Law Commons^™

Limitations On Government: A Comparative Constitutional Analysis Of American And Iraqi Efforts To Preserve Liberty And To Protect Against Arbitrariness, Hemin Ibrahim Qadir

Law Student Scholarship

This dissertation is a comparative study in constitutionalism, the historical process of limiting government powers to enable the people to be well served and protected in important aspects of their human dignity. The two constitutional systems explored here are those of the United States and Iraq.

People have to be guaranteed protection and the Constitution must restrict the government from being too powerful to enact whatever laws or acts they want. The United States of America passed through many stages from the colonial period until present day to limit government powers, to protect human rights, fundamental rights, natural rights, and …

Allocating The Costs Of Parental Free Exercise: Striking A New Balance Between Sincere Religious Belief And A Child's Right To Medical Treatment , Paul A. Monopoli

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Line-Item Veto: The Best Response When Congress Passes One Spending “Bill” A Year, L. Gordon Crovitz

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Montesquieu's Theory Of Government And The Framing Of The American Constitution , Matthew P. Bergman

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Milking The New Sacred Cow: The Supreme Court Limits The Peremptory Challenge On Racial Grounds In Powers V. Ohio And Edmonson V. Leesville Concrete Co., Bradley R. Kirk

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Policy Against Federal Funding For Abortions Extends Into The Realm Of Free Speech After Rust V. Sullivan, Loye M. Barton

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

California's Constitutional Right To Privacy, J. Clark Kelso

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States V. Alvarez-Machain: Kidnapping In The "War On Drugs" - A Matter Of Executive Discretion Or Lawlessness?, Michael G. Mckinnon

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Separation Of Powers Doctrine On The Modern Supreme Court And Four Doctrinal Approaches To Judicial Decision-Making, R. Randall Kelso

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Walking The Invisible Line Of Punitive Damages: Txo Production Corp. V. Alliance Resources Corp. , Nancy G. Dragutsky

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Split-Recovery: A Constitutional Answer To The Punitive Damage Dilemma, Clay R. Stevens

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

"A Land Of Strangers": Communitarianism And The Rejuvenation Of Intermediate Associations, Derek E. Brown

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Political Question Or Judicial Query: An Examination Of The Modern Doctrine And Its Inapplicability To Human Rights Mass Tort Litigation, Nancy S. Williams

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Homosexuals, Equal Protection, And The Guarantee Of Fundamental Rights In The New Decade: An Optimist’S Quasi-Suspect View Of Recent Events And Their Impact On Heightened Scrutiny For Sexual Orientation-Based Discrimination, John Nicodemo

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Satellites And Municipalities: One Town’S Use Of Google Earth For Residential Surveillance, Edward Knoedler

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Bin Laden Exception, Erik Luna

Scholarly Articles

Osama bin Laden's demise provides an opportune moment to reevaluate the extraordinary measures taken by the U.S. government in the "war on terror," with any reassessment incorporating the threat posed by al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Some modest analysis suggests that terrorism remains a miniscule risk for the average American, and it hardly poses an existential threat to the United States. Nonetheless, terrorism-related fears have distorted the people's risk perception and facilitated dubious public policies, exemplified here by a series of programs implemented by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Among other things, this agency has adopted costly technology and …

Lost Souls: Constitutional Implications For The Deficiencies In Treatment For Persons With Mental Illness In Custody, Katherine L. Smith

Golden Gate University Law Review

This Comment explores systemic deficiencies of access to mental health care in prison systems and the Eighth Amendment implications of those deficiencies. Because the Eighth Amendment prohibits, among other things, infliction of cruel and unusual punishments, when denial of adequate mental health care results in undue suffering, the conditions of confinement may violate the Constitution. Therefore, there must be mechanisms in place to ensure necessary treatment is provided while protecting individual rights.

Part I of this Comment addresses the duty a state owes to those it incarcerates (e.g., to provide food, clothing, recreation, education, medical care) and what standards exist …

3d Printers, Obsolete Firearm Supply Controls, And The Right To Build Self-Defense Weapons Under Heller, Peter Jensen-Haxel

Golden Gate University Law Review

This Comment describes how 3D printers will render current firearm regulations obsolete by allowing individuals to easily produce firearms—production that, when exercised by law-abiding citizens, may be protected under the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. The regulatory system will be undermined in two phases. First, printers will be able to produce the only regulated piece of a firearm, the frame. Second, the printing of complete guns may be realized as 3D print technology advances or firearm design evolves. These developments, which could cause substantial changes in how both criminals and legitimate consumers obtain firearms, could …

Of Speech And Sanctions: Toward A Penalty-Sensitive Approach To The First Amendment, Michael Coenen

Journal Articles

Courts confronting First Amendment claims do not often scrutinize the severity of a speaker’s punishment. Embracing a “penalty-neutral” understanding of the free-speech right, these courts tend to treat an individual’s expression as either protected, in which case the government may not punish it at all, or unprotected, in which case the government may punish it to a very great degree. There is, however, a small but important body of “penalty-sensitive” case law that runs counter to the penalty-neutral norm. Within this case law, the severity of a speaker’s punishment affects the merits of her First Amendment claim, thus giving rise …

State Bankruptcy: Surviving A Tenth Amendment Challenge, David E. Solan

Golden Gate University Law Review

During February 2011 the prospect of creating a state-bankruptcy chapter burst into the national conversation. This debate largely centered on the necessity of state bankruptcy as a means of averting state bailouts, and leading commentators emphasized the need to tread gingerly on state prerogatives under the Tenth Amendment. The constitutionality of bankruptcy for states demands closer scrutiny, given that the Supreme Court’s recent Tenth Amendment jurisprudence has evolved toward protecting state sovereignty.

The principles handed down from a pair of cases in the 1930s involving the constitutionality of municipal bankruptcy would likely support upholding a state-bankruptcy chapter that is carefully …

The American Historical Review (April 2012) (Reviewing David Garland, Peculiar Institution: America’S Death Penalty In An Age Of Abolition, John Bessler

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Coyote Publishing, Inc. V. Miller: Blurring The Standards Of Commercial And Noncommercial Speech, Nicole E. Wolfe

Golden Gate University Law Review

In Coyote Publishing, Inc. v. Miller, the Ninth Circuit considered the constitutionality of a Nevada statute that regulates commercial advertising of legal brothels. The Ninth Circuit held that severe restrictions on brothel advertising, even in counties where brothels are legal, are valid under the First Amendment. The court concluded that Nevada Revised Statutes sections 201.430(1) and 201.440, which largely prohibit the advertising of licensed brothels, met the four prongs of the Central Hudson test. Although the Ninth Circuit held that Nevada Revised Statutes section 201.430(1) was constitutional, the facts of the case did not apply to Nevada Revised Statutes section …

"Reasonable Suspicion Plus": A Framework To Address Chief Judge Alex Kozinski's Concerns Of Mass Surveillance Without Compromising Police Effectiveness, Tyler R. Smith

Golden Gate University Law Review

Global Positioning Systems (GPS) provide law enforcement with a powerful tool to covertly investigate criminal networks. These networks, however, are often themselves technologically sophisticatedand thus able to elude police surveillance. GPS monitoring has drawn substantial criticism recently as police, in many jurisdictions, may utilize the technology without a search warrant; the issue has boiled down to whether the Fourth Amendment requires a search warrant in the first place.

This Comment argues that the Supreme Court should establish a new rule, “Reasonable Suspicion Plus,” that would require police to state in a sworn declaration particularized reasoning for use of a GPS …

Constitution Day 2012: The American Judiciary, Robert Berry

Librarian Publications

Robert Berry, research librarian for the social sciences at the Sacred Heart University Library, has written an essay about the role of the American Judiciary in interpreting laws of the United States government. The essay was written for the occasion of Constitution Day 2012 at Sacred Heart University.

Toward A Meaning-Full Establishment Clause Neutrality, Bruce Ledewitz

Ledewitz Papers

Published scholarship collected from academic journals, law reviews, newspaper publications & online periodicals.

Robert Taylor, An Appreciation, Bruce Ledewitz

Ledewitz Papers

Published scholarship collected from academic journals, law reviews, newspaper publications & online periodicals.

Slavery In The United States: Persons Or Property?, Paul Finkelman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

“Early-Bird Special” Indeed!: Why The Tax Anti-Injunction Act Permits The Present Challenges To The Minimum Coverage Provision, Neil S. Siegel, Michael C. Dorf

Faculty Scholarship

In view of the billions of dollars and enormous effort that might otherwise be wasted, the public interest will be best served if the Supreme Court of the United States decides the present challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) during its October 2011 Term. Potentially standing in the way, however, is the federal Tax Anti-Injunction Act (TAIA), which bars any “suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax.” The dispute to date has turned on the fraught and complex question of whether the ACA's exaction for being uninsured qualifies as a …

Not The Power To Destroy: An Effects Theory Of The Tax Power, Neil S. Siegel, Robert D. Cooter

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s “new federalism” decisions impose modest limits on the regulatory authority of Congress under the Commerce Clause. According to those decisions, the Commerce Clause empowers Congress to use penalties to regulate interstate commerce, but not to regulate noncommercial conduct. What prevents Congress from penalizing non-commercial conduct by calling a penalty a tax and invoking the Taxing Clause? The only obstacle is the distinction between a penalty and a tax for purposes of Article I, Section 8. In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (NFIB), the Court considered whether the minimum coverage provision in the Patient …

Section 2 Is Dead: Long Live Section 2, Guy-Uriel Charles

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.