Law Commons^™

The Constitutional Right To Watch Television: Analyzing The Digital Switchover In The Context Of The First Amendment , Eugene Ho

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Envisioning The Constitution , Thomas P. Crocker

American University Law Review

If one of the more persistent problems of constitutional interpretation, particularly of the Bill of Rights, is that we lack a clear view of it, then it would appear that how we see the Constitution is as important as how we read it. What clauses we see as connected in order to form comprehensive values, such as federalism or rights protections, are not so much products of constitutional interpretation as constitutional vision. To obtain a view of the Constitution, we have to do more than derive semantic meaning from diverse articles and clauses. To have a vision of the Constitution …

Final Salute To Lost Soldiers: Preserving The Freedom Of Speech At Military Funerals, Andrea Cornwell

American University Law Review

This Comment argues that RAFHA, as currently written, cannot stand in light of First Amendment jurisprudence. Part I reviews the history and development of relevant free speech case law and restrictions on expression, including the recent trend in the states of passing legislation similar to RAFHA. Part II assesses the Act’s constitutionality against this background. First, Part II contends that the statute is a content-based restriction of free speech and is thus subject to strict scrutiny. Second, even if deemed content neutral, the Act could not survive the courts’ intermediate scrutiny. Finally, this Comment reasons that even if able to …

Constitutional Review And Tax Law: An Analytical Framework , Yoseph Edrey

American University Law Review

This Article offers a more comprehensive and substantial approach to constitutional review of the general power to tax and the way tax laws should comply with constitutional rights and principles. The power of Congress to levy taxes is not confined to income taxes; it is broader and much more general. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution describes the general power of Congress in terms of tax laws as follows: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United …

Cruelty To The Mentally Ill: An Eighth Amendment Challenge To The Abolition Of The Insanity Defense, Stephen M. Leblanc

American University Law Review

This Comment addresses the present gap in insanity-defense laws

created by the defense’s abolition and offers an Eighth Amendment

based remedy. Part I reviews the history and evolution of the insanity

defense in Anglo-American law. It then describes how four states

have statutorily abolished the defense. It concludes with a discussion

of Clark v. Arizona, the Court’s most recent decision on the

constitutionality of the insanity defense. Part II turns to the Eighth

Amendment, examining its historical understanding and the

contemporary evolving-standards-of-decency analysis, through which

the Court assesses the constitutionality of modern-day punishments.

Part II concludes with a discussion of …

Tom Delay, Robert Torricelli, And Political Party Maneuvering: Why The First Amendment Associational Rights Of Political Parties Should Be Extended To Include Candidate Replacement , Kevin M. Baker

American University Law Review

This Comment analyzes whether the First Amendment

associational rights of the major political parties should include

candidate replacement and argues that the rights of parties to define

who votes in the primary logically should be extended to include a

right to replace candidates on the ballot after a withdrawal. Based on

the more recent Supreme Court cases finding greater freedom of

association for political parties, this Comment will focus on the 2002

replacement of Robert Torricelli in the New Jersey U.S. Senate

election and the 2006 failure to replace Tom DeLay in the Texas

22nd Congressional District U.S. House of …

On Mock Funerals, Banners, And Giant Rat Balloons: Why Current Interpretation Of Section 8(B)(4)(Ii)(B) Of The National Labor Relations Act Unconstitutionality Burdens Union Speech, Kate L. Racokzy

American University Law Review

This Comment discusses whether the government may prohibit unions from engaging in types of secondary protest like mock funerals. Since 1959, § 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA” or “the Act”) has made it illegal for unions to “threaten, coerce, or restrain” secondary employers into severing their business ties with primary employers. Precisely what forms of protest this provision outlaws, however, is unclear. On one end of the spectrum, courts almost always find that picketing secondary employers constitutes illegal coercion, for courts see pickets as having a unique power to induce automatic action. On the other end, the …

A Proposal To Rescue New York Times V. Sullivan By Promoting A Responsible Press, Benjamin Barron

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Comparative Evidence Or Common Experience: When Does "Substantial Limitation" Require Proof Under The Americans With Disabilities Act?, Cheryl L. Anderson

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Gender Curve: An Analysis Of Colleges' Use Of Affirmative Action Policies To Benefit Male Applicants, Debra Franzese

American University Law Review

This comment evaluates the constitutionality of affirmative action policies that benefit male students. Part I sets out background information about potential causes of action and remedies for female students who challenge affirmative action policies that benefit male students. Section A discusses the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the development of the law regarding universities’ use of racial affirmative action policies. Section B discusses potential remedies under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (“Title IX”) and the similarity between Title IX and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (“Title VI”). Section C discusses state remedies …

Comparative Constitutional Advocacy , Mark C. Rahdert

American University Law Review

When the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Roper v. Simmons, a longstanding debate about comparative analysis in constitutional cases came to national prominence. In Roper the Court relied in part on comparative precedent in ruling that the execution of juvenile offenders violates the Eighth Amendment's proscription against cruel and unusual punishment. This look beyond our borders earned the Supreme Court both accolades and scathing criticism. This article comprehensively evaluates the place of comparative analysis in our constitutional jurisprudence. It discusses and adds to the arguments in support of comparative constitutional advocacy offered by several leading scholars, and responds …