Law Commons^™

Sacrifice And Sacred Honor: Why The Constitution Is A "Suicide Pact", Peter Brandon Bayer

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Most legal scholars and elected officials embrace the popular cliché that “the Constitution is not a suicide pact.” Typically, those commentators extol the “Constitution of necessity,” the supposition that Government, essentially the Executive, may take any action—may abridge or deny any fundamental right—to alleviate a sufficiently serious national security threat. The “Constitution of necessity” is wrong. This Article explains that strict devotion to the “fundamental fairness” principles of the Constitution’s Due Process Clauses is America’s utmost legal and moral duty, surpassing all other considerations, even safety, security and survival.

The analysis begins with the most basic premises: the definition of …

Culture Matters: Cultural Differences In The Reporting Of Employment Discrimination Claims, Andrew Tae-Hyun Kim

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Why don’t reasonable people complain about discrimination? Behavioral science evidence points to structural barriers, like the fear of retaliation and the lack of sociocultural power in the workplace, that discourage employees from reporting. By not reporting perceived discriminatory or harassing conduct, the employee not only underutilizes Title VII’s administrative scheme—which was created precisely to remedy and deter such conduct—but also incurs a heavy litigative cost in employer liability suits. This Article claims that for certain minority groups, namely Asian Americans, certain cultural differences significantly heighten those structural barriers and consequently leave them underprotected in the legal system. The Article locates …

Restoring "Life, Liberty, And The Pursuit Of Happiness" In Our Constitutional Jurisprudence: An Exercise In Legal History, Patrick J. Charles

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

All A Twitter: Social Networking, College Athletes, And The First Amendment, Davis Walsh

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Campus Citizenship And Associational Freedom: An Aristolelian Take On The Nondiscrimination Puzzle, Chapin Cimino

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Student expressive association on campus is a thorny thicket. Student affinity groups often choose to organize around a shared principle or characteristic of the groups’ members, which, by definition, makes those students different in some way from their peers. In order to preserve the group’s sense of uniqueness, these groups often then wish to control their own membership and voting policies. They feel, in essence, entitled to discriminate—a right arguably embodied by the First Amendment freedom of expressive association. When campus groups actually exercise this right, however, they run into university antidiscrimination policies, which can cost them official campus recognition. …

The "Padilla Advisory" And Its Implications Beyond The Immigration Context, Hanh H. Le

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Auto-Authentication Of The Page: Purely Written Speech And The Doctrine Of Obscenity, Ryen Rasmus

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Rationalizing Religious Exemptions: A Legislative Process Theory Of Statutory Exemptions For Religion, Zoe Robinson

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article proposes a new theory of religious liberty in the United States: it hypothesizes that a person’s religious freedom is dependent on their political power. Following the Supreme Court’s 1990 decision of Employment Division v. Smith, the legislature has sole control over the enactment of accommodations and exemptions from laws of general application for religious adherents. This Article argues that post-Smith accounts of religious liberty and pluralism fail to systematically analyze the relationship between religious liberty and legislative exemptions. To this end, the Article proposes a unique public choice model that hypothesizes that legislative accommodations and exemptions may result …

The Religious Liberty Of Judges, Daniel R. Suhr

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article begins by reviewing the government employee line of cases, starting with United Public Workers v. Mitchell in 1947.29 The first section concludes that the modified Pickering balancing test set forth in United States v. National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) is the appropriate level of scrutiny for judicial conduct rules. The body of this Article reviews ways in which the four canons of the ABA Model Code of Judicial Ethics and official interpretations of and rulings regarding them limit the religious activities of judges. I conclude that numerous applications of the Model Code are unconstitutional infringements on judges’ First …

Iqbal, Al-Kidd And Pleading Past Qualified Immunity: What The Cases Mean And How They Demonstrate A Need To Eliminate The Immunity Doctrines From Constitutional Tort Law, John M. Greabe

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Supreme Court’s decisions in Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Ashcroft v. al-Kidd contain issue-framing statements indicating that a constitutional tort plaintiff is required to plead facts sufficient to establish the inapplicability of the qualified immunity defense. Yet, framing the issue in this way ignores the Court’s earlier decisions in Gomez v. Toledo and Crawford-El v. Britton and is at odds with the established law of pleading; a plaintiff is not required to anticipate an affirmative defense and negate its applicabilityin the complaint. These cases thus raise a number of questions—Does the Court really mean what its issue-framing statements suggest? If …

Shadowing The Flag: Extending The Habeas Writ Beyond Guantanamo, Dawinder S. Sidhu

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The writ of habeas corpus activates courts’ duty to check arbitrary or unlawful restraints by the Executive on individual liberty. In times of war, courts have been compelled to determine whether the writ is available to individuals held by the Executive outside of the territorial boundaries of the United States. In Johnson v. Eisentrager, in which World War II detainees were held in Germany, the Supreme Court answered in the negative, while in Boumediene v. Bush, involving post–9/11 detainees housedat Guantánamo, the Court reached the opposite conclusion. Operating within these two guideposts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District …

A Child-Centered Response To The Elkins Family Law Task Force, Amy M. Pellman, Robert N. Jacobs, Dara K. Reiner

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In Elkins v. Superior Court, 163 P.3d 160 (Cal. 2007), California’s Supreme Court asked the Judicial Council to form a task force to make recommendations to increase “access to justice” in family court, because it was concerned about rules, policies, and procedures that put self-represented litigants at an unfair disadvantage in parentageand dissolution cases.

Neither the task force’s report in 2010 nor the legislation that the report inspired the same year addresses children’s due process rights, even though children ordinarily have no access to justice. This Article shows that due process sometimes requires the trial court to appoint counsel for …

Extending Hope Into "The Hole": Applying Graham V. Florida To Supermax Prisons, Joseph B. Allen

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Mrs. Mcintyre's Persona: Brining Privacy Theory To Election Law, William Mcgeveran

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

In Memorium: Joseph Paul Doyle, Justin M. Marchesi

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Campaign Disclosure, Privacy And Transparency, Deborah G. Johnson, Priscilla M. Regan, Kent Wayland

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

A Foxy Hedgehog: The Consistent Perceptions Of Carol Rose, Jedediah Purdy

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Presented at the 2010 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference.

Two Challenges For Campaign Finance Disclosure After Citizens United And Doe V. Reed, Richard Briffault

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Response, Carol M. Rose

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Presented at the 2010 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference.

Executive Branch Czars, Who Are They? Are They Needed? Can Congress Do Anything About Them?, Jonathan D. Puvak

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Inevitable Trend Toward Universally Recognizable Signals Of Property Claims: An Essay For Carol Rose, Robert C. Ellickson

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Presented at the 2010 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference.

Online Behavioral Advertising And Deceptive Campaign Tactics: Policy Issues, Nichole Rustin-Paschal

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Anonymity And Democratic Citizenship, James A. Gardner

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Internet Voting, Security, And Privacy, Jeremy Epstein

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Backwards Gesture: Historical Narratives In Carol Rose's Property Scholarship, Daniel J. Sharfstein

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Presented at the 2010 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference.

Rose's Human Nature Of Property, Henry E. Smith

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Presented at the 2010 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference.

Finding Equilibrium: Exploring Due Process Violations In The Whistleblower Provisions Of The Fraud Enforecement And Recovery Act Of 2009, Laura Hough

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Defense Of Marriage Act And Uncategorical Federalism, David B. Cruz

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Essay addresses federalism objections to section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Ordinarily, the federal government accepts states’ determinations of what couples are validly married. Section 3 of DOMA, however, fashions a broad exception for same-sex couples, who are definitionally deemed not to be in “marriages.” In addition to equal protection and full faith and credit challenges to DOMA, litigants have made constitutional federalism arguments. In Massachusetts v. United
States Department of Health and Human Services, the federal trial court accepted one such argument, though in a form that might be read to categorically deny the federal …

The Fading Free Exercise Clause, Rene Reyes

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article uses the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Christian Legal Society
v. Martinez as a point of departure for analyzing the current state of free exercise doctrine. I argue that one of the most notable features of the Christian Legal Society (CLS) case is its almost total lack of engagement with the Free Exercise Clause. For the core of CLS’s complaint was unambiguously about the declaration and exercise of religious beliefs: the group claimed that it was being excluded from campus life because it required its members to live according to shared religious principles and to subscribe to a …

Redefining The Supremacy Clause In The Global Age: Reconciling Medellin With Original Intent, Sarah Elizabeth Nokes

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.