Law Commons^™

December 23, 2012: The Egyptian Constitution, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The Egyptian Constitution“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

December 20, 2012: No, God Has Not Called Them Home, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “No, God Has Not Called Them Home“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

December 16, 2012: Heller Is Good News For Gun Control, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Heller is Good News for Gun Control“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Vehicle Checkpoints: The Ever-Expanding Array Of Purposes For Which A Vehicle May Be Stopped - People V. Gavenda, Jan Lucas

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

May 30, 2012: Seeger—An Extraordinary Case, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Seeger—an Extraordinary Case“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

May 24, 2012: What Is The Right Term For Nonmembers Of Organized Religion?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “What Is the Right Term for Nonmembers of Organized Religion?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

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 …

Free Speech And Parity: A Theory Of Public Employee Rights, Randy J. Kozel

William & Mary Law Review

More than four decades have passed since the U.S. Supreme Court revolutionized the First Amendment rights of the public workforce. In the ensuing years the Court has embarked upon an ambitious quest to protect expressive liberties while facilitating orderly and efficient government. Yet it has never articulated an adequate theoretical framework to guide its jurisprudence.

This Article suggests a conceptual reorientation of the modern doctrine. The proposal flows naturally from the Court’s rejection of its former view that one who accepts a government job has no constitutional right to complain about its conditions. As a result of that rejection, the …

The Role Of Causation When Determining The Proper Defendant In A Takings Lawsuit, Jan G. Laitos

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

"Property" In The Constitution: The View From The Third Amendment, Tom W. Bell

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

During World War II, after Japan attacked the Aleutian Islands off Alaska’s coast, the United States forcibly evacuated the islands’ natives and quartered soldiers in private homes. That hitherto unremarked violation of the Third Amendment gives us a fresh perspective on what the term “property” means in the United States Constitution. As a general legal matter, property includes not just real estate—land, fixtures attached thereto, and related rights—but also various kinds of personal property, ranging from tangibles, such as books, to intangibles, such as causes of action. That knowledge would, if we interpreted the Constitution as we do other legal …

A (Modest) Separation Of Powers Success Story, Tara Leigh Grove

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Release As Remedy For Excessive Punishment, Alexander A. Reinert

William & Mary Law Review

Although the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on “cruel and unusual” punishment means different things in different contexts, it plainly forecloses state and federal actors from choosing ex ante to impose a punishment that is either disproportionate or inconsistent with minimum standards of decency. In other words, the Eighth Amendment mandates that no punishment be imposed if the only other choice on the table is an unconstitutional punishment. Although this principle can be gleaned from the disparate strands of Eighth Amendment jurisprudence, its remedial consequence has not been fully implemented. In this Article, I propose that providing a remedy of release from …

Katz Cradle: Holding On To Fourth Amendment Parity In An Age Of Evolving Electronic Communication, Christopher R. Brennan

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

March 30, 2012: A Fundamental Rights Case Masquerading As A Commerce Clause Case, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “A Fundamental Rights Case Masquerading as a Commerce Clause Case“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Hugo Black's Vision Of The Lawyer, The First Amendment, And The Duty Of The Judiciary: The Bar Applicant Cases In A National Security State, Joshua E. Kastenberg

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The "Flesh And Blood" Defense, James Erickson Evans

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Article Ii Safeguards Of Federal Jurisdiction, Tara Leigh Grove

Faculty Publications

Jurisdiction stripping has long been treated as a battle between Congress and the federal judiciary. Scholars have thus overlooked the important (and surprising) role that the executive branch has played in these jurisdictional struggles. This Article seeks to fill that void. Drawing on two strands of social science research, the Article argues that the executive branch has a strong incentive to use its constitutional authority over the enactment and enforcement of federal law to oppose jurisdiction-stripping measures. Notably, this structural argument has considerable historical support. The executive branch has repeatedly opposed jurisdiction-stripping proposals in Congress. That has been true even …

Looking Back At Cohen V. California: A 40 Year Retrospective From Inside The Court, Thomas G. Krattenmaker

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Teens, Sexts, & Cyberspace: The Constitutional Implications Of Current Sexting & Cyberbullying Laws, Jamie L. Williams

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Interpretive Contestation And Legal Correctness, Matthew D. Adler

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

January 12, 2012: The New Foundations Of The Ministerial Exception, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The New Foundations of the Ministerial Exception“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

"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 …

Too Narrow Of A Holding? How—And Perhaps Why—Chief Justice John Roberts Turned Snyder V. Phelps Into An Easy Case, Clay Calvert

Oklahoma Law Review

This article analyzes the United States Supreme Court’s March 2011 decision in Snyder v. Phelps. Specifically, it demonstrates the narrow nature of the holding, and argues that while narrow framing, in the tradition of judicial minimalism, may have been a strategic move by Chief Justice John Roberts to obtain a decisive eight-justice majority, the resulting opinion failed to advance First Amendment jurisprudence significantly. Instead, the outcome simply—even predictably—fell in line with an established order of decisions. This article examines four tactics employed by the Chief Justice to narrow the case in such a way that its outcome was essentially …