Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (16)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (14)
- University of San Diego (11)
- American University Washington College of Law (6)
- University of Georgia School of Law (6)
-
- BLR (2)
- Columbia Law School (2)
- Georgetown University Law Center (2)
- New York Law School (2)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- Cornell University Law School (1)
- Duke Law (1)
- Florida A&M University College of Law (1)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (1)
- Pace University (1)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (1)
- Seattle University School of Law (1)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (1)
- The University of Akron (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of Michigan Law School (1)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (1)
- Wayne State University (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- All Faculty Scholarship (17)
- Working Paper Series (14)
- University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series (11)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (6)
- Scholarly Works (5)
-
- Faculty Scholarship (4)
- Articles & Chapters (2)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (2)
- Akron Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Articles (1)
- Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press (1)
- Book Chapters (1)
- Cornell Law School Inter-University Graduate Student Conference Papers (1)
- Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Faculty Working Papers (1)
- Faculty Works (1)
- George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series (1)
- Journal Publications (1)
- LLM Theses and Essays (1)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (1)
- Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers (1)
- Seattle University Law Review SUpra (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 75
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Court And The Private Plaintiff, Elizabeth Beske
The Court And The Private Plaintiff, Elizabeth Beske
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
Two seemingly irreconcilable story arcs have emerged from the Supreme Court over the past decade. First, the Court has definitively taken itself out of the business of creating private rights of action under statutes and the Constitution, decrying such moves as relics of an “ancient regime.” Thus, the Supreme Court has slammed the door on its own ability to craft rights of action under federal statutes and put Bivens, which recognized implied constitutional remedies, into an ever-smaller box. The Court has justified these moves as necessary to keep judges from overstepping their bounds and wading into the province of the …
Jazz Improvisation And The Law: Constrained Choice, Sequence, And Strategic Movement Within Rules, William W. Buzbee
Jazz Improvisation And The Law: Constrained Choice, Sequence, And Strategic Movement Within Rules, William W. Buzbee
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This Article argues that a richer understanding of the nature of law is possible through comparative, analogical examination of legal work and the art of jazz improvisation. This exploration illuminates a middle ground between rule of law aspirations emphasizing stability and determinate meanings and contrasting claims that the untenable alternative is pervasive discretionary or politicized law. In both the law and jazz improvisation settings, the work involves constraining rules, others’ unpredictable actions, and strategic choosing with attention to where a collective creation is going. One expects change and creativity in improvisation, but the many analogous characteristics of law illuminate why …
Most Favored Racial Hierarchy: The Ever-Evolving Ways Of The Supreme Court's Superordination Of Whiteness, David Simson
Most Favored Racial Hierarchy: The Ever-Evolving Ways Of The Supreme Court's Superordination Of Whiteness, David Simson
Articles & Chapters
This Article engages in a critical comparative analysis of the recent history and likely future trajectory of the Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence in matters of race and religion to uncover new aspects of the racial project that Reggie Oh has recently called the “racial superordination” of whiteness—the reinforcing of the superior status of whites in American society by, among other things, prioritizing their interests in structuring constitutional doctrine. This analysis shows that the Court is increasingly widening the gap between conceptions of, and levels of protection provided for, equality in the contexts of race and religion in ways that prioritize …
Confrontation In The Age Of Plea Bargaining [Comments], William Ortman
Confrontation In The Age Of Plea Bargaining [Comments], William Ortman
Law Faculty Research Publications
No abstract provided.
Anti-Modalities, David E. Pozen, Adam Samaha
Anti-Modalities, David E. Pozen, Adam Samaha
Faculty Scholarship
Constitutional argument runs on the rails of “modalities.” These are the accepted categories of reasoning used to make claims about the content of supreme law. Some of the modalities, such as ethical and prudential arguments, seem strikingly open ended at first sight. Their contours come into clearer view, however, when we attend to the kinds of claims that are not made by constitutional interpreters – the analytical and rhetorical moves that are familiar in debates over public policy and political morality but are considered out of bounds in debates over constitutional meaning. In this Article, we seek to identify the …
Excessive Force: Justice Requires Refining State Qualified Immunity Standards For Negligent Police Officers, Angie Weiss
Excessive Force: Justice Requires Refining State Qualified Immunity Standards For Negligent Police Officers, Angie Weiss
Seattle University Law Review SUpra
At the time this Note was written, there was no Washington state equivalent of the § 1983 Civil Rights Act. As plaintiffs look to the Washington state courts as an alternative to federal courts, they will find that Washington state has a different structure of qualified immunity protecting law enforcement officers from liability.
In this Note, Angie Weiss recommends changing Washington state's standard of qualified immunity. This change would ensure plaintiffs have a state court path towards justice when they seek to hold law enforcement officers accountable for harm. Weiss explains the structure and context of federal qualified immunity; compares …
Dehumanization 'Because Of Sex': The Multiaxial Approach To The Title Vii Rights Of Sexual Minorities, Shirley Lin
Dehumanization 'Because Of Sex': The Multiaxial Approach To The Title Vii Rights Of Sexual Minorities, Shirley Lin
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
Although Title VII prohibits discrimination against any employee “because of such individual’s . . . sex,” legal commentators have not yet accurately appraised Title VII’s trait and causation requirements embodied in that phrase. Since 2015, most courts assessing the sex discrimination claims of LGBT employees began to intentionally analyze “sex” as a trait using social-construction evidence, and evaluated separately whether the discriminatory motive caused the workplace harm. Responding to what this Article terms a “doctrinal correction” to causation within this groundswell of decisions, the Supreme Court recently issued an “expansive” and “sweeping” reformulation of but-for causation in Bostock v. Clayton …
Social Science Evidence In Charter Litigation: Lessons From Carter V Canada (Attorney General), Jocelyn Downie
Social Science Evidence In Charter Litigation: Lessons From Carter V Canada (Attorney General), Jocelyn Downie
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
In this paper, I offer the reflections of an academic who wandered well out of her wheelhouse. While I have graduate training in both philosophy and law, I am not an expert on the use of social science and humanities evidence in litigation. But, through the course of working on Carter v Canada (Attorney General), I had the opportunity to participate directly in the process of marshalling, preparing, analyzing, and critiquing the evidence. My hope is that, through this paper, I can bring a perspective that may be useful both for practitioners who might (or, I would say, should) be …
A Contextual Approach To Harmless Error Review, Justin Murray
A Contextual Approach To Harmless Error Review, Justin Murray
Articles & Chapters
Harmless error review is profoundly important, but arguably broken, in the form that courts currently employ it in criminal cases. One significant reason for this brokenness lies in the dissonance between the reductionism of modern harmless error methodology and the diverse normative ambitions of criminal procedure. Nearly all harmless error rules used by courts today focus exclusively on whether the procedural error under review affected the result of a judicial proceeding. I refer to these rules as “result-based harmlesserror review.” The singular preoccupation of result-based harmless error review with the outputs of criminal processes stands in marked contrast with criminal …
Gun Rights And The New Lochnerism, Areto A. Imoukuede
Gun Rights And The New Lochnerism, Areto A. Imoukuede
Journal Publications
This Article examines the Supreme Court's recent Second Amendment cases as applications of the same libertarian bias that has undermined constitutional law's fundamental rights doctrine. The concept of a libertarian bias that is based in a New Lochnerism was previously introduced in both The Fifth Freedom and The New Due Process. The analysis here demonstrates that the recently revised doctrine regarding the Second Amendment and gun rights is driven by the current Supreme Court ("Court") hostility towards government regulation in a manner that is akin to what was seen during the Lochner Era. Regrettably, this Article is timely and is …
Justice And Accountability: Activist Judging In The Light Of Democratic Constitutionalism And Democratic Experimentalism, William H. Simon
Justice And Accountability: Activist Judging In The Light Of Democratic Constitutionalism And Democratic Experimentalism, William H. Simon
Faculty Scholarship
This essay examines the charge that activist judging is inconsistent with democracy in the light of two recent perspectives in legal scholarship. The perspectives – Democratic Constitutionalism and Democratic Experimentalism – suggest in convergent and complementary ways that the charge ignores or oversimplifies relevant features of both judging and democracy. In particular, the charge exaggerates the pre-emptive effect of activist judging, and it implausibly conflates democracy with electoral processes. In addition, it understands consensus as a basis for judicial legitimacy solely in terms of pre-existing agreement and ignores the contingent legitimacy that can arise from the potential for subsequent agreement.
Human Rights Hero: The Supreme Court In Griswold V. Connecticut, Stephen Wermiel
Human Rights Hero: The Supreme Court In Griswold V. Connecticut, Stephen Wermiel
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
Resisting Wholesale Electronic Invasion Of The Fourth Amendment, Michael E. Tigar
Resisting Wholesale Electronic Invasion Of The Fourth Amendment, Michael E. Tigar
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Conservative-Libertarian Turn In First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman
The Conservative-Libertarian Turn In First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman
All Faculty Scholarship
Conservative constitutional jurisprudence in the United States has an important libertarian dimension. In recent years, a conservative majority of the Supreme Court has strengthened the constitutional protections for property rights, recognized an individual right to own firearms, imposed limits on the welfare state and the powers of the federal government, cut back on affirmative action, and held that closely held corporations have a right to religious liberty that permits them to deny contraceptive coverage to their female employees. This libertarian streak also can be seen in decisions on freedom of speech and association. In several leading cases, conservative judges have …
Realism Over Formalism And The Presumption Of Constitutionality: Chief Justice Roberts’ Opinion Upholding The Individual Mandate, Wilson Huhn
Akron Law Faculty Publications
Chief Justice John Roberts upheld the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act because he rejected formalism and embraced realism in constitutional analysis, and because he deferred to Congress, acknowledging its right to make policy choices.
Systems Pluralism And Institutional Pluralism In Constitutional Law: National, Supranational, And Global Governance, Daniel Halberstam
Systems Pluralism And Institutional Pluralism In Constitutional Law: National, Supranational, And Global Governance, Daniel Halberstam
Book Chapters
Constitutions are often seen as creating a closed and hierarchically organized system of law. Constitutional systems are taken as closed to claims of legality from outside the system and as setting forth a hierarchy of norms and institutions that governs within the system. This consolidation of authority, in turn, is predominantly associated with a radical political (re)founding of the state. Politics are framed by law and law is grounded in an act of collective politics on the part of an existing or aspiring community defined by shared histories, norms, processes, and politics.
The Individual Mandate, Sovereignty, And The Ends Of Good Government: A Reply To Professor Randy Barnett, Patrick Mckinley Brennan
The Individual Mandate, Sovereignty, And The Ends Of Good Government: A Reply To Professor Randy Barnett, Patrick Mckinley Brennan
Working Paper Series
Randy Barnett has recently argued that the individual mandate is unconstitutional because it is an improper regulation under the Necessary and Proper Clause (in conjunction with the Commerce Clause) because it improperly "commandeers" the people and thereby violates their sovereignty. In this paper, I counter that the argument from sovereignty is unavailing because it is, among other defects, hopelessly ambiguous. The variety of historically attested meanings of "sovereignty" renders the concept useless for purposes of answering questions of comparative authority, including the authority of the Congress to mandate that individuals purchase health insurance from a private market. There is no …
Resolving The Qualified Immunity Dilemma: Constitutional Tort Claims For Nominal Damages, James E. Pfander
Resolving The Qualified Immunity Dilemma: Constitutional Tort Claims For Nominal Damages, James E. Pfander
Faculty Working Papers
Scholars have criticized the Court's qualified immunity decision in Pearson v. Callahan on the ground that it may lead to stagnation in the judicial elaboration of constitutional norms. Under current law, officers sued in their personal capacity for constitutional torts enjoy qualified immunity from liability unless the plaintiff can persuade the court that the conduct in question violated clearly established law. Pearson permits the lower courts to dismiss on the basis of legal uncertainty; it no longer requires the courts to address the merits of the constitutional question. This essay suggests that constitutional tort claimants should be permitted to avoid …
Advice And Consent Vs. Silence And Dissent? The Contrasting Roles Of The Legislature In U.S. And U.K. Judicial Appointments, Mary Clark
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
The Senate‘s role in judicial appointments has come under increasingly withering criticism for its uninformative and spectacle-like nature. At the same time, Britain has established two new judicial appointment processes - to accompany its new Supreme Court and existing lower courts - in which Parliament plays no role. This Article seeks to understand the reasons for the inclusion and exclusion of the legislature in the U.S. and U.K. judicial appointment processes adopted at the creation of their respective Supreme Courts.
The Article proceeds by highlighting the ideas and concerns motivating inclusion of the legislature in judicial appointments in the early …
The Pros And Cons Of Politically Reversible 'Semisubstantive' Constitutional Rules, Dan T. Coenen
The Pros And Cons Of Politically Reversible 'Semisubstantive' Constitutional Rules, Dan T. Coenen
Scholarly Works
Most observers of constitutional adjudication believe that it works in an all-or-nothing way. On this view, the substance of challenged rules is of decisive importance, so that political decision makers may resuscitate invalidated laws only by way of constitutional amendment. This conception of constitutional law is incomplete. In fact, courts often use so-called “semisubstantive” doctrines that focus on the processes that nonjudicial officials have used in adopting constitutionally problematic rules. When a court strikes down a rule by using a motive-centered or legislative-findings doctrine, for example, political decision makers may revive that very rule without need for a constitutional amendment. …
Equality, Conscience, And The Liberty Of The Church: Justifying The Controversiale Per Controversialius, Patrick Mckinley Brennan
Equality, Conscience, And The Liberty Of The Church: Justifying The Controversiale Per Controversialius, Patrick Mckinley Brennan
Working Paper Series
This paper considers the central normative claim of Martha Nussbaum’s Liberty of Conscience: In Defense of America’s Tradition of Religious Equality, viz., that the U.S. Constitution’s religion clauses should be construed to provide equal (and extensive) protection to the vulnerable human faculty called conscience. The paper argues that Nussbaum’s argument from Rawlsian political liberalism that leads to her normative constitutional claim amounts, perversely, to an attempt to justify the controversial by the more controversial. The paper goes on to argue that while equality and conscience are concepts that are reasonably contested, Nussbaum illegitimately gives them priority over the also reasonably …
Delivering The Goods: Herein Of Mead, Delegations, And Authority, Patrick Mckinley Brennan
Delivering The Goods: Herein Of Mead, Delegations, And Authority, Patrick Mckinley Brennan
Working Paper Series
This paper argues, first, that the natural law position, according to which it is the function of human law and political authorities to instantiate certain individual goods and the common good of the political community, does not entail judges' having the power or authority to speak the natural law directly. It goes on to argue, second, that lawmaking power/authority must be delegated by the people or their representatives. It then argues, third, that success in making law depends not just on the exercise of delegated power/authority, but also on the exercise of care and deliberation or, in the article's terms, …
The Supreme Courts Municipal Bond Decision And The Market-Participant Exception To The Dormant Commerce Clause, Dan T. Coenen
The Supreme Courts Municipal Bond Decision And The Market-Participant Exception To The Dormant Commerce Clause, Dan T. Coenen
Scholarly Works
Does it violate the dormant Commerce Clause for a state to exempt interest earned on its own bonds, but no others, from income taxation? In a recent decision, the Supreme Court answered this question in the negative. Six members of the Court found the case controlled by the state-self-promotion exception to the dormancy doctrine's antidiscrimination rule. Three of those Justices, however, went further by also invoking the longstanding market-participant exception to sustain the discriminatory state tax break. This Essay challenges that alternative line of analysis. According to the author, the plurality's effort to apply the market-participant principle: (1) invites a …
``No One Does That Anymore": On Tushnet, Constitutions, And Others, Penelope J. Pether
``No One Does That Anymore": On Tushnet, Constitutions, And Others, Penelope J. Pether
Working Paper Series
In this contribution to the Quinnipiac Law Review’s annual symposium edition, this year devoted to the work of Mark Tushnet, I read his antijuridification scholarship “against the grain,” concluding both that Tushnet’s later scholarship is neo-Realist rather than critical in its orientation, and that both his early scholarship on slavery and his post-9/11 constitutional work reveal an ambivalence about the claim that we learn from history to circumscribe our excesses, which anchors his popular constitutionalist rhetoric.
The likeness of Tushnet’s scholarship to the work of the Realists lies in this: while the Realists’ search for a science that would satisfy …
Differentiating Church And State (Without Losing The Church), Patrick Mckinley Brennan
Differentiating Church And State (Without Losing The Church), Patrick Mckinley Brennan
Working Paper Series
There is an ongoing debate about whether the U.S. Constitution includes -- or should be interpreted to include -- a principle of "church autonomy." Catholic doctrine and political theology, by contrast, clearly articulated a principle of "libertas ecclesiae," liberty of the church, when during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries the Church differentiated herself from the state. This article explores the meaning and origin of the doctrine of the libertas ecclesiae and the proper relationship among churches, civil society, and government. In doing so, it highlights the points at which church and state should cooperate and the points at which …
The Tropicalization Of Proportionality Balancing: The Colombian And Mexican Examples, Luisa Conesa
The Tropicalization Of Proportionality Balancing: The Colombian And Mexican Examples, Luisa Conesa
Cornell Law School Inter-University Graduate Student Conference Papers
In “The Tropicalization of Proportionality Balancing: the Colombian and Mexican Examples” the author analyzes how the German based proportionality balancing test was exported to Latin America, by studying the Colombian Constitutional Court and the Mexican Supreme Court. This work is guided by the following questions: what is proportionality balancing? How has it been used by the Colombian and Mexican jurisprudences and what are its influences? Do the Courts cite other jurisdictions when using the test? Have they imported a traditional European test? Or, have they “tropicalized” it?
The study of the Latin American examples leads to the conclusion that the …
Reviving The Subject Of Law, Penelope J. Pether
Reviving The Subject Of Law, Penelope J. Pether
Working Paper Series
This essay is an advanced draft of work that will be published in On Philosophy and American Law (Francis J. Mootz III ed. forthcoming, Cambridge U.P., 2009). This edited collection includes responses by a wide range of scholars working in legal theory to Mootz’s challenge to respond to the current state of American legal philosophy, using Karl Llewellyn’s 1934 University of Pennsylvania law review account of the emergence of legal realism as a prompt. Drawing on the author’s recent scholarship on the emergence of a distinctive and impoverished model of “common law” judging in the U.S. since the mid- c20th, …
Risky Business: Massachusetts V. Epa, Risk-Based Harm, And Standing In The D.C. Circuit, Amanda Leiter
Risky Business: Massachusetts V. Epa, Risk-Based Harm, And Standing In The D.C. Circuit, Amanda Leiter
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
Market Triumphalism, Electoral Pathologies, And The Abiding Wisdom Of First Amendment Access Rights, Gregory P. Magarian
Market Triumphalism, Electoral Pathologies, And The Abiding Wisdom Of First Amendment Access Rights, Gregory P. Magarian
Working Paper Series
Forty years ago, Professor Jerome Barron made the classic case that the First Amendment requires not merely protection of speech against government interference but provision of access to the means of mass communication. The Supreme Court in the ensuing decades has largely rejected Barron’s approach. In this article, Professor Magarian defends Barron’s case for access rights against the two theoretical critiques that have underwritten its doctrinal rejection. The libertarian critique attacks the normative underpinnings of access rights, maintaining that the First Amendment insulates market-driven distributions of expressive opportunities. Professor Magarian demonstrates that politically progressive and conservative libertarian critics of access …
"Sociological Legitimacy" In Supreme Court Opinions, Michael Wells
"Sociological Legitimacy" In Supreme Court Opinions, Michael Wells
Scholarly Works
Analysis of a Supreme Court opinion ordinarily begins from the premise that the opinion is a transparent window into the Court's thinking, such that the reasons offered by the Court are, or ought to be, the reasons that account for the holding. Scholars debate the strength of the Court's reasoning, question or defend the Court's candor, and propose alternative ways of justifying the ruling. This Article takes issue with the transparency premise, on both descriptive and normative grounds. Especially in controversial cases, the Court is at least as much concerned with presenting its holding in a way that will win …