Law Commons^™

Holmes And Brennan, Howard M. Wasserman

Howard M Wasserman

The Five Days In June When Values Died In American Law, Bruce Ledewitz

Bruce Ledewitz

Abstract Principle V. Contextual Conceptions Of Harm: A Comment On R. V. Butler, Jamie Cameron

Jamie Cameron

This comment provides a critique of the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in R. v. Butler, which held that section 163(8) of the Criminal Code, defining obscenity, is a reasonable limit on freedom of expression under section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Before discussing the Charter, the Court expanded the scope of section 163(8) to include a prohibition against sexually explicit material that is degrading or dehumanizing. Initially, the author is critical of the Court's methodology, which enlarged section 163(8) at the expense of expressive freedom, without even mentioning the Charter. Once the Court had interpreted …

Who’S The ‘We?’ Who’S ‘The People?’, Rodney A. Smolla

Rod Smolla

No abstract provided.

All American Citizens Fall Under ‘We The People,’ But Who Is Really Included?, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

Categories, Tiers Of Review, And The Roiling Sea Of Free Speech Doctrine And Principle: A Methodological Critique Of United States V. Alvarez, Rodney A. Smolla

Rod Smolla

None available.

Academic Freedom, Hate Speech, And The Idea Of A University, Rodney A. Smolla

Rod Smolla

Not available.

Riding On The Ordinance Highway: Why The Supreme Court Should Step In, Shubhankar Dam

Shubhankar Dam

No abstract provided.

Saving Originalism, Robert J. Delahunty, John Yoo

John C Yoo

It is sometimes said that biographers cannot help but come to admire, even love, their subjects. And that adage seems to ring true of Professor Amar, the foremost “biographer” of the Constitution. He loves it not just as a governing structure, or a political system, but as a document. He loves the Constitution in the same way that a fan of English literature might treasure Milton’s Paradise Lost or Shakespeare’s Macbeth. He loves the Constitution not just for the good: the separation of powers, federalism, and the Bill of Rights. He also loves it for its nooks and crannies, idiosyncrasies, …

The Scope Of Precedent, Randy J. Kozel

Randy J Kozel

The scope of Supreme Court precedent is capacious. Justices of the Court commonly defer to sweeping rationales and elaborate doctrinal frameworks articulated by their predecessors. This practice infuses judicial precedent with the prescriptive power of enacted constitutional and statutory text. The lower federal courts follow suit, regularly abiding by the Supreme Court’s broad pronouncements. These phenomena cannot be explained by—and, indeed, oftentimes subvert—the classic distinction between binding holdings and dispensable dicta. This Article connects the scope of precedent with recurring and foundational debates about the proper ends of judicial interpretation. A precedent’s forward- looking effect should not depend on the …

The Representative Equality Principle: Disaggregating The Equal Protection Intent Standard, Bertrall L. Ross Ii

Bertrall L Ross

Challenges under the Equal Protection Clause require proof of intentional discrimination. Though rarely questioned by legal scholars or the courts, that conventional account cannot explain the success of equal protection challenges to electoral structures that dilute the vote of racial minorities. In the Supreme Court’s most recent decisions on vote dilution, the Court has invalidated local electoral structures under the Equal Protection Clause to the extent that they deprive African Americans of the opportunity for effective representation in the political process. The Court has reached its decisions despite the absence of any proof of intentional discrimination in the adoption of …

Democracy's Handmaid, Robert Tsai

Robert L. Tsai

Democratic theory presupposes open channels of dialogue, but focuses almost exclusively on matters of institutional design writ large. The philosophy of language explicates linguistic infrastructure, but often avoids exploring the political significance of its findings. In this Article, Tsai draws from the two disciplines to reach new insights about the democracy enhancing qualities of popular constitutional language. Employing examples from the founding era, the struggle for black civil rights, the religious awakening of the last two decades, and the search for gay equality, he presents a model of constitutional dialogue that emphasizes common modalities and mobilized vernacular. According to this …

Constitutional Borrowing, Robert Tsai

Robert L. Tsai

Borrowing from one domain to promote ideas in another domain is a staple of constitutional decisionmaking. Precedents, arguments, concepts, tropes, and heuristics all can be carried across doctrinal boundaries for purposes of persuasion. Yet the practice itself remains underanalyzed. This Article seeks to bring greater theoretical attention to the matter. It defines what constitutional borrowing is and what it is not, presents a typology that describes its common forms, undertakes a principled defense of borrowing, and identifies some of the risks involved. The authors' examples draw particular attention to places where legal mechanisms and ideas migrate between fields of law …

John Brown's Constitution, Robert Tsai

Robert L. Tsai

It will surprise many Americans to learn that before John Brown and his men briefly captured Harper’s Ferry, they authored and ratified a Provisional Constitution. This deliberative act built upon the achievements of the group to establish a Free Kansas, during which time Brown penned an analogue to the Declaration of Independence. These acts of writing, coupled with Brown’s trial tactics after his arrest, cast doubts on claims that the man was a lunatic or on a suicide mission. Instead, they suggest that John Brown aimed to be a radical statesman, one who turned to extreme tactics but nevertheless remained …

Good Society, Commerce, And The Rehnquist Court, Michael Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

No abstract provided.

How To Choose The Least Unconstitutional Option: Lessons For The President (And Others) From The 2011 Debt Ceiling Standoff, Neil H. Buchanan, Michael C. Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

The current successor to a federal statute first enacted in 1917, and widely known as the “debt ceiling,” limits the face value of money that the United States may borrow. Congress has repeatedly raised the debt ceiling to authorize borrowing to fill the gap between revenue and spending, but in the summer of 2011, a political standoff nearly left the government unable to borrow funds to meet obligations that Congress had affirmed earlier that very year. Some commentators urged President Obama to ignore the debt ceiling and issue new bonds, in order to comply with Section 4 of the Fourteenth …

Constitutional Issues Surrounding Student Possession And Use Of Cell Phones In Schools, Ralph Mawdsley, Charles Russo

Charles J. Russo

Constitutional challenges to limits on the possession and/ or use of cell phones in schools present potential claims involving the Fourth Amendment rights of students to privacy and to be free from unreasonable searchesalong with parental Fourteenth Amendment Liberty Clauserights to direct the education and upbringing of their children. However, as reflected in this article, as long as educational officials enact policies in line with state laws that are explicitly designed to enhance school safety, challenges filed by students and their parents are probably destined to fail because constitutional claims are likely to be outweighed by concerns for the greater …

Democracy Means That The People Make The Law, Gerald Torres

Gerald Torres

Gerald Torres delivered the Robert C. Wood lecture at the McCormack Graduate School of Policy Studies at University of Massachusetts Boston in 2006. This is his talk.

Death Penalty Jurisprudence By Tallying State Legislative Enactments: Harmonizing The Eighth And Tenth Amendments, Akram Faizer, Charles E. Maclean

Akram Faizer

Is The Filibuster Constitutional?, Josh Chafetz, Michael J. Gerhardt

Josh Chafetz

With the help of the President, Democrats in Congress were able to pass historic healthcare-reform legislation in spite of - and thanks to - the significant structural obstacles presented by the Senate’s arcane parliamentary rules. After the passage of the bill, the current political climate appears to require sixty votes for the passage of any major legislation, a practice which many argue is unsustainable. In this Debate, Professors Josh Chafetz and Michael Gerhardt debate the constitutionality of the Senate’s cloture rules by looking to the history of those rules in the United States and elsewhere. Professor Chafetz argues that the …

The Unconstitutionality Of The Filibuster, Josh Chafetz

Josh Chafetz

This Article, written for the Connecticut Law Review's 2010 "Is Our Constitutional Order Broken?" symposium, argues that the filibuster, as currently practiced, is unconstitutional.

After a brief introduction in Part I, Part II describes the current operation of the filibuster. Although the filibuster is often discussed in terms of "unlimited debate," this Part argues that its current operation is best understood in terms of a sixty-vote requirement to pass most bills and other measures through the Senate.

Part III presents a structural argument that this supermajority requirement for most Senate business is unconstitutional. This Part argues that the words "passed" …

Impeachment And Assassination, Josh Chafetz

Josh Chafetz

In 1998, the conservative provocateur Ann Coulter made waves when she wrote that President Clinton should be either impeached or assassinated. Coulter was roundly - and rightly - condemned for suggesting that the murder of the President might be justified, but her conceptual linking of presidential impeachment and assassination was not entirely unfounded. Indeed, Benjamin Franklin had made the same linkage over two hundred years earlier, when he noted at the Constitutional Convention that, historically, the removal of “obnoxious” chief executives had been accomplished by assassination. Franklin suggested that a proceduralized mechanism for removal - impeachment - would be preferable. …

Executive Branch Contempt Of Congress, Josh Chafetz

Josh Chafetz

After former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten refused to comply with subpoenas issued by a congressional committee investigating the firing of a number of United States Attorneys, the House of Representatives voted in 2008 to hold them in contempt. The House then chose a curious method of enforcing its contempt citation: it filed a federal lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment that Miers and Bolten were in contempt of Congress and an injunction ordering them to comply with the subpoenas. The district court ruled for the House, although that ruling was subsequently stayed …

The Illusory Eighth Amendment, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

Although there is no obvious doctrinal connection between the Supreme Court’s Miranda jurisprudence and its Eighth Amendment excessive punishments jurisprudence, the two are deeply connected at the level of methodology. In both areas, the Supreme Court has been criticized for creating “prophylactic” rules that invalidate government actions because they create a mere risk of constitutional violation. In reality, however, both sets of rules deny constitutional protection to a far greater number of individuals with plausible claims of unconstitutional treatment than they protect. This dysfunctional combination of over- and underprotection arises from the Supreme Court’s use of implementation rules as a …

Punishment Without Culpability, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

For more than half a century, academic commentators have criticized the Supreme Court for failing to articulate a substantive constitutional conception of criminal law. Although the Court enforces various procedural protections that the Constitution provides for criminal defendants, it has left the question of what a crime is purely to the discretion of the legislature. This failure has permitted legislatures to evade the Constitution’s procedural protections by reclassifying crimes as civil causes of action, eliminating key elements (such as mens rea) or reclassifying them as defenses or sentencing factors, and authorizing severe punishments for crimes traditionally considered relatively minor. The …

The Constitution According To Justices Scalia And Thomas: Alive And Kickin', Eric J. Segall

Eric J. Segall

No abstract provided.

Hesburgh Lecture: Faith, Politics, And The Constitution: Understanding The Separation Of Church And State, Richard Garnett

Richard W Garnett

Rick Garnett delivered Faith, Politics, and the Constitution: Understanding the Separation of Church and StateSeptember 19, 2014 Hesburgh Lecture Ares Auditorium The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law Tucson, Arizona

Politics And Public Sector Employees: What's Gone Wrong With The Relationship Between Ministers And Public Servants - Why It Matters, And What Needs To Be Done To Fix It, Matthew S. R. Palmer Qc

The Hon Justice Matthew Palmer

Who Speaks For The ‘People’ On Policy?, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

Are ‘We The People’ Meeting Our Responsibilities?, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.