Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Roger Williams University (18)
- Duke Law (17)
- William & Mary Law School (12)
- University of Colorado Law School (8)
- University of Michigan Law School (7)
-
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (6)
- St. John's University School of Law (5)
- University of Richmond (5)
- New York Law School (4)
- Notre Dame Law School (4)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (4)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (4)
- University of Georgia School of Law (4)
- University of New Hampshire (4)
- Georgetown University Law Center (3)
- Georgia State University College of Law (3)
- University of Dayton (3)
- Boston University School of Law (2)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (2)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (2)
- University of Miami Law School (2)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (2)
- American University Washington College of Law (1)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
- Chapman University (1)
- Dordt University (1)
- Emory University School of Law (1)
- Florida State University College of Law (1)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- Liberty University (1)
- Keyword
-
- Supreme Court (24)
- United States Supreme Court (16)
- Constitutional law (9)
- Immigration (8)
- Travel Ban (8)
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (7)
- Due process (6)
- SCOTUS (6)
- Fourth Amendment (5)
- United States (5)
- Civil rights (4)
- Court of Appeals (4)
- Discrimination (4)
- Executive Order (4)
- Fifth Amendment (4)
- First Amendment (4)
- Refugee (4)
- Scalia (4)
- Statutory interpretation (4)
- Textualism (4)
- Arbitration (3)
- Constitution (3)
- Criminal (3)
- Defendants (3)
- Freedom of speech (3)
- Indigent (3)
- Jurisprudence (3)
- Justices (3)
- LGBT rights (3)
- Lawyers (3)
- Publication
-
- Law Faculty Scholarship (20)
- Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar (16)
- All Faculty Scholarship (8)
- Articles (8)
- Publications (8)
-
- Supreme Court Preview (8)
- Journal Articles (6)
- Scholarly Articles (6)
- Faculty Publications (5)
- Faculty Scholarship (5)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (4)
- Law Faculty Publications (4)
- Educational Leadership Faculty Publications (3)
- Faculty Publications By Year (3)
- Other Publications (3)
- Popular Media (3)
- Scholarly Works (3)
- Bankruptcy Research Library (2)
- Life of the Law School (1993- ) (2)
- Utah Law Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Articles & Chapters (1)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (1)
- Book Chapters (1)
- Faculty Articles (1)
- Faculty Work Comprehensive List (1)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (1)
- Honors Scholar Theses (1)
- Law School Blogs (1)
- Law Student Publications (1)
- Online Publications (1)
Articles 31 - 60 of 137
Full-Text Articles in Law
Scotus's 2016-17 Term: The Calm Before The Storm?, John M. Greabe
Scotus's 2016-17 Term: The Calm Before The Storm?, John M. Greabe
Law Faculty Scholarship
[Excerpt] “The court's just-completed 2016-17 term contained no . . . blockbusters. Its highest profile ruling was an unsigned opinion that modified preliminary injunctions issued by lower courts to prevent President Donald Trump's "travel ban" orders from going into immediate effect.
But that ruling did not decide whether the president's orders are in fact unconstitutional. Instead, the court put that important question off until the fall, by which time further factual developments -for example, the executive branch completing its review and deciding to lift or modify the bans -may well render the issue moot.”
Implementing The Refugee Eo: Add Grandparents, Peter Margulies
Implementing The Refugee Eo: Add Grandparents, Peter Margulies
Law Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Travel Ban In The Supreme Court: Crafting A Workable Remedy, Peter Margulies
The Travel Ban In The Supreme Court: Crafting A Workable Remedy, Peter Margulies
Law Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Brief Of The National Association For Public Defense As Amici Curiae Supporting Petitioner, Byrd V. U.S. (U.S. June 12, 2017) (No. 16- 1371)., Janet Moore
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
More than two centuries after it was ratified, the Fourth Amendment continues to protect the “right of the people to be secure” from “unreasonable searches.” U.S. Const. amend. IV. Modern technological advances and social developments do not render our rights “any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought.” Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473, 2494–95 (2014). This Court plays an essential role in ensuring that the Fourth Amendment retains its vitality as an indispensable safeguard of liberty, even as Americans dramatically change the ways they organize their everyday affairs. This case calls for the Court to …
Race, Partisan Gerrymandering And The Constitution, John M. Greabe
Race, Partisan Gerrymandering And The Constitution, John M. Greabe
Law Faculty Scholarship
[Excerpt] “For the most part, the Constitution speaks in generalities. The 14th Amendment, for example, instructs the states to provide all persons the "equal protection of the laws." But obviously, this cannot mean that states are always forbidden from treating a person differently than any other person. Children can, of course, be constitutionally barred from driving, notwithstanding the Equal Protection Clause. Thus, there is a need within our constitutional system to refine the Constitution's abstract provisions.”
Reflection: How Multiracial Lives Matter 50 Years After Loving, Lauren Sudeall Lucas
Reflection: How Multiracial Lives Matter 50 Years After Loving, Lauren Sudeall Lucas
Faculty Publications By Year
Black Lives Matter. All Lives Matter. These two statements are both true, but connote very different sentiments in our current political reality. To further complicate matters, in this short reflection piece, I query how multiracial lives matter in the context of this heated social and political discussion about race. As a multiracial person committed to racial justice and sympathetic both to those pushing for recognition of multiracial identity and to those who worry such recognition may undermine larger movements, these are questions I have long grappled with both professionally and personally. Of course, multiracial lives matter - but do they …
Should The President’S Words Matter In Court?, Katherine A. Shaw
Should The President’S Words Matter In Court?, Katherine A. Shaw
Online Publications
The most striking aspect of last Thursday’s opinion by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, which rejected the Trump administration’s latest effort to revive its travel ban for individuals from six predominantly Muslim countries, was its reliance on Donald Trump’s own words as candidate, president-elect and president. The court leaned particularly heavily on his now-famous campaign statement that he was “calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”
Supreme Court Institute Annual Report, 2016-2017, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute
Supreme Court Institute Annual Report, 2016-2017, Georgetown University Law Center, Supreme Court Institute
SCI Papers & Reports
During the U.S. Supreme Court’s October Term (OT) 2016 – corresponding to the 2016-2017 academic year –the Supreme Court Institute (SCI) provided moot courts for advocates in 100% of the cases heard by the Supreme Court, offered a variety of programs related to the Supreme Court, and continued to integrate the moot court program into the education of Georgetown Law students.
A list of all SCI moot courts held in OT 2016 – arranged by argument sitting and date of moot and including the name and affiliation of each advocate and the number of observers – follows the narrative portion …
Abortion In The Court: The Impact Of Abortion Views On Public Opinion Of The Supreme Court, Robert Heins
Abortion In The Court: The Impact Of Abortion Views On Public Opinion Of The Supreme Court, Robert Heins
Student Scholar Symposium Abstracts and Posters
Abortion has long been considered one of the most controversial topics the United States Supreme Court has ruled on. My research examines how one’s opinion on abortion impacts their view of the United States Supreme Court. This analysis will show how much of an impact one policy stance has on the public’s overall view of a much larger institution. To analyze my question, I will utilize American National Election Studies Time Series data from the years 1976, 1988, and 2016. These years will allow me to study the role abortion plays in crafting opinion of the court before the politicization …
A Comparative Approach To Counter-Terrorism Legislation And Legal Policy, Paul David Hill Jr
A Comparative Approach To Counter-Terrorism Legislation And Legal Policy, Paul David Hill Jr
Senior Honors Theses
Since the 9/11 attacks, American legislation and legal policy in regards to classifying and processing captured terrorists has fallen short of being fully effective and lawful. Trial and error by the Bush and Obama administrations has uncovered two key lessons: (1) captured terrorists are not typical prisoners of war and thus their detainment must involve more legal scrutiny than the latter; and (2) captured terrorists are not ordinary criminals and thus the civilian criminal court system, due to constitutional constraints, is not capable of adequately trying every count of terrorism. Other nations, including France and Israel, approach this problem with …
Proportionality Skepticism In A Red State, Lauren Sudeall Lucas
Proportionality Skepticism In A Red State, Lauren Sudeall Lucas
Faculty Publications By Year
Commentary on Carol S. Steiker & Jordan M. Steiker, Courting Death: The Supreme Court and Capital Punishment (2016).
Foster V. Chatman: A Missed Opportunity For Batson And The Peremptory Challenge, Nancy Marder
Foster V. Chatman: A Missed Opportunity For Batson And The Peremptory Challenge, Nancy Marder
All Faculty Scholarship
In 2016, the United States Supreme Court decided that the prosecutors in Foster v. Chatman exercised race-based peremptory challenges in violation of Batson v. Kentucky. The Court reached the right result, but missed an important opportunity. The Court should have acknowledged that after thirty years of the Batson experiment, it is clear that Batson is unable to stop discriminatory peremptory challenges. Batson is easy to evade, so discriminatory peremptory challenges persist and the harms from them are significant. The Court could try to strengthen Batson in an effort to make it more effective, but in the end the only way …
The Miranda Case Fifty Years Later, Yale Kamisar
The Miranda Case Fifty Years Later, Yale Kamisar
Articles
A decade after the Supreme Court decided Miranda v. Arizona, Geoffrey Stone took a close look at the eleven decisions the Court had handed down “concerning the scope and application of Miranda.” As Stone observed, “[i]n ten of these cases, the Court interpreted Miranda so as not to exclude the challenged evidence.” In the eleventh case, the Court excluded the evidence on other grounds. Thus, Stone noted, ten years after the Court decided the case, “the Court ha[d] not held a single item of evidence inadmissible on the authority of Miranda.” Not a single item. To use …
Disentangling Miranda And Massiah: How To Revive The Sixth Amendment Right To Counsel As A Tool For Regulating Confession Law, Eve Brensike Primus
Disentangling Miranda And Massiah: How To Revive The Sixth Amendment Right To Counsel As A Tool For Regulating Confession Law, Eve Brensike Primus
Articles
Fifty years after Miranda v. Arizona, many have lamented the ways in which the Burger, Rehnquist, and Roberts Courts have cut back on Miranda's protections. One underappreciated a spect of Miranda's demise is the way it has affected the development of the pretrial Sixth Amendment right to counsel guaranteed by Massiah v. United States. Much of the case law diluting suspects' Fifth Amendment Miranda rights has bled over into the Sixth Amendment right to counsel cases without consideration of whether the animating purposes of the Massiah pretrial right to counsel would support such an importation. This development is unfortunate …
The Retirement Strategy Of Supreme Court Justices: An Economic Approach, Kayla M. Joyce
The Retirement Strategy Of Supreme Court Justices: An Economic Approach, Kayla M. Joyce
Honors Scholar Theses
Previous research has identified strategic behavior in the nomination, confirmation, and retirement processes of the Supreme Court, each independently. This paper analyzes the interaction between the justices, the president, and the Senate in these processes. I constructed a game theoretic model to consider the nomination and approval process of Supreme Court justices and the change in dynamics that might result from an impending election. I hypothesize that sitting justices take into account the party affiliations of the president and the Senate when they are deciding whether it is the optimal time to retire to achieve their own strategic objectives. The …
Mcdonnell V. United States: Defining “Official Action” In Public Corruption Law, Christopher Murphy
Mcdonnell V. United States: Defining “Official Action” In Public Corruption Law, Christopher Murphy
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
McDonnell v. United States involved the former Governor of Virginia leveraging the power of his position to help a wealthy constituent gain access to top state decision makers in exchange for valuable gifts and loans. The Government argued that conduct like setting up phone calls and meetings, as well as hosting receptions on behalf of the constituent was sufficient to constitute an “official act” under public corruption laws. Governor McDonnell argued for a narrower interpretation of “official act,” claiming that his conduct was akin to run of the mill things public officials do every day to benefit their constituents. The …
What Is The Relevant Parcel? Clarifying The "Parcel As A Whole" Standard In Murr V. Wisconsin, Gavin S. Frisch
What Is The Relevant Parcel? Clarifying The "Parcel As A Whole" Standard In Murr V. Wisconsin, Gavin S. Frisch
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
Murr v. Wisconsin seeks to determine whether commonly-owned, adjacent parcels of land are considered as 1 or 2 parcels for purposes of analyzing a regulatory takings claim. Nearly 40 years ago, the Court in Penn Central rejected a property owner's takings claim which segmenting the entire parcel into discrete property rights because a compensatory taking must result from governmental action which interferes with the "parcel as a whole." In Murr, property owners argue that a local zoning ordinance effected a taking of one of their two adjoining parcels because the ordinance prohibited the owners from developing their lot. I …
A General Approach For Predicting The Behavior Of The Supreme Court Of The United States, Daniel Katz
A General Approach For Predicting The Behavior Of The Supreme Court Of The United States, Daniel Katz
All Faculty Scholarship
Building on developments in machine learning and prior work in the science of judicial prediction, we construct a model designed to predict the behavior of the Supreme Court of the United States in a generalized, out-of-sample context. To do so, we develop a time-evolving random forest classifier that leverages unique feature engineering to predict more than 240,000 justice votes and 28,000 cases outcomes over nearly two centuries (1816-2015). Using only data available prior to decision, our model outperforms null (baseline) models at both the justice and case level under both parametric and non-parametric tests. Over nearly two centuries, we achieve …
Minor Courts, Major Questions, Michael Coenen
The Supreme Court And Education Law, Charles J. Russo
The Supreme Court And Education Law, Charles J. Russo
Educational Leadership Faculty Publications
Compiling a “top 10” list of anything— including Supreme Court cases and justices’ quotes—can be fraught with differences of opinion. Yet discussions about those differences can be useful learning activities, because they can lead to conversations about the underlying legal issues in schools. With that caveat in mind, this column offers key quotes from major Supreme Court cases that played major, even transformational, roles in shaping the landscape of U.S. K–12 education. The quotes are accompanied by brief summaries of why the cases are significant. With the exception of Brown v. Board of Education, Topeka, Kansas (1954), the most important …
Justice Scalia And Abortion Speech, Timothy Zick
Justice Scalia And Abortion Speech, Timothy Zick
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
An Alcohol Mindset In A Drug-Crazed World: A Review Of Birchfield V. North Dakota, Devon Beeny
An Alcohol Mindset In A Drug-Crazed World: A Review Of Birchfield V. North Dakota, Devon Beeny
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
Birchfield v. North Dakota involved the ability of legislatures to criminalize a driver’s refusal to submit to a chemical test after a law enforcement officer arrested the individual for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The driver’s argued this criminalized their constitutional right to refuse a warrantless search, while the governments’ argued they needed this power in order to effectively address drunk driving in their jurisdictions. The Court decided that refusing a breath test could be criminalized because requiring the test did not violate the driver’s constitutional rights, however the Court also ruled that because of the invasive …
Ditching Your Duty: When Must Private Entities Comply With Federal Antidiscrimination Law?, Tara Knapp
Ditching Your Duty: When Must Private Entities Comply With Federal Antidiscrimination Law?, Tara Knapp
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
This Commentary considers how the Fifth Circuit characterizes “services, programs, and activities” of public agencies in Ivy v. Williams, in the context of determining whether a private entity is subject to federal antidiscrimination law. “Services, programs, and activities” of public agencies must comply with Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, whether directly distributed by a public or a private entity. This Commentary argues private driving schools in Texas that distribute a driving course necessary to obtaining a drivers’ license are subject to Title II because the providing the course functionally constitutes a program of the Texas Education …
Drawing Lines: Racial Gerrymandering In Bethune-Hill V. Virginia Board Of Elections, Scott Reed
Drawing Lines: Racial Gerrymandering In Bethune-Hill V. Virginia Board Of Elections, Scott Reed
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
In Bethune-Hill v. Virginia Board of Elections, the Supreme Court had to decide whether twelve Virginia challenged legislative districts, in which a one-size-fits-all 55% black voting age population floor was imposed, withstood constitutional scrutiny. The Court, though stating that the lower court misapplied precedent, declined to hold that race predominated in the formation of the districts and that strict scrutiny would be triggered, instead remanding to the lower court for reexamination. This commentary argues that the Court missed an opportunity to hold that a 55% BVAP floor prioritized above all else is per se racial predomination, and such a …
May The Best Canon Win: Lockhart V. United States And The Battle Of Statutory Interpretation, Hassan Shaikh
May The Best Canon Win: Lockhart V. United States And The Battle Of Statutory Interpretation, Hassan Shaikh
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
In Lockhart v. United States, the Supreme Court resolved a long-standing circuit split regarding 18 U.S.C. § 2252(b)(2), which triggered a mandatory minimum sentence for recidivists who had previously been convicted under federal or state crimes relating to “aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse, or abusive sexual conduct involving a minor or ward.” In expected fashion, the Court relied on the statute’s plain meaning to decide whether Lockhart’s previous crime had triggered the mandatory minimum. However, even with identical approaches to the text, the majority and dissent reached contrary conclusions. This commentary explores how a single approach could result in …
Birchfield V. North Dakota: Warrantless Breath Tests And The Fourth Amendment, Sara Jane Schlafstein
Birchfield V. North Dakota: Warrantless Breath Tests And The Fourth Amendment, Sara Jane Schlafstein
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
In Birchfield v. North Dakota, the Supreme Court explored warrantless breath tests during DUI stops and their validity under the Fourth Amendment. To determine their constitutionality, the Court adopted a balancing test, weighing the government’s interest in preventing instances of drunk driving with the intrusion on an individual’s privacy. The Court ultimately concluded that warrantless breath tests are constitutional when conducted incident to a lawful DUI arrest. This commentary explores the Court’s reasoning and holding and will argue that the Court was correct in deciding that a warrant is not necessary for conducting a breath test incident to a …
Why Not Limit Neil Gorsuch — And All Supreme Court Justices — To 18-Year Terms?, Lori A. Ringhand, Paul M. Collins Jr.
Why Not Limit Neil Gorsuch — And All Supreme Court Justices — To 18-Year Terms?, Lori A. Ringhand, Paul M. Collins Jr.
Popular Media
Legal scholars and political scientists increasingly question whether life tenure remains a good idea for Supreme Court justices. While scholars disagree about the exact numbers, our Supreme Court justices are serving longer and longer terms; presidents have incentives to choose younger and younger nominees; and the justices themselves appear to delay retirement in the hope of having an ideologically compatible president select their replacements. Moreover, the confirmation process has become increasingly contentious, culminating last year in Senate Republicans refusing to even grant a hearing to President Barack Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland.
As a result, many scholars propose a shift to …
Commodity Supply And Extraterritorial Patent Infringement In Life Technologies V. Promega, G. Edward Powell
Commodity Supply And Extraterritorial Patent Infringement In Life Technologies V. Promega, G. Edward Powell
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
American patent law grants inventors the exclusive right, within U.S. territory, to make, sell, use, and import their patented inventions. In response to attempts to circumvent the right by making the components of an invention within the U.S. and exporting them for assembly abroad, Congress passed 35 U.S.C. § 271(f), prohibiting “suppl[ying] . . . from the United States all or a substantial portion of the components of a patented invention . . . to actively induce the combination of such components outside of the United States . . . .” Petitioner Life Technologies supplied one commodity component of a …
Without More, There Is No More: Standing And Racial Gerrymandering In Wittman V. Personhuballah, Jessica Edmundson
Without More, There Is No More: Standing And Racial Gerrymandering In Wittman V. Personhuballah, Jessica Edmundson
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
In drawing election maps, racial gerrymandering separates minority groups, packing them into specific districts to weaken the power of their votes. In Wittman v. Personhuballah, the Supreme Court held that a group of Virginia congressmen that neither lived in, nor represented a district did not have standing to defend gerrymandering in that district. Although the Court had the opportunity to address the substantive issues in the case, it did not, leaving a substantial gap in racial gerrymandering jurisprudence. This commentary explores the consequences of this gap and argues that the Court should not find a legally cognizable right in …
Brief Of The National Association Of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Et Al As Amici Curiae Supporting Petitioner, Mcwilliams V. Dunn (U.S. March 6, 2017) (No. 16-5294)., Janet Moore
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
We submit this brief to make three important points. First, Ake itself clearly and unambiguously held as a matter of due process that indigent capital defendants must be provided with independent expert assistance upon a reasonable showing of need. The Court was unanimous on this point and swept aside aging precedent that had held provision of neutral assistance was adequate.
Second, Ake was hardly a revolutionary decision. As the Court noted, many states already provided expert assistance. In the first six years after Ake, numerous states explicitly held independent expert assistance must be provided upon an adequate showing of need. …