Gedid

No abstract provided.