Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (5)
- Fifth Amendment (3)
- Congress (2)
- Constitution (2)
- Miranda v. Arizona (2)
-
- Bill of Rights (1)
- Bush v. Gore (1)
- City of Boerne v. Flores (1)
- Congruence and proportionality (1)
- Constitutional interpretation (1)
- Criminal justice (1)
- Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council (1)
- Custodial interrogations (1)
- Dickerson v. United States (1)
- Diplomacy (1)
- Due Process Clause (1)
- Due Process; Constitutional Law (1)
- Due process (1)
- Elections (1)
- Electoral College (1)
- England (1)
- Equal protection (1)
- Fairness (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Federal foreign affairs power (1)
- Federalism (1)
- Florida (1)
- Foreign affairs (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Measure Of Freedom, James W. Nickel
In Defense Of Making Government Pay: The Deterrent Effect Of Constitutional Tort Remedies, Myriam E. Gilles
In Defense Of Making Government Pay: The Deterrent Effect Of Constitutional Tort Remedies, Myriam E. Gilles
Articles
Legal economists are concerned with setting optimal deterrence levels. Armed with information concerning the public and private costs and benefits of a particular harmful activity, the legal economist seeks to set a “price” for the activity which, to some socially optimal extent, minimizes external costs while retaining external benefits. If the economist's information is perfect, he can predict precisely how an economically rational actor will respond to a particular price and achieve optimal deterrence of activities whose costs outweigh their benefits.
'Appropriate' Means-Ends Constraints On Section 5 Powers, Evan H. Caminker
'Appropriate' Means-Ends Constraints On Section 5 Powers, Evan H. Caminker
Articles
With the narrowing of Congress' Article I power to regulate interstate commerce and to authorize private suits against states, Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment provides Congress with an increasingly important alternative source of power to regulate and police state conduct. However, in City of Boerne v. Flores and subsequent cases, the Supreme Court has tightened the doctrinal test for prophylactic legislation based on Section Five. The Court has clarified Section Five's legitimate ends by holding that Congress may enforce Fourteenth Amendment rights only as they are defined by the federal judiciary, and the Court has constrained Section Five's permissible …
From Miranda To §3501 To Dickerson To...(Symposium: Miranda After Dickerson: The Future Of Confession Law), Yale Kamisar
From Miranda To §3501 To Dickerson To...(Symposium: Miranda After Dickerson: The Future Of Confession Law), Yale Kamisar
Articles
Once the Court granted [certiorari in Dickerson] court-watchers knew the hour had come. At long last the Court would have to either repudiate Miranda, repudiate the prophylactic-rule cases [the cases viewing Miranda's requirements as not rights protected by the Constitution, but merely "prophylactic rules"] or offer some ingenious reconciliation of the two lines of precedent. The Supreme Court of the United States, however, doesn't "have to" do anything, as the decision in Dickerson once again reminds us.
The Asymmetry Of State Sovereign Immunity, Richard Henry Seamon
The Asymmetry Of State Sovereign Immunity, Richard Henry Seamon
Articles
This Article discusses whether a State has sovereign immunity from claims for just compensation. The Article concludes that the States are indeed immune from just compensation suits brought against them in federal court; States are not necessarily immune, however, from just-compensation suits brought against them in their own courts of general jurisdiction. Thus, the States' immunity in federal court is not symmetrical to the States' immunity in their own courts. This asymmetry, the Article explains, is the result of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Due Process Clause obligates a State to provide a means of paying …
Miranda And Some Puzzles Of 'Prophylactic' Rules, Evan H. Caminker
Miranda And Some Puzzles Of 'Prophylactic' Rules, Evan H. Caminker
Articles
Constitutional law scholars have long observed that many doctrinal rules established by courts to protect constitutional rights seem to "overprotect" those rights, in the sense that they give greater protection to individuals than those rights, as abstractly understood, seem to require.' Such doctrinal rules are typically called "prophylactic" rules.2 Perhaps the most famous, or infamous, example of such a rule is Miranda v. Arizona,' in which the Supreme Court implemented the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination4 with a detailed set of directions for law enforcement officers conducting custodial interrogations, colloquially called the Miranda warnings. 5
Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel
Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel
Articles
When I was first introduced to the constitutional regulation of criminal procedure in the mid-1950s, a single issue dominated the field: To what extent did the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment impose upon states the same constitutional restraints that the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments imposed upon the federal government? While those Bill of Rights provisions, as even then construed, imposed a broad range of constitutional restraints upon the federal criminal justice system, the federal system was (and still is) minuscule as compared to the combined systems of the fifty states. With the Bill of Rights provisions …
'Bush' V. 'Gore': What Was The Supreme Court Thinking?, Richard D. Friedman
'Bush' V. 'Gore': What Was The Supreme Court Thinking?, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
One of the most astonishing episodes in American political history ended last month with perhaps the most imperial decision ever by the United States Supreme Court. In one stroke, the Court exercised power that belonged to Congress, the legislature of Florida, Florida's courts and administrators, and, most importantly, the people of the state.
The Foreign Affairs Of Federal Systems: A National Perspective On The Benefits Of State Participation, Daniel Halberstam
The Foreign Affairs Of Federal Systems: A National Perspective On The Benefits Of State Participation, Daniel Halberstam
Articles
In recent years, the constitutional law of foreign relations has come under intense academic scrutiny, and with it the traditionally accepted constitutional balance between the federal government and the States. In the course of this renewed debate, revisionist scholars have challenged the previously dominant view that States have no place in foreign affairs.
Kyllo V. United States And The Partial Ascendance Of Justice Scalia's Fourth Amendment, Richard Henry Seamon
Kyllo V. United States And The Partial Ascendance Of Justice Scalia's Fourth Amendment, Richard Henry Seamon
Articles
No abstract provided.