Law Commons^™

A Denial Of Personhood: Why Hate Crime Legislation Is Necessary To Assure Proportionality In Punishment, Clare Godfryd

JCLC Online

The term “hate crime” entered the mainstream in the United States during the 1980s, when advocates began to track incidents of bias-motivated violence. Since then, hate crimes have continued to garner significant attention. Advocates and legislators have traditionally justified hate crime law under the “expressive theory,” the idea that the purpose of such laws is to condemn prejudice and express messages of tolerance and equality.

In this Comment, I offer a distinct justification for hate crime legislation. Specifically, I argue that, when a perpetrator targets a victim because of perceived immutable characteristics, the hate crime offender denies the victim’s agency …

Challenging The Criminalization Of Undocumented Drivers Through A Health-Justice Framework, Jason A. Cade

Scholarly Works

States increasingly use driver’s license laws to further policy objectives unrelated to road safety. This symposium contribution employs a health justice lens to focus on one manifestation of this trend—state schemes that prohibit noncitizen residents from accessing driver’s licenses and then impose criminal sanctions for driving without authorization. Status-based no-license laws not only facilitate legally questionable enforcement of local immigration priorities but also impose structural inequities with long-term health consequences for immigrants and their family members, including US citizen children. Safe, reliable transportation is a significant social determinant of health for individuals, families, and communities. Applying a health justice lens …

The Lessons Of 9/11 For October 7, Mary Ellen O'Connell

NDLS in the News

October 7 is being called Israel’s 9/11. The comparison is apt for the lessons that can be learned as to the legality of launching a ground offensive to respond to terrorism.

Necessity, Proportionality, And Executive Order 14086, Alex Joel

Joint PIJIP/TLS Research Paper Series

No abstract provided.

Proportionality Defenses In Frand Cases - A Comparative Assessment Of The Revised German Patent Injunction Rules And Us Case Law, Peter Georg Picht, Jorge L. Contreras

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

A new defense against injunctions in FRAND cases has arisen in Germany, and its relationship to the Huawei defense (whether viewed as a competition or contractual matter) is largely unexplo-red. In August 2021, the “Second Act for the Modernization of Patent Law” (Zweites Pa-tentrechtsmodernisierungsgesetz) took effect and modified the German Patent Act (GPA) in sever-al respects. Pertinent to our topic is an amendment to § 139(1) GPA which introduced an expli-cit proportionality defense against injunction claims. The new proportionality mechanism con-sists of three main elements: First, § 139(1)(3) GPA excludes the claim to an injunction in case of patent infringement …

No Sense Of Decency, Kathryn E. Miller

Articles

For nearly seventy years, the Court has assessed Eighth Amendment claims by evaluating “the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.” In this Article, I examine the evolving standards of decency test, which has long been a punching bag for critics on both the right and the left. Criticism of the doctrine has been fierce, but largely academic until recent years. Some fault the test for being too majoritarian, while others argue that it provides few constraints on the Justices’ discretion, permitting their personal predilections to rule the day. For many, the test is seen …

The Right To Amend State Constitutions, Jessica Bulman-Pozen, Miriam Seifter

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay explores the people's right to amend state constitutions and threats to that right today. It explains how democratic proportionality review can help courts distinguish unconstitutional infringement of the right from legitimate regulation. More broadly, the Essay considers the distinctive state constitutional architecture that popular amendment illuminates.

State Constitutional Rights And Democratic Proportionality, Jessica Bulman-Pozen, Miriam Seifter

Faculty Scholarship

State constitutional law is in the spotlight. As federal courts retrench on abortion, democracy, and more, state constitutions are defining rights across the nation. Despite intermittent calls for greater attention to state constitutional theory, neither scholars nor courts have provided a comprehensive account of state constitutional rights or a coherent framework for their adjudication. Instead, many state courts import federal interpretive practices that bear little relationship to state constitutions or institutions.

This Article seeks to begin a new conversation about state constitutional adjudication. It first shows how in myriad defining ways state constitutions differ from the U.S. Constitution: They protect …

Counting The Cost Of Enlarging The Role Of Adr In Civil Justice, Dorcas Quek Anderson

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Access to civil justice in many countries has been plagued by the common challenges of the high cost of litigation, inequality in parties’ financial resources, differing risk appetites and limited judicial resources. Singapore, a common law jurisdiction, recently implemented radical changes to its civil justice regime with effect from 1 April 2022 in order to ensure affordability and timeliness of the civil justice process. As in the United Kingdom, these civil justice reforms are premised on the proportionality principle: they seek to achieve procedure that is proportionate to the claim value and the means of the parties, without unduly compromising …

Taking Justification Seriously: Proportionality, Strict Scrutiny, And The Substance Of Religious Liberty, Stephanie H. Barclay, Justin Collings

Journal Articles

Last term, five Justices on the Supreme Court flirted with the possibility of revisiting the Court’s First Amendment test for when governments must provide an exemption to a religious objector. But Justice Barrett raised an obvious, yet all-important question: If the received test were to be revised, what new test should take its place? The competing interests behind this question have be-come even more acute in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. In a moment rife with lofty rhetoric about religious liberty but riven by fierce debates about what it means in practice, this Article revisits a fundamental question common to …

Criminal Law’S Core Principles, Paul H. Robinson

All Faculty Scholarship

Modern criminal law scholars and policymakers assume they are free to construct criminal law rules by focusing exclusively on the criminal justice theory of the day. But this “blank slate” conception of criminal lawmaking is dangerously misguided. In fact, lawmakers are writing on a slate on which core principles are already indelibly written and realistically they are free only to add detail in the implementation of those principles and to add additional provisions not inconsistent with them. Attempts to do otherwise are destined to produce tragic results from both utilitarian and retributivist views.

Many writers dispute that such core principles …

Epilogue: The Elephant In The Room, Jamal Greene

Faculty Scholarship

This chapter explores the contrasting role of proportionality discourse in the USA and in Latin America. Although the USA provided an important constitutional model for Latin American countries, the latter does not share the former’s disinterest in the proportionality framework, which is considered foreign to the legal tradition of the country despite the fact it is arguably harmonic with the approach to law creation in the common law tradition. The chapter seeks possible explanations for the contrast in four elements: the importance in Latin America of centralized, specialized constitutional jurisdiction; the tradition of borrowing constitutional jurisprudence from abroad; the openness …

Proportionality, Constraint, And Culpability, Mitchell N. Berman

All Faculty Scholarship

Philosophers of criminal punishment widely agree that criminal punishment should be “proportional” to the “seriousness” of the offense. But this apparent consensus is only superficial, masking significant dissensus below the surface. Proposed proportionality principles differ on several distinct dimensions, including: (1) regarding which offense or offender properties determine offense “seriousness” and thus constitute a proportionality relatum; (2) regarding whether punishment is objectionably disproportionate only when excessively severe, or also when excessively lenient; and (3) regarding whether the principle can deliver absolute (“cardinal”) judgments, or only comparative (“ordinal”) ones. This essay proposes that these differences cannot be successfully adjudicated, and one …

Injunctions In Patent Law: A Trans-Atlantic Dialog On Flexibility And Tailoring, Jorge L. Contreras, Martin Husovec,

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

This chapter is from the edited volume "Injunctions in Patent Law: A Trans-Atlantic Dialogue on Flexibility and Tailoring" (Jorge Contreras & Martin Husovec, eds., Cambridge Univ. Press, forthcoming). It offers a unique analytical synthesis of eleven national and two regional/international descriptions of flexibilities in patent remedies authored by leading scholars in the field. This synthesis identifies a range of similarities and differences among jurisdictions, explains the principal features of these different legal systems, provides an analytical framework for comparing them, and offers observations about trends and the outlook for the future. The countries studied include Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, …

Curing The First Amendment Scrutiny Muddle Through A Breyer-Based Blend Up? Toward A Less Categorical, More Values-Oriented Approach For Selecting Standards Of Judicial Review, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article argues that the United States Supreme Court should significantly alter its current categorical approach for discerning standards of judicial review in free-speech cases. The present system should become nondeterminative and be augmented with a modified version of Justice Stephen Breyer’s long-preferred proportionality framework. Specifically, the Article’s proposed tack fuses facets of today’s policy, which largely pivots on distinguishing content-based laws from content-neutral laws and letting that categorization determine scrutiny, with a more nuanced, values-and-interests methodology. A values-and-interests formula would allow the Court to climb up or down the traditional ladder of scrutiny rungs – strict, intermediate or rational …

Mala Prohibita And Proportionality, Youngjae Lee

Faculty Scholarship

What is the proportionate punishment for conduct that is neither harmful nor wrongful? A likely response to that is that one ought not to be punished at all for such conduct. It is, however, common for the state to punish harmless conduct the wrongfulness of which is not always apparent. Take, for example, the requirement that those who give investment advice for compensation do so only after registering as an investment advisor. Advising a person on how to invest his or her funds and accepting a fee for the advice without registering with the government does not seem harmful or …

A Critical Evaluation Of The Effectiveness And Legitimacy Of Webblocking Injunctions, Mark Hyland

Articles

Relative to the dual criteria of effectiveness and legitimacy, this article evaluates webblocking injunctions in the context of intellectual property law and with a particular focus on the vanguard role played by the English Courts. With regard to the first criterion, it is argued that there is reason to think that webblocking injunctions are viewed by IP owners as well as by legislators and courts as a relatively effective instrument in the protection of IP assets. Moreover, the extension of webblocking orders to trade marks together with their adoption in a number of legal systems, is further evidence that these …

Hacking For Intelligence Collection In The Fight Against Terrorism: Israeli, Comparative, And International Perspectives, Asaf Lubin

Articles by Maurer Faculty

תקציר בעברית: הניסיון של המחוקק הישראלי להביא להסדרה מפורשת של סמכויות השב״כ במרחב הקיברנטי משקף מגמה רחבה יותר הניכרת בעולם לעיגון בחקיקה ראשית של הוראות בדבר פעולות פצחנות מצד גופי ביון ומודיעין ורשויות אכיפת חוק למטרות איסוף מודיעין לשם סיכול עבירות חמורות, ובייחוד עבירות טרור אם בעבר היו פעולות מסוג אלה כפופות לנהלים פנימיים ומסווגים, הרי שהדרישה לשקיפות בעידן שלאחר גילויי אדוארד סנודן מחד והשימוש הנרחב בתקיפות מחשב לביצוע פעולות חיפוש וחקירה לסיכול טרור מאידך, מציפים כעת את הדרישה להסמכה מפורשת. במאמר זה אבקש למפות הן את השדה הטכנולוגי והן את השדה המשפטי בכל האמור בתקיפות מחשבים למטרות ריגול ומעקב. …

The Proportionality Rule And Mental Health Harm In War, Sarah Knuckey, Alex Moorehead, Audrey Mccalley, Adam Brown

Faculty Scholarship

The foundational international humanitarian law rule of proportionality — that parties to an armed conflict may not attack where civilian harm would be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage — is normally interpreted to encompass civilian physical injuries only. Attacks may cause significant mental harms also, yet current interpretations of the law lag behind science in understanding and recognizing these kinds of harms. This article analyzes legal, public health, psychology, and neuroscience research to assess the extent to which mental health harms should and could be taken into account in proportionality assessments.

Civil Procedure And Economic Inequality, Maureen Carroll

Articles

How well do procedural doctrines attend to present-day economic inequality? This Essay examines that question through the lens of three doctrinal areas: the “irreparable harm” prong of the preliminary injunction standard, the requirement that discovery must be proportional to the needs of the case, and the due process rights of class members in actions for injunctive relief. It concludes that in each of those areas, courts and commentators could do more to take economic inequality into account.

Codifying A Sharia-Based Criminal Law In Developing Muslim Countries, Paul H. Robinson

All Faculty Scholarship

This paper reproduces presentations made at the University of Tehran in March 2019 as part of the opening and closing remarks for a Conference on Criminal Law Development in Muslim-Majority Countries. The opening remarks discuss the challenges of codifying a Shari’a-based criminal code, drawing primarily from the experiences of Professor Robinson in directing codification projects in Somalia and the Maldives. The closing remarks apply many of those lessons to the situation currently existing in Iran. Included is a discussion of the implications for Muslim countries of Robinson’s social psychology work on the power of social influence and internalized norms that …

Injunctive Relief, Norman Siebrasse, Rafal Sikorski, Jorge L. Contreras, Thomas F. Cotter, John M. Golden, Sang Jo Jong, Brian J. Love, David O. Taylor

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Patent systems commonly empower courts to order accused or adjudged infringers to refrain from continuing infringing conduct in the future. Some patentees file suit for the primary purpose of obtaining and enforcing an injunction against infringement by a competitor, and even in cases in which the patentee is willing to license an invention to an accused infringer for an agreed price, the indirect monetary value of an injunction against future infringement can dwarf the amount a finder of fact is likely to award as compensation for past infringement. In some of these cases, an injunction, if granted, would impose costs …

Supreme Irrelevance: The Court’S Abdication In Criminal Procedure Jurisprudence, Tonja Jacobi, Ross Berlin

Faculty Articles

Criminal procedure is one of the Supreme Court’s most active areas of jurisprudence, but the Court’s rulings are largely irrelevant to the actual workings of the criminal justice system. The Court’s irrelevance takes two forms: objectively, on the numbers, its jurisprudence fails to protect the vast majority of people affected by the criminal justice system; and in terms of salience, the Court has sidestepped the major challenges in the United States today relating to the criminal justice system. These challenges include discrimination in stops and frisks, fatal police shootings, unconscionable plea deals, mass incarceration, and disproportionate execution of racial minorities. …

Liberal Constitutionalism And The Unsettling Of The Secular, Benjamin Berger

Articles & Book Chapters

This chapter argues that certain features of our constitutional theories and practices have been more dependent than we have heretofore acknowledged on an implicit faith in the character and success of secularism. An assumption about the “secular” nature of the social world has lent certain resources to liberal constitutional theory and made possible particular ideas about the nature of contemporary constitutionalism. Yet the conviction that our political and social lives can be satisfyingly described as secular has been seriously destabilized by experience and theory alike. A simple faith in secularism thus unsettled, certain gaps or shortcomings in prevailing accounts of …

R. V. K.R.J.: Shifting The Balance Of The Oakes Test From Minimal Impairment To Proportionality Of Effects, Marcus Moore

All Faculty Publications

The judgment of the Supreme Court in R. v. K.R.J. reflects an important potential change in the way proportionality analysis is conducted in the review of constitutional rights limitations under Canada’s Oakes test. Previously, most cases came down to the “Minimal Impairment” stage of Oakes. Its dominant role is challenged by KRJ, which places new weight on the subsequent and final “Proportionality of Effects” step. A permanent shift in the focus of the test to the Proportionality of Effects inquiry would be a landmark change in the thirty-year history of proportionality in Canada. The shift does not appear crafted to …

Distributive Principles Of Criminal Law, Paul H. Robinson, Tyler Scot Williams

All Faculty Scholarship

This first chapter from the recently published book Mapping American Criminal Law: Variations across the 50 States documents the alternative distributive principles for criminal liability and punishment — desert, deterrence, incapacitation of the dangerous — that are officially recognized by law in each of the American states. The chapter contains two maps visually coded to display important differences: the first map shows which states have adopted desert, deterrence, or incapacitation as a distributive principle, while the second map shows which form of desert is adopted in those jurisdictions that recognize desert. Like all 38 chapters in the book, which covers …

Defense And Desert: When Reasons Don’T Share, Kimberly Kessler Ferzan

All Faculty Scholarship

Many retributivists maintain that when a defendant commits an offense, (1) the defendant forfeits rights against punishment and (2) it is intrinsically good for the defendant to get the punishment he deserves. Self-defense theorists often maintain that when certain conditions are met, (1) an aggressor forfeits his rights against defensive force and (2) the aggressor may be harmed instrumentally to prevent his attack. In the context of a symposium on Uwe Steinhoff’s "Just War Theory," this paper examines the intersection of defense and desert. First, may desert and defense be aggregated when, for instance, the amount of harm that is …

Judicial Review Of Disproportionate (Or Retaliatory) Deportation, Jason A. Cade

Scholarly Works

This Article focuses attention on two recent and notable federal court opinions considering challenges to Trump administration deportation decisions. While finding no statutory bar to the noncitizens’ detention and deportation in these cases, the court in each instance paused to highlight the injustice of the removal decisions. This Article places the opinions in the context of emerging immigration enforcement trends, which reflect a growing indifference to disproportionate treatment as well as enforcement actions founded on retaliation for the exercise of constitutional rights. Judicial decisions like the ones considered here serve vital functions in the cause of immigration law reform even …

Reframing The Proportionality Principle, Michael A. Newton

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Proportionality functions as oneof the most important legal constraints applicable to the conduct of hostilities. In that context, this short essay discusses the commonly encountered misapplications of Cicero's classic sentiment that "salus populwe supremus est lexl . . . silent enim leges inter armes." Rather than serving as a necessary basis for a positive articulation of lawful force as an exception to the norm, jus in bello proportionality delineates the outer boundaries of the commander's appropriate discretion. The mere invocation of jus in bello proportionality cannot become an effective extension of asymmetric combat power by artificially crippling combatant capabilities. This …

Rights As Trumps?, Jamal Greene

Faculty Scholarship

Rights are more than mere interests, but they are not absolute. And so two competing frames have emerged for adjudicating conflicts over rights. Under the first frame, rights are absolute but for the exceptional circumstances in which they may be limited. Constitutional adjudication within this frame is primarily an interpretive exercise fixed on identifying the substance and reach of any constitutional rights at issue. Under the second frame, rights are limited but for the exceptional circumstances in which they are absolute. Adjudication within this frame is primarily an empirical exercise fixed on testing the government’s justification for its action. In …