Law Commons^™

City Of Los Angeles V. Patel: The Upcoming Supreme Court Case No One Is Talking About, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

Focusing solely on whether a hotel owner has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a guest registry is akin to asking whether Verizon Wireless has a reasonable expectation of privacy in its customer lists. The answer to those questions should be yes, but the sixty-four thousand dollar question—and the proverbial elephant in the room—is whether hotel occupants and cell phone users forfeit their privacy rights simply because they check into the Beverly Hills Hotel or call their significant others from a Smart Phone on the Santa Monica Freeway. Put differently, a hotel owner’s expectation of privacy in a guest registry …

City Of Los Angeles V. Patel: The Upcoming Supreme Court Case No One Is Talking About, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

Focusing solely on whether a hotel owner has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a guest registry is akin to asking whether Verizon Wireless has a reasonable expectation of privacy in its customer lists. The answer to those questions should be yes, but the sixty-four thousand dollar question—and the proverbial elephant in the room—is whether hotel occupants and cell phone users forfeit their privacy rights simply because they check into the Beverly Hills Hotel or call their significant others from a Smart Phone on the Santa Monica Freeway.

Put differently, a hotel owner’s expectation of privacy in a guest registry …

Same-Sex Marriage And Conflict Of Law: The “Other” Constitutional Issue, Sheldon D. Pollack

Sheldon D Pollack

A constitutional issue of great significance has confounded our political and legal systems in recent decades. This involves the legal status afforded same-sex marriage. Under longstanding tradition, marriage in all fifty states was restricted to a union of one man and one woman (a “traditional marriage”). But tradition began to erode in the 1990s, gradually giving way to a tacit acceptance of same-sex marriage in various regions of the United States. The result has been several decades of unsettled and conflicting law with respect to the legal status of such unions, with some states recognizing same-sex marriages and others prohibiting …

An Outline For The Study Of Ethiopian Constitutional Law, Tsegaye Beru

Tsegaye Beru

This outline is based on the 1995 Ethiopian Constitution. However, it is important to acknowledge that the 1995 Constitution cannot be studied in isolation. Like its forerunners, the Constitution is not distinctively Ethiopia, save the customary and religious laws that have been recognized by it. Past and present constitutions were derived from various sources, mostly Western. The immediate source of the 1995 Constitution is the Charter of the Transitional Government that took power from the military government. However, the 1995 Constitution was built upon the constitutions and laws that preceded it and the customary and religious laws that predated it. …

A Comment On Costs In Constitutional Cases, Iain Field

Iain Field

Professor Patrick Keyzer and Stephen Lloyd SC are both well qualified to speak to the legal principles that govern the determination of costs in constitutional cases, and I am, with respect, happy to accept their combined review of these principles. I do not think that there are any significant disagreements between them in this regard. They have, nevertheless, provided us with two usefully distinct perspectives on the topic, and offered two contrasting views as to the need for special costs rules in constitutional cases. I have only a small number of observations (perhaps it is better to say questions), which …

Fcc V. Fox Television Moot Court, Robert Barnes, Joan Biskupic, John Blume, Erwin Chemerinsky, Thomas Goldstein, Linda Greenhouse, John Mcginnis, David Savage, Paul Smith, William Van Alstyne, Timothy Zick

John H. Blume

The Bill of Rights Institute and William and Mary Law School hosted a moot court on the FCC v. Fox Television indecency case. The case rests on the FCC’s ban against the use of curse words in television broadcasts Erwin Chermerinsky and Thomas Goldstein argued the case before Joan Biskupic, Robert Barnes, John Blume, Linda Greenhouse, John McGinnis, David Savage, Paul Smith, William Van Alstyne, and Timothy Zick. After the oral argument the judgment was shown. Then the panelists responded to questions from members of the audience. This program contains language some may find offensive.

Amicus Brief: City Of Montebello V. Vasquez, Steven J. Andre

Steven J. Andre

This amicus brief proposes that the court of appeal below and the parties to this litigation have asked the wrong question regarding the governmental activity in question. While the court of appeal was quite correct in recognizing that elected officials’ actions in voting upon legislation and negotiating do not involve exercise of First Amendment rights, this recognition is short sighted. In actuality, no governmental action furthers the First Amendment rights of the government actor. Public officials engage in activity which in many ways resembles constitutionally protected speech and petitioning. They speak, vote, evaluate and otherwise involve themselves in official proceedings …

The Legacy Of Anthony M. Kennedy, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

The defining moments in Justice Kennedy’s tenure on the Court came in Planned Parenthood, Lawrence, and United States v. Windsor, where the Court did to the Constitution—in the name of liberty—what it also did—in the name of democracy—to Florida’s citizens in Bush v. Gore. In all three cases, Justice Kennedy’s reliance on a broad conception of liberty, rather than equal protection principles, shifted the balance too heavily in favor of judicial, rather democratic, creation of unenumerated fundamental rights.

Justice Kennedy will rightly be celebrated for safeguarding reproductive freedom and championing sexual autonomy for same-sex couples, but underneath the black …

America's Written Constitution: Remembering The Judicial Duty To Say What The Law Is, Joshua J. Schroeder

Joshua J Schroeder

In 2013 the Supreme Court embraced a policy of feigned positivism. In general positivism says there are no future rewards and punishments and thus there is no Natural Law that holds sway over rulers whether it is established by a creator God or not. Thus adopting positivism leaves the Court with an existential problem because the Court’s equitable power flows directly from Natural Law and Nature’s God and is much older than the new country known as the United States. But even in the scope of U.S. history positivism lost significant ground in its struggle with equitable power and the …

A Contribuição Da Doutrina Na Jurisdição Constitucional Portuguesa E Brasileira, Teresa M. G. Da Cunha Lopes

Teresa M. G. Da Cunha Lopes

O presente livro pretende fazer um estudo interformantes, com o fim de verificar se a jurisprudência das Cortes Constitucionais e Supremas resulta explicitamente permeável ao formante doutrinário. Por outro lado, o objeto principal da investigação são as citações diretas da doutrina que utilizam os juízes na motivação das decisões.

Rethinking Proportionality Under The Cruel And Unusual Punishments Clause, John Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

Although a century has passed since the Supreme Court started reviewing criminal punishments for excessiveness under the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, this area of doctrine remains highly problematic. The Court has never answered the claim that proportionality review is illegitimate in light of the Eighth Amendment’s original meaning. The Court has also adopted an ever-shifting definition of excessiveness, making the very concept of proportionality incoherent. Finally, the Court’s method of measuring proportionality is unreliable and self contradictory. As a result, a controlling plurality of the Court has insisted that proportionality review be limited to a narrow class of cases. …

The Original Meaning Of "Unusual": The Eighth Amendment As A Bar To Cruel Innovation, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

In recent years, both legal scholars and the American public have become aware that something is not quite right with the Supreme Court's Eighth Amendment jurisprudence. Legal commentators from across the spectrum have described the Court's treatment of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause as "embarrassing," "ineffectual and incoherent," a "mess," and a "train wreck." The framers of the Bill of Rights understood the word "unusual" to mean "contrary to long usage." Recognition of the word's original meaning will precisely invert the "evolving standards of decency" test and ask the Court to compare challenged punishments with the longstanding principles and …

Youth Matters: Miller V. Alabama And The Future Of Juvenile Sentencing, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

In the Supreme Court's latest Eighth Amendment decision, Miller v. Alabama, the Court held that statutes authorizing mandatory sentences of life in prison with no possibility of parole are unconstitutional as applied to offenders who were under eighteen when they committed their crimes. This short essay examines several themes presented in Miller, including the constitutional significance of youth and science, the legitimacy of mandatory life sentences and juvenile transfer statutes, and the conflict between “evolving standards of decency” and the Supreme Court’s “independent judgment.” This essay also introduces important articles by Richard Frase, Carol Steiker and Jordan Steiker, Franklin Zimring …

The Illusory Eighth Amendment, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

Although there is no obvious doctrinal connection between the Supreme Court’s Miranda jurisprudence and its Eighth Amendment excessive punishments jurisprudence, the two are deeply connected at the level of methodology. In both areas, the Supreme Court has been criticized for creating “prophylactic” rules that invalidate government actions because they create a mere risk of constitutional violation. In reality, however, both sets of rules deny constitutional protection to a far greater number of individuals with plausible claims of unconstitutional treatment than they protect. This dysfunctional combination of over- and underprotection arises from the Supreme Court’s use of implementation rules as a …

Punishment Without Culpability, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

For more than half a century, academic commentators have criticized the Supreme Court for failing to articulate a substantive constitutional conception of criminal law. Although the Court enforces various procedural protections that the Constitution provides for criminal defendants, it has left the question of what a crime is purely to the discretion of the legislature. This failure has permitted legislatures to evade the Constitution’s procedural protections by reclassifying crimes as civil causes of action, eliminating key elements (such as mens rea) or reclassifying them as defenses or sentencing factors, and authorizing severe punishments for crimes traditionally considered relatively minor. The …

Incapacitation Through Maiming: Chemical Castration, The Eighth Amendment, And The Denial Of Human Dignity, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

This year marks the tenth anniversary of California's enactment of the nation's first chemical castration law. This law requires certain sex offenders to receive, as part of their punishment, long-term pharmacological treatment involving massive doses of a synthetic female hormone called medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA). MPA treatment is described as chemical castration because it mimics the effect of surgical castration by eliminating almost all testosterone from the offender's system. The intended effect of MPA treatment is to alter brain and body function by reducing the brain's exposure to testosterone, thus depriving offenders of most (or all) capacity to experience sexual desire …

The Conservative-Libertarian Turn In First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman

All Faculty Scholarship

Conservative constitutional jurisprudence in the United States has an important libertarian dimension. In recent years, a conservative majority of the Supreme Court has strengthened the constitutional protections for property rights, recognized an individual right to own firearms, imposed limits on the welfare state and the powers of the federal government, cut back on affirmative action, and held that closely held corporations have a right to religious liberty that permits them to deny contraceptive coverage to their female employees. This libertarian streak also can be seen in decisions on freedom of speech and association. In several leading cases, conservative judges have …

Should Musicians Be Jailed For Their Threatening Lyrics?, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

The Conservative-Libertarian Turn In First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman

Steven J. Heyman

Conservative constitutional jurisprudence in the United States has an important libertarian dimension. In recent years, a conservative majority of the Supreme Court has strengthened the constitutional protections for property rights, recognized an individual right to own firearms, imposed limits on the welfare state and the powers of the federal government, cut back on affirmative action, and held that closely held corporations have a right to religious liberty that permits them to deny contraceptive coverage to their female employees. This libertarian streak also can be seen in decisions on freedom of speech and association. In several leading cases, conservative judges have …

Is Social Media A Human Right? Exploring The Scope Of Internet Rights, Brian Christopher Jones

Brian Christopher Jones

La Rebeldía De J.Waldron: ¿Es Democrático El Control Judicial Constitucional?, Joshimar De La Cruz Aroni

Joshimar De la cruz Aroni

Constitutional Law

Employee Speech & Management Rights: A Counterintuitive Reading Of Garcetti V. Ceballos, Elizabeth Dale

Elizabeth Dale

In the two years since the decision came down, courts and commentators generally have agreed that the Supreme Court's decision in Garcetti v. Ceballos sharply limited the First Amendment rights of public employees. In this Article, I argue that this widely shared interpretation overstates the case. The Court in Garcetti did not dramatically change the way it analyzed public employees' First Amendment rights. Instead, it restated the principles on which those claims rest, emphasizing management rights and the unconstitutional conditions doctrine. By making those two theories the centerpiece of the decision, the Court in Garcetti defined public employee speech rights …

Terrorism As An Intellectual Problem, Charles W. Collier

Charles W. Collier

The past few years have been instructive for observers of religious terrorism. Events have conspired to reveal ever more of its grim visage, inner logic, and awful potential. Religious terrorism has been exhaustively analyzed as a security problem, a military problem, an economic problem, a political problem, and more. But it is also an intellectual problem, one with particular implications for the study of law, culture, and history. This Essay examines the intellectual assumptions of religious terrorism, and it does so from three distinct perspectives: the theory of religion and American constitutional law (Part I); the common law (Part II); …

Constitutionality Of Statutory Renegotiation, Charles Collier

Charles W. Collier

No abstract provided.

The New Logic Of Affirmative Action, Charles W. Collier

Charles W. Collier

No abstract provided.

Looking Backward: Richard Epstein Ponders The “Progressive” Peril, Michael Allan Wolf

Michael A Wolf

In "How Progressives Rewrote the Constitution," Richard Epstein bemoans the growth of a dominant big government. How Progressives should receive a warm reception from the audience, lawyers and laypeople alike, who view the New Deal as a mistake of epic proportions. For the rest of us, significant gaps will still remain between, on the one hand, our understanding of the nation’s past and of the complex nature of constitutional lawmaking and, on the other, Epstein’s version of the nature of twentieth-century reform and Progressive jurisprudence.

School Surveillance And The Fourth Amendment, Jason P. Nance

Jason P. Nance

In the aftermath of several highly-publicized incidents of school violence, public school officials have increasingly turned to intense surveillance methods to promote school safety. The current jurisprudence interpreting the Fourth Amendment generally permits school officials to employ a variety of strict measures, separately or in conjunction, even when their use creates a prison-like environment for students. Yet, not all schools rely on such strict measures. Recent empirical evidence suggests that low-income and minority students are much more likely to experience intense security conditions in their school than other students, even after taking into account factors such as neighborhood crime, school …

School Discipline 101: Students' Due Process Rights In Expulsion Hearings, Melissa Frydman, Shani M. King

Shani M. King

Upholding the principle that school districts, as state actors, shall not deprive a student of liberty or property without due process of law, courts have expanded for more than four decades the Fourteenth Amendment's due process protection of public school students. Understanding this principle is essential to representing children in school discipline proceedings. Before presenting a practical guide to representing students in these proceedings, we offer a brief history of due process protection for children.

The Case For Defamatory Opinion, Adam Lamparello

Adam Lamparello

The law should not allow revenge porn in the name of the First Amendment, just as it should not allow private citizens to purchase AK-47’s in the name of the Second Amendment. Citizens can abuse fundamental rights just as governments can infringe them. At some point, courts have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was not intended to give people a fundamental right to trash an individual’s reputation while seeking cover under the self-serving blanket of opinion and taste. It is one thing to stroll into a courthouse with a shirt that says Fuck the Draft, but quite another to …

Restoring The Right Constitution?, Eduardo M. Peñalver

Eduardo M. Peñalver

After years of relative neglect, the past few decades have witnessed a dramatic renewal of interest in the natural law tradition within philosophical circles. This natural law renaissance, however, has yet to bear much fruit within American constitutional discourse, especially among commentators on the left. In light of its low profile within contemporary constitutional debates, an effort to formulate a natural law constitutionalism is almost by definition an event worthy of sustained attention. In "Restoring the Lost Constitution," Randy Barnett draws heavily upon a natural law theory of constitutional legitimacy to argue in favor of a radically libertarian reading of …