Law Commons^™

Popular Sovereignty And The Doctrine Of Plenary State Legislative Power, Nina Neff

William & Mary Law Review Online

Unlike the federal legislature, state legislatures possess plenary power, except insofar as they are limited by state constitutions. Though state plenary power is rooted in the legal authority of popular sovereignty, the doctrine of plenary state legislative power dulls democratic power by eliminating a potential right to local self-governance and by inducing courts to underenforce constitutional limits on state legislatures. These trends do not square with our democratic intuitions or with our desire to have a sense of efficacy, energy, and power in our own ability to influence the laws of our communities. This Article suggests that the doctrine of …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Katherine Mims Crocker And Brandon Hasbrouck In Support Of Neither Party With Respect To Defendant's Motion To Dismiss, Katherine Mims Crocker, Brandon Hasbrouk

Briefs

No abstract provided.

Framing The Second Amendment: Gun Rights, Civil Rights And Civil Liberties, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

Gun rights proponents and gun control advocates have devoted significant energy to framing the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. In constitutional discourse, advocates and commentators have referred to the Second Amendment as a "collective, ""civic republican," "individual," and 'fundamental" right. Gun rights advocates have defended the right to keep and bear arms on "law and order" grounds, while gun control proponents have urged regulation based on "public health, " "human rights, " and other concerns. These frames and concepts have significantly influenced how the right to keep and bear arms has been debated, interpreted, and enforced. This Article …

Free Speech, Rational Deliberation, And Some Truths About Lies, Alan K. Chen

William & Mary Law Review

Could “fake news” have First Amendment value? This claim would seem to be almost frivolous given the potential for fake news to undermine two core functions of the freedom of speech—promoting democracy and facilitating the search for “truth,” as well as the corollary that to be valuable, speech must promote rational deliberation. Some would therefore claim that fake news should be classified as “no value” speech falling outside of the First Amendment’s reach. This Article argues somewhat counterintuitively that fake news has value because speech doctrine should not be focused exclusively on the promotion of rational deliberation, but should also …

Force-Feeding Pretrial Detainees: A Constitutional Violation, Bryn L. Clegg

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Argument Analysis: Justices Spar Over Stare Decisis, Originalism, Text And What Counts As A Fourth Amendment “Seizure”, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Case Preview: When Is A Fleeing Suspect “Seized”?, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable “searches” and “seizures.” On Wednesday, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral argument in Torres v. Madrid, a case that will provide important guidance on what constitutes a Fourth Amendment seizure. Here’s a rundown of the case starting with the relevant facts and procedural history, followed by a discussion of the legal issues and finally a couple of things to watch for at the argument.

Antitrust Regulation And The Federal-State Balance: Restoring The Original Design, Alan J. Meese

Faculty Publications

The U.S. Constitution divides authority over commerce between states and the national government. Passed in 1890, the Sherman Act (“the Act”) reflects this allocation of power, reaching only those harmful agreements that are “in restraint of... commerce among the several States.” This Article contends that the Supreme Court erred when it radically altered the balance between state and national power over trade restraints in 1948, abruptly abandoning decades of precedent recognizing exclusive state authority over most intrastate restraints. This revised construction of the Act contravened the statute’s apparent meaning, unduly expanded the reach of federal antitrust regulation, and undermined the …

Courts, Culture, And The Lethal Injection Stalemate, Eric Berger

William & Mary Law Review

The Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Bucklew v. Precythe reiterated the Court’s great deference to states in Eighth Amendment lethal injection cases. The takeaway is that when it comes to execution protocols, states can do what they want. Events on the ground tell a very different story. Notwithstanding courts’ deference, executions have ground to a halt in numerous states, often due to lethal injection problems. State officials and the Court’s conservative Justices have blamed this development on “anti-death penalty activists” waging “guerilla war” on capital punishment. In reality, though, a variety of mostly uncoordinated actors motivated by a range of …

You Must Present A Valid Form Of (Gender) Identification: The Due Process And First Amendment Implications Of Tennessee's Birth Certificate Law, Brooke Lowell

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Note analyzes Tennessee’s prohibition against transgender people changing their gender markers on their birth certificates under both Fourteenth Amendment Substantive Due Process and the First Amendment. Part I discusses the relevant terms related to transgender rights, the importance of birth certificates, and the relevant laws at play. Part II focuses on the Substantive Due Process argument. It lays out the foundational cases and then applies them to analyze whether gender identity is a fundamental right. Part III explores the First Amendment analysis, focusing on gender as speech. It also discusses how government speech affects the analysis. The Note concludes …

"Buy One Get One Free": How Reindictment Policies Permit Excessive Searches, Katie Carroll

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

When the government decides to stop prosecuting a case, it files a nolle prosequi with the court. Nolle prosequis are slightly different from motions to dismiss. Unlike a motion to dismiss with prejudice, a prosecutor may later reindict a defendant with the same crime without a double jeopardy issue arising after dropping the same case through nolle prosequi. Furthermore, many states do not require judicial approval for a nolle prosequi. Therefore, prosecutors can gain a number of advantages by using nolle prosequi, like avoiding speedy trial deadlines or having a second chance to win important evidentiary hearings.

The advantages of …

Preventing Parkland: A Workable Fourth Amendment Standard For Searching Juveniles' Smartphones Amid School Threats In A Post-Parkland World, Andrew Mueller

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

On February 14, 2018, Nikolas Cruz, age nineteen, went to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School campus in Parkland, Florida, armed with an AR-15 rifle. He opened fire, killing seventeen students. His unspeakable actions culminated in an attack, which eclipsed the 1999 Columbine High School Massacre to become the deadliest school shooting at a high school in American history. In the immediate months following this still-recent tragedy, schools across the United States were flooded with “copycat” threats of violence. Terroristic threat charges levied against juveniles have likewise skyrocketed.

These recent events have resulted in new and burdensome pressures for schools …

Secondary Meaning And Religion: An Analysis Of Religious Symbols In The Courts, Eric D. Yordy, Elizabeth Brown

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In the Supreme Court’s most recent freedom of religion case, Justice Alito and Justice Ginsburg disagreed about the actual and potential meaning of the Latin cross, a traditional symbol of Christianity in which the upright leg of the cross is longer than the horizontal arms of the cross. Justice Alito stated that the Latin cross, while not losing its religious meaning, has acquired what might be called a “secondary meaning” as a symbol of World War I. He couched his analysis in language suggesting that a religious symbol’s meaning may depend on its circumstances. While he also denied that he …

The Death Of Non-Resident Contribution Limit Bans And The Birth Of The New Small, Swing State, George J. Somi

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District race in 2018 featured an eye-popping number: 96.7. That figure represents the percentage of candidate Maura Sullivan’s individual contributions derived from out-of-state, non–New Hampshire donors. In August 2018, of the $1.37 million USD of individual contributions that Sullivan had raised, only 3.3%—$46,648 USD—originated from in-state contributors. Sullivan had received individual donations amounting to $497,405 USD from Boston, $216,359 USD from New York City, $101,562 USD from the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, and $92,371 USD from San Francisco.

In nearby Maine, campaign finance reports filed on October 15, 2019, with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) indicate …

Tasing The Constitution: Conducted Electrical Weapons, Other Forceful Arrest Means, And The Validity Of Subsequent Constitutional Rights Waivers, Andreas Kuersten

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Conducted electrical weapons (CEWs)—the most famous and widely used of which are offered under the TASER brand—are ubiquitous tools of law enforcement, carried by the vast majority of law enforcement officers and routinely deployed. These devices subdue targets by coursing electric current through their bodies, thereby causing individuals to collapse as their muscles involuntarily contract. Yet this method of operation has raised concerns—voiced by researchers, advocates, and criminal defendants alike—that CEWs influence cognitive capacity in addition to muscle function as electric current potentially transits through the brain via the central nervous system. In the context of an arrest, this implicates …

Dissent, Disagreement And Doctrinal Disarray: Free Expression And The Roberts Court In 2020, Clay Calvert

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Using the United States Supreme Court’s 2019 rulings in Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, Nieves v. Bartlett, and Iancu v. Brunetti as analytical springboards, this Article explores multiple fractures among the Justices affecting the First Amendment freedoms of speech and press. All three cases involved dissents, with two cases each spawning five opinions. The clefts compound problems witnessed in 2018 with a pair of five-to-four decisions in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra and Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. Partisan divides, the Article argues, are only one problem with First Amendment …

Section 1983 & Qualified Immunity: Qualifying The Death Of Due Process And America's Most Vulnerable Classes Since 1871. Can It Be Fixed?, Gabrielle Pelura

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The First Amendment And The Roots Of Lgbt Rights Law: Censorship In The Early Homophile Era, 1958-1962, Jason M. Shepard

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

Long before substantive due process and equal protection extended constitutional rights to homosexuals under the Fourteenth Amendment, in three landmark decisions by the Supreme Court of the United States, First Amendment law was both a weapon and shield in the expansion of LGBT rights. This Article examines constitutional law and “gaylaw” from the perspective of its beginning, through case studies of One, Inc. v. Olesen (1958), Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield (1958), and Manual Enterprises, Inc. v. Day (1962). In protecting free press rights of sexual minorities to use the U.S. mail for mass communications, the Warren Court’s liberalization of …

A Defense Of The Regulatory Takings Doctrine: A Historical Analysis Of This Conflict Between Property Rights And Public Good And A Prediction For Its Future, Andrew Parslow

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

Since man first left the state of nature and formed property rights, there have been issues when states desire to use the property of another for what they consider to be the greater good. In their wisdom, the Founding Fathers of the United States built on centuries of historical principles ranging from the Romans to the English and enshrined in the Fifth Amendment the common law notion that “private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation.” The rise of environmentalism has brought a new frontier to the ancient struggle between the rights of individuals and the …

Environmental Federalism As Forum Shopping, Cale Jaffe

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

Public policy advocates of all stripes—litigators, politicians, or newspaper columnists—invoke principles of federalism when they are imploring Congress to respect limits imposed by Article I, and when they are insisting that a state legislature accede to the supremacy of a duly enacted national law, invoking Article VI. Yet historically, application of the term, “federalism,” at least in the context of environmental law, has been driven far more by pragmatic considerations than constitutional ones.

This pragmatic approach should not be surprising because, at its core, federalism simply asks what is the right level of government to solve a given problem. After …

Janus And The Future Of Collective Bargaining: Rhetorically Predicting A First Amendment Right To Negotiation, Thomas J. Freeman, Aaron Mckain, Destynie J.L. Sewell

William & Mary Business Law Review

The importance of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees has been widely recognized for its effect on reducing the power and influence of public unions. A close reading of the majority opinion provides a clue that compulsory collective bargaining itself may be settling into the court’s crosshairs. Collective bargaining is an important tool, by which labor can reduce the often-inherent power imbalance it has with ownership and management. Yet as this Article outlines, the interests of individual workers can often be at odds with those other workers workers, particularly those …

Not Gill-Ty: Challenging And Providing A Workable Alternative To The Supreme Court's Gerrymandering Standing Analysis In Gill V. Whitford, Colin Neal

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Information Gathering Or Speech Creation: How To Think About A First Amendment Right To Record, Jared Mullen

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Understanding The Spirit Of The Constitution On Corruption: Emoluments, Impeachment, And The Primacy Of Political Virtue, Lea Mano

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Arbitrary Arbiters: Evaluating The Right To Be Informed Of Eligibility For Discretionary Relief In Removal Proceedings, Michael Jordan

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Kidnapping Reconsidered: Courts Merger Tests Inadequately Remedy The Inequities Which Developed From Kidnapping's Sensationalized And Racialized History, Samuel P. Newton

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Steps Toward Abolishing Capital Punishment: Incrementalism In The American Death Penalty, Melanie Kalmanson

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

While scholars seem united on the sentiment that abolition is the ultimate resting place for capital sentencing in the United States, their arguments vary as to how the system will reach that point. For example, Carol and Jordan Steiker argue that the systemic disarray of capital sentencing in the United States is a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s attempt to constitutionalize capital sentencing. This Article contends that the U.S. Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence that has developed since 1972, when the Court reset capital sentencing in Furman v. Georgia, has aided the Court in gradually narrowing capital punishment, as a …

The Bad News Of Good News Club: Obliterating The Wall Between Church & State, Kevin W. Connell

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Contracting Away The First Amendment?: When Courts Should Intervene In Nondisclosure Agreements, Abigail Stephens

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Considerations Of History And Purpose In Constitutional Borrowing, Robert L. Tsai

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.