Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (29)
- Constitutional Law (18)
- Courts (13)
- Judges (11)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (10)
-
- Criminal Procedure (8)
- Intellectual Property Law (7)
- Legal History (7)
- Education Law (6)
- First Amendment (6)
- Fourth Amendment (6)
- Jurisprudence (6)
- Law and Politics (6)
- Law and Race (6)
- Administrative Law (5)
- Criminal Law (5)
- Fourteenth Amendment (5)
- Jurisdiction (5)
- Law and Gender (5)
- Legal Biography (5)
- Sexuality and the Law (5)
- Civil Procedure (4)
- Election Law (4)
- Environmental Law (4)
- Health Law and Policy (4)
- Immigration Law (4)
- Labor and Employment Law (4)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (4)
- Law and Philosophy (4)
- Institution
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (10)
- Emory University School of Law (4)
- Pepperdine University (4)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (3)
- Seattle University School of Law (3)
-
- Georgetown University Law Center (2)
- Liberty University (2)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (2)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Georgia State University College of Law (1)
- Louisiana State University Law Center (1)
- Marquette University Law School (1)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- Notre Dame Law School (1)
- Roger Williams University (1)
- St. John's University School of Law (1)
- St. Mary's University (1)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (1)
- Trinity College (1)
- University of Colorado Law School (1)
- University of Maine School of Law (1)
- University of San Diego (1)
- Washington University in St. Louis (1)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (1)
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (10)
- Faculty Articles (4)
- Pepperdine Law Review (4)
- Seattle University Law Review (3)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (2)
-
- Journal Articles (2)
- Senior Honors Theses (2)
- University of Cincinnati Law Review (2)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Catholic University Law Review (1)
- Emory Law Journal (1)
- Faculty Publications (1)
- Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Georgia State University Law Review (1)
- Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality (1)
- Marquette Law Review (1)
- Roger Williams University Law Review (1)
- SLU Law Journal Online (1)
- Saint Louis University Journal of Health Law & Policy (1)
- San Diego Law Review (1)
- Scholarship@WashULaw (1)
- Senior Theses and Projects (1)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (1)
- Student Journal of Information Privacy Law (1)
- University of Colorado Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 46
Full-Text Articles in Law
Examining Netchoice And Murthy: Content Moderation In The Hands Of The Supreme Court, Devin B. Forbush
Examining Netchoice And Murthy: Content Moderation In The Hands Of The Supreme Court, Devin B. Forbush
Student Journal of Information Privacy Law
The right to free speech is often justified by the idea that an undisturbed marketplace of ideas is an essential ingredient for a healthy democracy. While in many cases we may believe the views espoused by that speech are incorrect, ignorant, or even harmful, those reasons do not justify silencing those views. In 2024, there is a clear social divide between social media platforms’ content-moderation practices. On one side, anti-moderation advocates opine that social media platforms have a distinct and pervasive bias in moderating user content and viewpoints indiscriminately. On the other side, many advocates contend that social media platforms …
From College Campus To Corner Office: The Impact Of Sffa V. Harvard On Voluntary Affirmative Action Programs, Ellen Whitehair
From College Campus To Corner Office: The Impact Of Sffa V. Harvard On Voluntary Affirmative Action Programs, Ellen Whitehair
University of Cincinnati Law Review
No abstract provided.
Anti-Press Bias: A Response To Andersen Jones And West's Presuming Trustworthiness, Erin C. Carroll
Anti-Press Bias: A Response To Andersen Jones And West's Presuming Trustworthiness, Erin C. Carroll
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Professors RonNell Andersen Jones and Sonja R. West’s Presuming Trustworthiness is a deeply depressing read. That is what makes it so good. The article is a clear-eyed, data-driven approach to assessing just how endangered the legal status of the free press is. Given the universality of the agreement that a free press is central to democracy, Andersen Jones and West’s message is vital. Presuming Trustworthiness should raise alarms.
In response, I hope this essay can serve as a bullhorn. I want to amplify what Andersen Jones and West’s research and data bear out. Not only has the Supreme Court ceased …
Quit Using Acquittals: The Unconstitutionality And Immorality Of Acquitted-Conduct Sentencing, Brenna Nouray
Quit Using Acquittals: The Unconstitutionality And Immorality Of Acquitted-Conduct Sentencing, Brenna Nouray
Pepperdine Law Review
This Comment examines the phenomenon of acquitted-conduct sentencing—a practice that allows a sentencing judge to enhance a criminal defendant’s sentence due to conduct for which he has already been acquitted. Seventeen-year-old Dayonta McClinton is one of many criminal defendants who have unjustly suffered at the hands of this practice when he received a thirteen-year enhancement because of conduct for which he already received a verdict of not guilty from a jury. This Comment argues that acquitted-conduct sentencing is unconstitutional, as it violates both the reasonable doubt standard required under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the jury …
The Word Is "Humility": Why The Supreme Court Needed To Adopt A Code Of Judicial Ethics, Laurie L. Levenson
The Word Is "Humility": Why The Supreme Court Needed To Adopt A Code Of Judicial Ethics, Laurie L. Levenson
Pepperdine Law Review
The Supreme Court is one of our most precious institutions. However, for the last few years, American confidence in the Court has dropped to a new low. Less than 40% of Americans have confidence in the Court and its decisions. Recent revelations regarding luxury trips, gifts, and exclusive access for certain individuals to the Justices have raised questions about whether the Justices understand their basic ethical duties and can act in a fair and impartial manner. As commentators have noted, the Supreme Court stood as the only court in America that was not governed by an ethical code. The question …
Partisanship "All The Way Down" On The U.S. Supreme Court, Lee Epstein
Partisanship "All The Way Down" On The U.S. Supreme Court, Lee Epstein
Pepperdine Law Review
Just as the American public is politically polarized, so too is the U.S. Supreme Court. More than ever before, a clear alignment exists between the Justices’ partisanship and their ideological leanings (known as “partisan sorting”). Disapproval of opposing-party identifiers also appears to have intensified (“partisan antipathy”). This Article offers evidence of both forms of polarization. It shows that partisan sorting has resulted in wide gaps in voting between Republican and Democratic appointees; and it supplies data on “us-against-them” judging in the form of increasing antipathy toward opposite-partisan presidents. Taken collectively, the data point not to law “all the way down,” …
The Supreme Court, Article Iii, And Jurisdiction Stuffing, James E. Pfander
The Supreme Court, Article Iii, And Jurisdiction Stuffing, James E. Pfander
Pepperdine Law Review
Reflecting on the state of the federal judiciary in the aftermath of the Biden Commission report and subsequent controversies, this Article identifies problems with the current operation of both the Supreme Court and the lower courts that make up the Article III judicial pyramid. Many federal issues have been assigned to non-Article III tribunals, courts poorly structured to offer the independent legal assessment that such Founders as James Wilson prized as they structured the federal judiciary. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court devotes growing attention to a slice of highly salient public law questions, including those presented on the shadow docket, thereby …
Administrative Law Judges And The Erosion Of The Administrative State: Why Jarkesy May Be The Straw That Breaks The Camel's Back, Nicholas D'Addio
Administrative Law Judges And The Erosion Of The Administrative State: Why Jarkesy May Be The Straw That Breaks The Camel's Back, Nicholas D'Addio
Catholic University Law Review
The Trump-era unitary executive movement sought to expand presidential
power and shrink the influence of the administrative state through deregulation.
This movement ripples into the present moment, as Trump’s overhaul of the
federal judiciary installed a comprehensive system to delegitimize
administrative agency action— a system that is certain to endure. The
independence and role of administrative law judges (ALJs) has proven a key
target of the movement. Most recently, in the 2022 case of Jarkesy v. Securities
and Exchange Commission, the Fifth Circuit held that the dual-tiered for-cause
removal protections of SEC ALJs violated the Take Care Clause of Article …
The Misguided Use Of The Harvard/Unc Ruling To Thwart Law Firm And Other Private Employer Dei Efforts, Ronald A. Norwood
The Misguided Use Of The Harvard/Unc Ruling To Thwart Law Firm And Other Private Employer Dei Efforts, Ronald A. Norwood
SLU Law Journal Online
This article explores the Harvard/UNC ruling and what, in the author’s view, is the misguided efforts by certain political and well-financed private actors to use that ruling to justify the eradication of private employers and law firm DEI efforts. It is the author’s firm belief that because the Supreme Court’s holding is limited to an analysis of the Constitution’s Equal Protection clause (limited to state actors) and Title VI (covering private actions receiving federal funding), that ruling should not be used by courts to quash DEI programs designed to level the employment playing field for minorities, women and other protected …
The Miller Trilogy, Jones, And The Future Of Juvenile Sentencing And Constitutional Interpretation In The Post-Jones America, Gabriela Seguinot
The Miller Trilogy, Jones, And The Future Of Juvenile Sentencing And Constitutional Interpretation In The Post-Jones America, Gabriela Seguinot
Senior Theses and Projects
The United States is an outlier in juvenile sentencing practices, often subjecting youth offenders to extreme and lengthy punishments. While the Supreme Court over the past two decades has been slowly narrowing the nation’s use of such sentences against children through a series of cases known as the Miller Trilogy, this progress came to a sudden halt in the 2021 case of Jones v. Mississippi. However, in surprising turn of events, the Supreme Court’s recent national display of restraint has not stopped sentencing reform efforts in the states. Contrary to the current Supreme Court, states in the U.S. have …
Slaughtering Slaughter-House: An Assessment Of 14th Amendment Privileges Or Immunities Jurisprudence, Caleb Webb
Slaughtering Slaughter-House: An Assessment Of 14th Amendment Privileges Or Immunities Jurisprudence, Caleb Webb
Senior Honors Theses
In 1872, the Supreme Court decided the Slaughter-House Cases, which applied a narrow interpretation of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment that effectually eroded the clause from the Constitution. Following Slaughter-House, the Supreme Court compensated by utilizing elastic interpretations of the Due Process Clause in its substantive due process jurisprudence to cover the rights that would have otherwise been protected by the Privileges or Immunities Clause. In more recent years, the Court has heard arguments favoring alternative interpretations of the Privileges or Immunities Clause but has yet to evaluate them thoroughly. By applying the …
Public Opinion And Its Potential Impact On The U.S. Supreme Court, Savannah Medlin
Public Opinion And Its Potential Impact On The U.S. Supreme Court, Savannah Medlin
Senior Honors Theses
The Supreme Court of the United States has a fundamental role in the interpretation of the Constitution and the configuration of the legal landscape of the country. But, while the Framers isolated the Court from political pressures, the Court is not removed from the impact of public opinion. This essay considers the effect of public opinion on Supreme Court rulings by reviewing studies and cases to discover the part public opinion plays in the courtroom. My findings imply that public opinion impacts the Court. There are limited ways by which the Court can prevent this impact. I emphasize that the …
Once Is Enough: Why Title Ix's Pervasive Requirement Necessitates Adopting The Totality Inquiry, Evan S. Thompson
Once Is Enough: Why Title Ix's Pervasive Requirement Necessitates Adopting The Totality Inquiry, Evan S. Thompson
University of Cincinnati Law Review
No abstract provided.
Willfully Forgetting Miranda's True Nature: Vega V. Tekoh Severs The Warnings Requirement From The Constitution, George M. Dery Iii
Willfully Forgetting Miranda's True Nature: Vega V. Tekoh Severs The Warnings Requirement From The Constitution, George M. Dery Iii
Marquette Law Review
This Article analyzes Vega v. Tekoh, in which the Supreme Court ruled that
a violation of Miranda was not a violation of the Fifth Amendment privilege
against self-incrimination. This Article examines the original language of the
Miranda opinion, the statements and intentions of the members of the Miranda
Court, and subsequent precedent to determine Miranda’s true nature. Further,
this Article examines the reasoning of Vega and the dangers created by its
pronouncements, especially in light of the Court’s earlier characterization of
Miranda as a constitutional rule in Dickerson v. United States. This Article
asserts that the Justices who …
Arrests: Legal And Illegal, Daniel Yeager
Arrests: Legal And Illegal, Daniel Yeager
Georgia State University Law Review
The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. An arrest—manifesting a police intention to transport a suspect to the stationhouse for booking, fingerprinting, and photographing—is a mode of seizure. Because arrests are so intrusive, they require roughly a fifty percent chance that an arrestable offense has occurred. Because nonarrest seizures (aka Terry stops), though no “petty indignity,” are less intrusive than arrests, they require roughly just a twenty-five percent chance that crime is afoot.
Any arrest not supported by probable cause is illegal. It would therefore seem to follow that any arrest supported by probable cause is legal. But it …
Pro Se Litigants In The U.S. Supreme Court: How Do They Fare?, Kyle Persaud
Pro Se Litigants In The U.S. Supreme Court: How Do They Fare?, Kyle Persaud
St. Mary's Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Growing, Growing, Gone: How Dobbs Fundamentally Altered The Way Reproductive Freedom, Private And Professional Liability, And Constitutional Rights Will Be Analyzed In A Post–Roe America, Amanda J. Sharp
San Diego Law Review
This Note examines the Dobbs decision and its implications. Part II analyzes the history of abortion rights in the United States, including the role Dobbs played in overturning precedential cases. Part III describes the legal implications of Dobbs, including the status of abortion rights and how this decision altered the state of women’s healthcare. It then addresses Dobbs’ indirect implications, including its potential impacts on the foster care system, implied liability in healthcare professions, data privacy laws, and the employer-employee relationship. Part IV briefly proposes next steps that could be taken and concludes with a call to action.
The Worst Choice For School Choice: Tuition Tax Credits Are A Bad Idea And Direct Funding Is Wiser, Michael J. Broyde, Anna G. Gabianelli
The Worst Choice For School Choice: Tuition Tax Credits Are A Bad Idea And Direct Funding Is Wiser, Michael J. Broyde, Anna G. Gabianelli
Faculty Articles
School choice is on the rise, and states use various mechanisms to implement it. One prevalent mechanism is also a uniquely problematic one: the tax credit. Tax credits are deficient at equitably distributing a benefit like school choice; they are costly, and they invite fraud. Instead of using tax credits, states opting for school choice programs should use direct funding. Direct funding will more efficiently achieve the goals of school choice because it can be regulated like any other government benefit, even if it ends up subsidizing religious private schools.
Tax credits’ prevalence is not inexplicable, of course. It is …
Judicial Fidelity, Caprice L. Roberts
Judicial Fidelity, Caprice L. Roberts
Journal Articles
Judicial critics abound. Some say the rule of law is dead across all three branches of government. Four are dead if you count the media as the fourth estate. All are in trouble, even if one approves of each branch’s headlines, but none of them are dead. Not yet.
Pundits and scholars see the latest term of the Supreme Court as clear evidence of partisan politics and unbridled power. They decry an upheaval of laws and norms demonstrating the dire situation across the federal judiciary. Democracy is not dead even when the Court issues opinions that overturn precedent, upends longstanding …
The Pioneers, Waves, And Random Walks Of Securities Law In The Supreme Court, Elizabeth Pollman
The Pioneers, Waves, And Random Walks Of Securities Law In The Supreme Court, Elizabeth Pollman
Seattle University Law Review
After the pioneers, waves, and random walks that have animated the history of securities laws in the U.S. Supreme Court, we might now be on the precipice of a new chapter. Pritchard and Thompson’s superb book, A History of Securities Law in the Supreme Court, illuminates with rich archival detail how the Court’s view of the securities laws and the SEC have changed over time and how individuals have influenced this history. The book provides an invaluable resource for understanding nearly a century’s worth of Supreme Court jurisprudence in the area of securities law and much needed context for …
The Past As A Colonialist Resource, Deepa Das Acevedo
The Past As A Colonialist Resource, Deepa Das Acevedo
Faculty Articles
Originalism’s critics have failed to block its rise. For many jurists and legal scholars, the question is no longer whether to espouse originalism but how to espouse it. This Article argues that critics have ceded too much ground by focusing on discrediting originalism as either bad history or shoddy linguistics. To disrupt the cycle of endless “methodological” refinements and effectively address originalism’s continued popularity, critics must do two things: identify a better disciplinary analogue for originalist interpretation and advance an argument that moves beyond methods.
Anthropology can assist with both tasks. Both anthropological analysis and originalist interpretation are premised on …
The False Promise Of Jurisdiction Stripping, Daniel Epps, Alan M. Trammell
The False Promise Of Jurisdiction Stripping, Daniel Epps, Alan M. Trammell
Scholarship@WashULaw
Jurisdiction stripping is seen as a nuclear option. Its logic is simple: by depriving federal courts of jurisdiction over some set of cases, Congress ensures those courts cannot render bad decisions. In theory, it frees up the political branches and the states to act without fear of judicial second-guessing. To its proponents, it offers the ultimate check on unelected and unaccountable judges. To critics, it poses a grave threat to the separation of powers. Both sides agree, though, that jurisdiction stripping is a powerful weapon. On this understanding, politicians, activists, and scholars throughout American history have proposed jurisdiction stripping measures …
The Unconstitutional Conditions Vacuum In Criminal Procedure, Kay L. Levine, Jonathan R. Nash, Robert A. Schapiro
The Unconstitutional Conditions Vacuum In Criminal Procedure, Kay L. Levine, Jonathan R. Nash, Robert A. Schapiro
Faculty Articles
For more than a century, the Supreme Court has applied the unconstitutional conditions doctrine in many contexts, scrutinizing government efforts to condition the tradeoff of rights for benefits with regard to speech, funding, and takings, among others. The Court has declined, however, to invoke the doctrine in the area of criminal procedure, where people accused of crime are often asked to—and often do—surrender their constitutional rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments in return for some benefit. Despite its insistence that the unconstitutional conditions doctrine applies broadly across the Bill of Rights, the Court’s jurisprudence demonstrates that the doctrine …
Community Caretaking Exception Saves Lives . . . The Supreme Court Disagrees, Gabriella Lorenzo
Community Caretaking Exception Saves Lives . . . The Supreme Court Disagrees, Gabriella Lorenzo
Touro Law Review
As many are aware, the Fourth Amendment protects the people against unreasonable searches and seizures. A warrant is necessary for said activities. While there are a few exceptions to the warrant requirement, the Supreme Court recently held that the community caretaking exception does not extend to the home. Extending this exception to the home would allow police officers to enter and engage in functions that are unrelated to the investigation of a crime. Essentially, this exception would allow police to aid individuals and prevent serious, dangerous situations to protect the community. This Note discusses why the Supreme Court erred in …
“It’S The End Of The World As We Know It” –Redrafting Amendment To Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 26 To Allow Remote Testimony, Alisson Sandoval
“It’S The End Of The World As We Know It” –Redrafting Amendment To Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 26 To Allow Remote Testimony, Alisson Sandoval
Touro Law Review
During the COVID-19 pandemic, when society fought an aggressive and deadly virus, our connection to the outside world became predominantly virtual. Videoconference technology became essential in state and federal civil judicial proceedings. In light of the unprecedented challenges presented by the pandemic and its long-lasting impact on the criminal justice system, this Article argues for amending Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 26 to permit remote witness testimony when a witness is unavailable.
Fears, Faith, And Facts In Environmental Law, William W. Buzbee
Fears, Faith, And Facts In Environmental Law, William W. Buzbee
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Environmental law has long been shaped by both the particular nature of environmental harms and by the actors and institutions that cause such harms or can address them. This nation’s environmental statutes remain far from perfect, and a comprehensive law tailored to the challenges of climate change is still elusive. Nonetheless, America’s environmental laws provide lofty, express protective purposes and findings about reasons for their enactment. They also clearly state health and environmental goals, provide tailored criteria for action, and utilize procedures and diverse regulatory tools that reflect nuanced choices.
But the news is far from good. Despite the ambitious …
Students For Fair Admissions: Affirming Affirmative Action And Shapeshifting Towards Cognitive Diversity?, Steven A. Ramirez
Students For Fair Admissions: Affirming Affirmative Action And Shapeshifting Towards Cognitive Diversity?, Steven A. Ramirez
Seattle University Law Review
The Roberts Court holds a well-earned reputation for overturning Supreme Court precedent regardless of the long-standing nature of the case. The Roberts Court knows how to overrule precedent. In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA), the Court’s majority opinion never intimates that it overrules Grutter v. Bollinger, the Court’s leading opinion permitting race-based affirmative action in college admissions. Instead, the Roberts Court applied Grutter as authoritative to hold certain affirmative action programs entailing racial preferences violative of the Constitution. These programs did not provide an end point, nor did they require assessment, review, periodic expiration, or revision for greater …
Foreword: The Life, Work & Legacy Of Felix Frankfurter, The Justice Known As “Ff”, Rodger D. Citron
Foreword: The Life, Work & Legacy Of Felix Frankfurter, The Justice Known As “Ff”, Rodger D. Citron
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
John Marshall And Felix Frankfurter: An Icon And A Disappointment?, William E. Nelson
John Marshall And Felix Frankfurter: An Icon And A Disappointment?, William E. Nelson
Touro Law Review
This article shows how Chief Justice John Marshall first developed the doctrine of judicial restraint in Marbury v. Madison to assure the public that the Supreme Court would not engage in politically oriented judicial review as colonial courts had in holding Parliament’s 1765 Stamp Act unconstitutional. Justice Felix Frankfurter, in contrast, adopted judicial restraint differently—by reading the scholarship of James Bradley Thayer. This article also shows that Frankfurter did not abandon his commitment to judicial restraint when during his years on the bench it began to serve conservative purposes rather than the progressive purposes it had once served.
Lost In The Thicket, Brad Snyder
Lost In The Thicket, Brad Snyder
Touro Law Review
As part of a symposium on his biography of Felix Frankfurter, Democratic Justice, Brad Snyder revisits Baker v. Carr and explores the contrasts between Justice William Brennan’s judicially supremacist majority opinion and Frankfurter’s departmentalist dissent and unheeded warnings about empowering the judiciary. As Frankfurter wrote in his Baker dissent, he placed more faith in the U.S. Congress, as opposed to the judiciary, to protect democracy.