Law Commons^™

The Supreme Court 1997 Term -- Foreword: The Limits Of Socratic Deliberation, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The New American Caste System: The Supreme Court And Discrimination Among Civil Rights Plaintiffs, Melissa L. Koehn

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Fifteen percent of the decisions issued by the Supreme Court during its 1996-97 Term centered around section 1983. Section 1983 provides civil rights plaintiffs with a procedural mechanism for vindicating their federally protected rights, including those enshrined in the Constitution. The Court's decisions from its 1996-97 Term reflect a continuation of the alarming trend that has permeated section 1983 for the last two decades-a movement to decrease the scope of section 1983, regardless of the impact on constitutional rights. The Supreme Court appears to be creating a hierarchy both of constitutional rights and of plaintiffs: free speech and takings claims …

Section 1: Chicago V. Morales, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 2: The Direction Of The Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 4: Criminal Law And Procedure, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 8: Also This Term, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 5: Civil Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 6: The Court And The Public, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 3: Business, Commerce, And Property, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 9: Justice Powell, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 7: Upcoming Issues In The Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

The Electronic Media And The Flight From First Amendment Doctrine: Justice Breyer's New Balancing Approach, Jerome A. Barron

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Contemporary First Amendment issues in cases involving the electronic media transcend traditional conflicts between the government and the speaker. The speaker is not easy to identify. Listeners, programmer and medium operators or distributors all have competing claims to First Amendment protection. To determine whose interests shall prevail, courts increasingly seek a methodology that accounts for these warring interests. Justice Breyer, along with Justice Souter and, in some respects, Justice Stevens, have been instrumental in reviving balancing as a First Amendment approach in these situations.

In two recent First Amendment cable television cases Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. FCC (Turner II) …

Race, Rights, And Remedies In Criminal Adjudication, Pamela S. Karlan

Michigan Law Review

Once upon a time, back before the Warren Court, criminal procedure and racial justice were adjacent hinterlands in constitutional law's empire. In 1954, the fifth edition of Dowling's constitutional law casebook contained one chapter on "procedural due process" in which six of the eight cases were about criminal justice, and three of those - Powell v. Alabama, Moore v. Dempsey, and Bailey v. Alabama - were as much about race as they were about crime. A few pages later, two slender chapters on the "national protection of civil rights" and "equal protection of the laws" contained seven and nine decisions, …

A Response To Professor Rubenfeld, Jonathan D. Hacker

Michigan Law Review

Professor Jed Rubenfeld has offered in these pages an ingenious explanation for why the Supreme Court was right to strike down the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) in City of Boerne v. Flores. Rubenfeld finds in the First Amendment's Establishment Clause a historical and inherent principle he calls "antidisestablishmentarianism": a prohibition on acts of Congress that "disestablish" religion in the several states. Rubenfeld reads the Establishment Clause as proscribing not only congressional acts that "establish" religion but also all congressional acts that "dictate a position on religion for states," including laws designed to ensure that states abide by the requirements …

Reply: Did The Fourteenth Amendment Repeal The First?, Jed Rubenfeld

Michigan Law Review

To get right to the point: Mr. Hacker does not disagree that the Establishment Clause would, in the absence of the Fourteenth Amendment, have prohibited Congress from passing a nationwide religion law like RFRA. He believes, however, that the Fourteenth Amendment has in part repealed the First. Of course, he doesn't want to say repealed. The language of repeal is not pleasant to the ears of those who would like to forget about First Amendment antidisestablishmentarianism. The Fourteenth Amendment did not "repeal any aspect of the text of the [Establishment] Clause," Hacker says, but only "change[d] profoundly the meaning of …

Criminal Procedure, Justice, Ethics, And Zeal, Darryl K. Brown

Michigan Law Review

William Stuntz's recent article, The Uneasy Relationship Between Criminal Procedure and Criminal Justice, offers a series of thoughtful observations on the reasons that criminal procedure doctrines designed to protect defendants have done so little to improve the criminal justice system. Stuntz's article describes the unintended effects of attempts by the United States Supreme Court to improve criminal justice by closely regulating criminal procedure. That procedural focus has had perverse effects because, in a dynamic criminal justice system, other institutional players have responded to procedural rules in ways that undermine appellate courts' goals. Specifically, legislatures have reacted by expanding substantive criminal …

A Return To States' Rights? The Rehnquist Court Revives Federalism, Melanie K. St. Clair

Northern Illinois University Law Review

This comment examines three decisions of the 1997 Supreme Court Term in which the Court invalidated Federal laws: Printz v. United States, City of Boerne v. Flores, and Reno v. ACLU. This comment looks for a unifying trend in the decisions in an effort to determine if the Court is moving in a new philosophical direction. The author suggests that the decisions do signal a renewed commitment to States' rights and federalism. Further, the decisions reveal the Court's antagonism toward the largess and enlarged scope of Congress. The author suggests that the decisions are an attempt by the Court to …

Textualism, The Unknown Ideal?, William N. Eskridge Jr.

Michigan Law Review

In May 1997, the New York Knickerbockers basketball team was poised to reach the finals of its division in the National Basketball Association (NBA). The Knicks led the rival Miami Heat by three games to two and needed one more victory to win the best-of seven semifinal playoff series. Game six would be in New York; with their star center, Patrick Ewing, playing well, victory seemed assured for the Knicks. A fracas during game five changed the odds. During a fight under the basket between Knicks and Heat players, Ewing left the bench and paced in the middle of the …

Civility A Speech Delivered By Associate Justice Clarence Thomas To Students At Washington And Lee University School Of Law Lexington, Virginia Tuesday, March 10, 1998, Clarence Thomas

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Process, The Constitution, And Substantive Criminal Law, Louis D. Bilionis

Michigan Law Review

Criminal law scholars have pined for a substantive constitutional criminal law ever since Henry Hart and Herbert Packer first embraced the notion in the late 1950s and early 1960s. To this day, scholars continue to search for a theory fhat giv:es content to, in Hart's words, "the unmistakable indications that the Constitution means something definite and spμiething serious when it speaks of 'crime.'" To their dismay, the Supreme Court has - with two exceptions - seemingly resisted the notion. The two exceptions are familiar. First came the 1957 case of Lambert v. California, in which the Court came as close …

The Political Economy Of Cooperative Federalism: Why State Autonomy Makes Sense And "Dual Sovereignty" Doesn't, Roderick M. Hills Jr.

Michigan Law Review

It is commonplace to observe that "dual federalism" is dead, replaced by something variously called "cooperative federalism," "intergovernmental relations," or "marble-cake federalism." According to this conventional wisdom, state and local officials do not enforce merely their own laws in their distinct policymaking sphere. Rather, as analyzed in a voluminous literature, state and local governments also cooperate with the federal government in many policymaking areas, ranging from unemployment insurance to historic preservation. These nonfederal governments help implement federal policy in a variety of ways: by submitting implementation plans to federal agencies, by promulgating regulations, and by bringing administrative actions to enforce …

Us Supreme Court Confronts 'Right To Die', Bruce Carolan

Articles

This article covers the US Supreme Court's decisions regarding physician-assisted suicide for a UK audience.

Introduction: Symposium On Constitutional Elitism, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

Confrontation: The Search For Basic Principles, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the accused in a criminal prosecution the right "to be confronted with the Witnesses against him."' The Confrontation Clause clearly applies to those witnesses who testify against the accused at trial. Moreover, it is clear enough that confrontation ordinarily includes the accused's right to have those witnesses brought "face-toface," in the time-honored phrase, when they testify.2 But confrontation is much more than this "face-to-face" right. It also comprehends the right to have witnesses give their testimony under oath and to subject them to crossexamination. 3 Indeed, the Supreme Court has treated the accused's …

New York Vs. "The Rest Of The Country": State Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Barry Latzer

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

What's In A Word? A Comparative Analysis Of Article I, § 12 Of The New York State Constitution And The Fourth Amendment To The United States Constitution As Interpreted By The New York Court Of Appeals And The United States Supreme Court, Douglas Holden Wigdor

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

There's No Success Like Failure/And Failure's No Success At All: Exposing The Pretextuality Of Kansas V. Hendricks, Michael L. Perlin

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Subtracting Sexism From The Classroom: Law And Policy In The Debate Over All-Female Math And Science Classes In Public Schools, Carolyn B. Ramsey

Publications

No abstract provided.

Mandatory Arbitration Of Employee Discrimination Claims: Unmitigated Evil Or Blessing In Disguise?, Theodore J. St. Antoine

Articles

One of the hottest current issues in employment law is the use of mandatory arbitration to resolve workplace disputes. Typically, an employer will make it a condition of employment that employees must agree to arbitrate any claims arising out of the job, including claims based on statutory rights against discrimination, instead of going to court. On the face of it, this is a brazen affront to public policy. Citizens are being deprived of the forum provided them by law. And indeed numerous scholars and public and private bodies have condemned the use of mandatory arbitration. Yet the insight of that …

The Reluctant Justice: Lewis F. Powell Jr. Personifies The 'Quality Of Attentiveness', Christina B. Whitman

Articles

Lewis F. Powell Jr. came to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1972 reluctantly and at an age when many professionals are anticipating retirement rather than a career change. But the Court suited him. He grew to love the work, although he often found it agonizing, and he thrived on the role he played in the history of the Constitution.