Law Commons^™

Former Presidents And Executive Privilege, Laurent Sacharoff

Laurent Sacharoff

Brief Of Eleven Law Professors And Aarp As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Bilski V. Kappos, 130 S. Ct. 3218 (2010) (No. 08-964), Joshua Sarnoff, Lori Andrews, Andrew Chin, Ralph Clifford, Christine Farley, Sean Flynn, Debra Greenfield, Peter Jaszi, Charles Mcmanis, Lateef Mtima, Malla Pollack

Amicus Briefs

This is the brief filed by Joshua Sarnoff and Barbara Jones on behalf of various law professors and AARP in the Bilski v. Kappos case, discussing constitutional limits to the Patent power.

F09rs Sgb No. 16 (Budget), Compagno, Sellers

Student Senate Enrolled Legislation

No abstract provided.

F09rs Sgr No. 6 (Constitution Revision Committee), Palermo, Parker, Prestridge

Student Senate Enrolled Legislation

No abstract provided.

A Step Too Far - Posthumously Conceived Children And Social Security Entitlements In Vernoff V Astrue, Mel Cousins

Mel Cousins

This case note examines a recent decision of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit concerning the entitlements of posthumously conceived children under social security. In contrast to its earlier (expansionary) decision in Gillett-Netting, here the Court set out the limits to how far it is willing to push the interpretation of the (convoluted) legislation and refused to find a right to benefit where there was no evidence that the father had consented to (or even considered) having a child post-mortem.

Ink Blot Or Not: The Meaning Of Privileges And/Or Immunities, Richard Aynes

Akron Law Faculty Publications

This article examines the meaning of the terms privileges and immunities as used in Article IV of the U.S. Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment. It begins by tracing the American use of the terms to April 10, 1606 in the first Charter of Virginia. Building upon the work of other scholars and citing original documents, it concludes that these words has a well-established meaning as “rights” well before the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted. The article notes that in Justice Miller’s decision in the Slaughter-House Cases he refers to the privileges and immunities of Corfield v. Coryell as “those rights which …

Ink Blot Or Not: The Meaning Of Privileges And/Or Immunities, Richard Aynes

Richard L. Aynes

This article examines the meaning of the terms privileges and immunities as used in Article IV of the U.S. Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment. It begins by tracing the American use of the terms to April 10, 1606 in the first Charter of Virginia. Building upon the work of other scholars and citing original documents, it concludes that these words has a well-established meaning as “rights” well before the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted. The article notes that in Justice Miller’s decision in the Slaughter-House Cases he refers to the privileges and immunities of Corfield v. Coryell as “those rights which …

The Constitutional Right To A Treaty Preemption Defense, David Sloss

Faculty Publications

The Constitution includes several provisions specifically designed to protect criminal defendants. For example, the Fourth Amendment prohibits "unreasonable searches and seizures," the Sixth Amendment guarantees that criminal defendants have a right to legal representation, and the Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishments. The Constitution' s Founders recognized that state power is at its apex when the state threatens individuals with criminal sanctions. Accordingly, they adopted special constitutional rules to protect "the individual defendant from the awesome power of the State."

The Due Process Clause provides critical protection for criminal defendants; it stipulates that no State shall "deprive any person …

Executive Branch Contempt Of Congress, Josh Chafetz

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

After former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten refused to comply with subpoenas issued by a congressional committee investigating the firing of a number of United States Attorneys, the House of Representatives voted in 2008 to hold them in contempt. The House then chose a curious method of enforcing its contempt citation: it filed a federal lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment that Miers and Bolten were in contempt of Congress and an injunction ordering them to comply with the subpoenas. The district court ruled for the House, although that ruling was subsequently stayed …

Constitutional Flaw?, Carl E. Schneider

Articles

Do terminally ill patients have a constitutional right "to decide, without FDA interference, whether to assume the risks of using potentially life-saving investigational drugs that the FDA has yet to approve for commercial marketing, but that the FDA has determined, after Phase I clinical human trials, are safe enough for further testing"? In Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs v. McClellan, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia said "no." In Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs v. von Eschenbach, a panel (three judges) of the United States Court of Appeals …

Trust Or Profit: How Military Officers Are Bound By The Constitution, Michael C. Mcnerney

Michael C McNerney

This paper examines the ability of reserve and active duty military officers to serve in certain political offices, such as Congress and the Electoral College. The seminal case on this issue, U.S. v. Lane, dealt with a U.S. senator who served as a reserve military judge. In deciding the case, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces only stated that a member of Congress may not also serve as a judge, but did not reach the ultimate issue of concurrent military service. This paper will attempt to show in exactly which political offices military officers may serve. In making …

Will The Supreme Court Send The Vra's Biggest Sunset Provision Into The Sunset?: Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One And The 2006 Reauthorization Of Section Five Of The Voting Rights Act, Cameron W. Eubanks

Cameron W Eubanks

The D.C. Circuit correctly decided Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Mukasey. The court subjected the 2006 reauthorization of § 5 of the Voting Rights Act to the rational and appropriate test announced in South Carolina v. Katzenbach. Under this test the court found that Congress had a rational basis to extend § 5 based on evidence of continued racial discrimination in voting. On review, the Supreme Court will uphold the § 5 reauthorization in spite of the congruent and proportional test announced in City of Boerne v. Flores which is used to review enactments passed pursuant to …

Unmasking Judicial Extremism, Carl Tobias

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Constitutionality Of Mandates To Purchase Health Insurance, Mark A. Hall

O'Neill Institute Papers

Health insurance mandates have been a component of many recent health care reform proposals. Because a federal requirement that individuals transfer money to a private party is unprecedented, a number of legal issues must be examined.

This paper analyzes whether Congress can legislate a health insurance mandate and the potential legal challenges that might arise, given such a mandate. The analysis of legal challenges to health insurance mandates applies to federal individual mandates, but can also apply to a federal mandate requiring employers to purchase health insurance for their employees. There are no Constitutional barriers for Congress to legislate a …

Book Review: The Constitution In The Supreme Court: The First Hundred Years, 1789-1888., David S. Bogen

David S. Bogen

No abstract provided.

The Rule Against Scandal, Marci A. Hamilton

Schmooze 'tickets'

No abstract provided.

Toward A Judeo-Christian Constitutional Interpretation, Henry L. Chambers

Schmooze 'tickets'

No abstract provided.

Is There A Paradox In Amending A Sacred Text?, Beau Breslin

Schmooze 'tickets'

No abstract provided.

Like A Hole In The Head, Lief H. Carter

Schmooze 'tickets'

No abstract provided.

Religion And Constitutionalism: Indigenous Societies, David S. Bogen

Schmooze 'tickets'

No abstract provided.

The Market Participant Doctrine And The Clear Statement Rule, David S. Bogen

David S. Bogen

This paper argues that the market participant exception to the dormant commerce clause reflects the same concerns that led to the clear statement doctrine for application of general legislation to the operations of state governments. The genius of the Constitution was to make federal law directly applicable to individuals instead of through state governments – this made enforcement easier and avoided confrontation between the state and nation. Confrontation in which the federal authorities order the state to act in a particular way should be a result of consideration of the need to do so. But the dormant commerce clause by …

"Taxnapping": How Murphy V. Irs Used Direct Taxation To Steal The Tax Reform Debate, Jason A. Derr

Jason A Derr

Suppose someone asks you, “You know, I’m fed up with the tax policy of United States, what can do I change it?” Although some may respond with ideas of protest, one of the most common responses will likely be, “Call your Congressperson.” However, after the D.C. Circuit’s decision in Murphy v. IRS, a new response is called for: “If you want to change tax policy, call the judge’s chambers.”

In Murphy v. IRS, the D.C. Circuit considered whether the taxation of emotional injury damages violated the “direct tax clauses” of the United States Constitution. The direct clauses are a mysterious …

Trust Or Profit: How Both Active Duty And Reserve Military Officers Are Bound By The Constitution, Michael C. Mcnerney

Michael C McNerney

This Comment examines the constitutional barriers that constrain military officers from holding certain public offices. Included is an examination of the Emoluments Clause, Incompatability Clause, and several seminal cases.

The Truth About Torts: Rethinking Regulatory Preemption And Its Impact On Public Health, William Buzbee, William Funk, Thomas Mcgarity, Nina A. Mendelson, Sidney Shapiro, David Vladeck, Matthew Shudtz

Other Publications

As consumers, we assume that the automobiles, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and other products we purchase are generally safe for their intended uses. We rely on manufacturers to design and produce safe products, and we assume that federal regulators are conscientious watchdogs of the marketplace. In most instances, our assumptions are valid and we safely go about our lives. But the regulatory system is now frayed to the point that dangerous products sometimes slip through the cracks. Vioxx, Firestone/ATX tires, and toxics-laden children’s toys have endangered and harmed millions. In these cases, society depends on the state courts as a venue …

The Constitution And The American Federal System, Robert A. Sedler

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Former Presidents And Executive Privilege, Laurent Sacharoff

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

The Constitution provides former Presidents with no powers or role, and yet numerous former Presidents including Truman and Nixon have asserted executive privilege in order to withhold information from Congress, historians, and the public. The most recent former President, George W. Bush, is likely to make similar assertions based upon his sweeping view of the rights of former Presidents as reflected in his recently revoked Executive Order 13,233, potentially leading to a constitutional collision between the rights of former Presidents and those of Congress. This article argues that notwithstanding Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, former Presidents should retain no …

Step Out Of The Car: License, Registration, And Dna Please, Brian Gallini

School of Law Faculty Publications and Presentations

No Arkansas appellate court has examined the constitutionality of the recently enacted House Bill 1473 – better known as “Juli’s Law” – which allows officers to take DNA samples from suspects arrested for capital murder, murder in the first degree, kidnapping, sexual assault in the first degree, and sexual assault in the second degree. This Essay contends that Juli’s Law violates the Fourth Amendment of the federal constitution. Part I highlights certain features of the statute and explores the rationale underlying its enactment. Part II discusses the only published decision upholding the practice of taking of DNA samples from certain …

39th Congress (1865-1867) And The 14th Amendment: Some Preliminary Perspectives, Richard Aynes

Akron Law Faculty Publications

The 39th Congress (1865-1867) was one of the important Congresses in our history. It passed more legislation than any other Congress up to that time.

This preliminary examination of the 39th Congress begins with a look it composition. One of the critical factors was that while the 38th Congress contained a majority of unionists, the 39th Congress contained a super-majority which meant not only that they could override a Presidential veto, but also that they did not need to take the Democratic opposition seriously. This article also identifies the leadership of the 39th Congress. The 38th Congress was composed of …

Empathy And Pragmatism In The Choice Of Constitutional Norms For Religious Land Use Disputes, Elizabeth Reilly

Akron Law Faculty Publications

From the perspective of both religious entities and local governments, religious land use requests are best resolved quickly, locally and cooperatively. The traditional framework for addressing religious land use disputes, which the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA)1 adopted, is ill-suited to those goals. Legally, disputes have long been framed as denials of the free exercise of religion – the broadest of all claims and the one requiring the most intrusive and subjective determinations about a particular religious group and its proposed use (what religion is, what a particular sect requires and how religion qua religion is affected …

Constitutional Interpretation And Judicial Review: A Case Of The Tail Wagging The Dog, Michael Halley

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

A response to John F. Manning, Federalism and the Generality Problem in Constitutional Interpretation, 122 Harv. L. Rev. 2003 (2009). Professor John Manning's analysis of the Supreme Court's recent federalism decisions works as a platform to further the cause of textualism. His argument fails to persuade, however, because the textualism he says the Court should embrace in federalism cases is antithetical to the atextual nature of the Court's jurisdiction to adjudicate the constitutionality of legislation. Manning prefaces his work by telling readers that his analysis is not an end in itself. His aim, rather, is to "use the methodology" the …