Law Commons^™

Civil Commitment Of Mentally Ill; Right To Treatment; Parens Patriae Power; Right To Liberty; Donaldson V. O'Connor, Gary G. Cooper

Akron Law Review

THE RESPONDENT, Kenneth Donaldson, was involuntarily civilly committed! as a mental patient' in the Florida State Hospital at Chattahoochee. He remained confined for almost 15 years.' During that time he received little or no psychiatric care or treatment. His confinement was a "simple regime of enforced custodial care, not a program designed to alleviate or cure his supposed illness."' Donaldson, who was not aggressive or belligerent, repeatedly attempted to secure his release, claiming that the defendants unjustifiably continued to confine him despite attempts by responsible parties to have him released to their custody. In February, 1971, Donaldson filed suit under …

Administrative Agencies; Subpoena Power; Relevancy; Right Of Privacy; Atchison, Topeka & Sante Fe Ry. Co. V. Lopez, David L. Hostetler

Akron Law Review

The Kansas Supreme Court in Sante Fe has joined the majority of states in declaring that administrative "fishing expeditions" via the use of subpoena powers are now permissible. No probable cause need be shown and confidential information may be subject to subpoena if there is even a mere possibility of relevance to a matter within the scope of the agency's authority. The state's interest in preventing discrimination in employment practices has been declared a "compelling state interest" such as to override any claims to rights of privacy. Although primarily discussing only arrest and conviction records, the court in actuality upheld …

Economic Discrimination; Denial Of Social Security Benefits Premised On Gender-Based Classification Is Unconstitutional; Violates Equal Protection; Weinberger V. Wiesenfeld, Janice M. Ahern

Akron Law Review

After his wife's death, Wiesenfeld applied for social security survivor benefits for himself and his infant son. While he was able to obtain benefits for his son under 42 U.S.C. Section 402(d), he was denied benefits under Section 402(g) because those benefits were available only to widows and surviving divorced mothers. When his application was denied, Wiesenfeld brought suit in federal district court to obtain declaratory and injunctive relief,' contending that the gender-based classification of 42 U.S.C. Section 402(g) violated equal protection as found within the due process clause of the fifth amendment.' A three-judge district court panel granted relief …

Abortion; Parental Consent; Minors' Rights To Due Process, Equal Protection And Privacy; State V. Koome, Barbara Child

Akron Law Review

The Washington court had before it a physician appealing his conviction for performing an abortion on an unmarried 16-year-old woman, a ward of the King County Juvenile Court, which had given its consent to the abortion. However, the young woman's parents and the Catholic Children's Services, her temporary guardian, both opposed the abortion and were granted a stay of the abortion order pending review by the state supreme court. During the stay, Dr. Koome performed the abortion. The supreme court held that the Washington consent statute "too broadly encumbers the right of unmarried minor women to choose to terminate pregnancy, …

The Hohfeldian Approach To Constitutional Cases, H. Newcomb Morse

Akron Law Review

INFERRED, OR AT THE MOST rebuttably presumed, is a slight acquaintanceship on the part of the reader with the work on jural opposites and jural correlatives by Professor W. Newcomb Hohfeld. The Founding Fathers, as though anticipating the coming of the Messianic logician, used all of the four Hohfeldian gravamen terms-rights, privileges, powers and immunities-in the Constitution of the United States,' and for this reason the author perceives a nexus between Hohfeldian logic and constitutional construction. The appropriate initial touchstone for contemporary use of this theory could appear to be the 1968 case of Flast v. Cohen, considering Mr. Justice …

Separation Of Powers; Bill Of Attainder; Presidential Papers; Chief Executive's Right To Privacy; Nixon V. Administrator Of General Services, Patricia L. Spencer

Akron Law Review

In addressing itself to the constitutionality of the "Presidential Recording and Materials Preservation Act," the United States Supreme Court in Nixon v. Administrator of General Services (Nixon II) ruled for the first time on the permissible extent of congressional authority to regulate the disposition of official records and papers of a former chief executive. By its action, the Court undertook to reverse two hundred years of practice by past presidents.

Corporal Punishment In Schools; Due Process; Cruel And Unusual Punishment; Ingraham V. Wright, Mary W. Altier

Akron Law Review

Corporal punishment as a means of disciplining school children has been used in this country since colonial days. There have been various constitutional attacks on the practice of inflicting corporal punishment, with varying results, and the issue was finally brought before the Supreme Court in Ingraham v. Wright. The Court decided on April 19, 1977 that the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause of the eighth amendment does not apply to disciplinary corporal punishment in public schools and that the Due Process Clause of the fourteenth amendment does not require notice and hearing prior to imposition of corporal punishment, as …

State Funding Of Nontherapeutic Abortions; Medicaid Plans; Equal Protection; Right To Choose An Abortion; Beal V. Doe, Maher V. Roe, Poelker V. Doe, Constance Leistiko

Akron Law Review

In Beal v. Doe the United States Supreme Court held that Title XIX of the Social Security Act permits but does not require states participating in the Medicaid program established by that Act to fund nontherapeutic abortions. In the companion cases of Maher v. Roe and Poelker v. Doe, the same majority held in Maher that the Equal Protection Clause does not require a state that funds childbirth and therapeutic abortions to also fund the costs of nontherapeutic abortions, and in Poelker, that the Constitution does not prohibit a state or city from forbidding the performance of elective …

Sixth Amendment; Right Of Confrontation; Unavailalbe Witness; State V. Roberts, Christopher C. Manthey, Carol G. Simonetti

Akron Law Review

"THE SIXTH AMENDMENT to the Constitution states that "[iln all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him .... ." This seems simple and absolute, but case law has proven it to be neither; almost every phrase has been dissected and interpreted by courts and commentators. In fact, there may be more law review articles on this subject than there are cases.1 Some of the questions that could be asked are: What is meant by "all criminal prosecutions?" Does this require confrontation in preliminary hearings? Does "shall enjoy the …

Equal Protection; Sex Discrimination; Veterans' Preference Statutes, Feeney V. Massachusetts, Eloise Taylor

Akron Law Review

"Historically, the armed services have been predominantly male. The result has been that the operation of veterans' preferences has placed women as a class at a particular disadvantage in comparison to men when in or entering into civil service.' To nullify this stigma, the first successful challenge to veterans' preference, Feeney v. Massachusetts,' was litigated."

Commerce Clause; Privileges And Immunities Clause; State Hiring; Discrimination Against Nonresidents; Hicklin V. Orbeck, Donna N. Kemp

Akron Law Review

"In Hicklin v. Orbeck, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held' that Alaska's statute entitled "Local Hire Under State Leases"' violates the Constitution due to its discriminatory effect on nonresidents. Basing its decision on the Privileges and Immunities Clause,' the Court found that there was insufficient justification for the extensive discrimination against nonresidents required by the Act because the unemployment problem to be alleviated by the legislation was not due to a great influx of nonresident jobseekers. Rather, the Court attributed the problem to the fact that a large percentage of the unemployed in Alaska lack sufficient education and job …

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Obscenity; Pinkus V. United States, Cary Douglass Caesa

Akron Law Review

“In its latest attempt to define a workable standard for obscenity rulings, the United States Supreme Court has held that children may not be included in a court's instruction as to the social group to whom the material would or would not be obscene. However, the Court held that sensitive persons and deviant groups may be included without unduly lowering the threshold of a finding of obscenity. Thus, Pinkus v. United States clarified the "community" whose judgment should define obscenity.”

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Commerical Speech And Advertising; Metpath, Inc. V. Imperato, Sheryl S. Kantz

Akron Law Review

"The decision of Metpath, Inc. v. Imperato is indicative of the growing trend of the judiciary toward affording "commercial speech" the protective shield of the first amendment. As shown by Metpath, where the concern is advertising by a medical clinic, speech with commercial overtones is afforded protection where a public interest in the subject and content of the speech is demonstrated. However, the perimeters of such protection have not been defined by this or previous decisions."

First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Access Of News Media To County Jail; Houchins V. Kqed, Inc., Thomas W. Renwand

Akron Law Review

"Although United States history is replete with struggles over the rights and prerogatives of the press, until recently these disputes rarely made their way to the nation's highest court.' In the last several years the Supreme Court has been confronted with a number of important, complex questions dealing with the role of a free press in a free society.'"

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Broadcasting; Obscenity; Fcc V. Pacifica Foundation, James E. Moliterno

Akron Law Review

“ ‘I was thinking about the curse words and the swear words, the cuss L words and the words you can't say . . .the words you couldn't say on the public, ah, airwaves... the ones that will curve your spine [and] grow hair on your hands ....’ While this is the satiric opinion of George Carlin, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and a bare majority of the United States Supreme Court have embraced it as their genuine opinion.' They have decided to protect the public from the fate of hearing Carlin's social criticism regarding seven ‘dirty’ words.”

First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Erosion Of New York Times Co. V. Sullivan; Herbert V. Lando, Edward Howlett

Akron Law Review

In Herbert v. Lando the Supreme Court announced that the first amendment does not require a constitutional privilege foreclosing direct inquiry into the editorial process. While the decision may seem correct in its overturning of the absolute privilege afforded to the editorial process by the Second Circuit, nevertheless, by refusing to grant even a qualified privilege to the editorial process the Court may have upset the delicate balance between an individual's interest in his reputation and society's interest in a free flow of information recognized in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.

Equal Protection; State Alimony Statutes; Sex Discrimination; Orr V. Orr, David A. Detec, Jane L. Thomas-Moore

Akron Law Review

In Orr v. Orr the United States Supreme Court held unconstitutional the Alabama alimony statutes which provided that husbands, but not wives, may be required to pay alimony upon divorce. The Court's principal reason for so holding was the statutes' violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the fourteenth amendment on the basis of sex discrimination.

The Role Of Courts In Government Today, James L. Oakes

Akron Law Review

It is elementary constitutional law that American courts have the power of judicial review. While a case can be made (and is still sometimes made by critics of too much judicial intervention) against the courts' power to review federal actions against the Constitution or state actions contrary to the Federal Constitution or statutes, the principle of judicial review is so well ingrained in the American system that it need not be reargued here. Rather I shall examine the principal arguments counseling caution and restraint in the exercise of the power, even though some of these arguments seem to run against …

Sixth Amendment; Right To Counsel; Use Of Prior Uncounseled Convictions; Lewis V. United States And Baldasar V. Illinois, Rita Marks

Akron Law Review

Once again the Supreme Court has spoken on the issue of the right to counsel. Within three months the Court rendered two decisions which appear to be inconsistent, not only with one another, but with prior decisions of the Court

Second Amendment Right To Bear Arms, Quilici V. Village Of Morton Grove, Mark Benedic

Akron Law Review

From the colonial firelock to today's inexpensive handgun, the United States has toiled over the right to keep and bear arms. In 1981, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois addressed this recurring issue in Quilici v. Village of Morton Grove. The arguments espoused in Quilici consisted of both traditional and novel hypotheses on this uncertain subject. Delivered within an atmosphere of renewed concern over the use and possession of firearms, the arguments in Quilici provide insight into the reasoning on both sides of the gun-control issue.

The following note reviews the potential ramifications of the …

Right To Privacy; Removal Of Life-Support Systems; Leach V. Akron General Medical Center, Stephanie Zembar

Akron Law Review

The decision in Leach v. Akron General Medical Center, marked Summit County's acceptance of the trend allowing the removal of life support systems from an incompetent terminally ill patient. Technological advancements have enabled the medical profession to maintain a person indefinitely in a chronic vegetative state. These advancements have blurred traditional definitions of death and have raised legal, medical and ethical questions to be resolved within our court system. The Leach case was one of first impression in Ohio, and the decision should aid in establishing a framework from which members of the legal and medical professions, as well …

Constitutional Amendment; Rescission Of Ratification; Extension Of Ratification Period, State Of Idaho V. Freeman, John Carrol

Akron Law Review

The court's ruling in Freeman is in conflict with both the Supreme Court's apparent trend involving article V issues, and most of the recent scholarly opinion on point. As a result of this departure, and the fact that the ERA failed to be adopted, this decision is likely to have slight precedential value. Nonetheless, the district court's discussion of the ERA in light of recent changes in the political question doctrine has significance in interpreting article V.

Fifth Amendment, Double Jeopardy In Capital Sentencing, Bullington V. Missouri, Patrick J. Keating

Akron Law Review

In Bullington v. Missouri the Supreme Court marked a significant departure from previous principles of double jeopardy. The Court, for the first time, applied the Double Jeopardy clause to a criminal sentence. By prohibiting the state from seeking the death penalty at retrial, the case also casts important implications on capital punishment.

Container Legislation, Equal Protection, Commerce Clause, Minnesota V. Clover Leaf Creamery Company, Craig B. Paynter

Akron Law Review

The problems of litter, solid waste, and natural resource depletion are often inexorably linked to the liquid manufacturing and packaging industry. Legislative efforts to ameliorate these problems may therefore involve various controls of containers. When states enact container legislation, however, terms must be carefully chosen to avoid conflict with both state and federal constitutions.

Sixth Amendment, Televising Trials, Chandler V. Florida, Paul A. Patterson

Akron Law Review

The Supreme Court recently handed down a unanimous decision dealing with the respective rights of the press and defendants in regard to the televising of criminal trials. The case, Chandler v. Florida, while explicitly stated to be consistent with the Court's earlier decision in Estes v. Texas, has expanded the realm of media coverage of criminal trials beyond what apparently was permissible under Estes. The Court attempted to balance the competing constitutional guarantees of freedom of the press and the sixth amendment right to a fair trial. It held that while the presence of television cameras in …

Affirmative Action, Reverse Discrimination Bratton V. City Of Detroit, John T. Dellick

Akron Law Review

In Bratton v. City of Detroit, the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals examined charges of reverse discrimination' arising from a voluntary affirmative action plan adopted by the City of Detroit. These reverse discrimination claims were presented as alleged violations of Title VIP and the fourteenth amendment. The Bratton court reviewed the leading Title VII reverse discrimination case, United Steelworkers of America v. Weber, and the leading fourteenth amendment reverse discrimination case, Regents of University of California v. Bakke. From these cases, the court in Bratton extracted the major guidelines of each, comingled them, and developed …

Book Removal In Secondary Schools: A Violation Of The First Amendment? Board Of Education V. Pico, Cherlyn Pherigo

Akron Law Review

In the American democratic system, it is not uncommon for small, publicly-elected bodies to control the workings of societal institutions. These bodies may be federal, state or local in realm and function, and are usually given wide discretion. But who is it that controls the actions of these bodies This question is paramount to the myriad of recent cases involving the removal of books from secondary school libraries. The body involved is the local school board - an elected unit charged with the duty of managing school affairs. In that process of management, however, local school boards are apparently not …

The Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel Quandry: The Debate Continues Strickland V. Washington, Susan K. Vanburen

Akron Law Review

In recent years, dissatisfied criminal defendants have increasingly resorted to claims alleging actual ineffectiveness of counsel as a vehicle for challenging their convictions. Prior to Strickland v. Washington, the Supreme Court had not delineated the "proper standards" for reviewing claims of actual ineffectiveness of counsel. The lack of a national standard for assessing defense counsel's performance, as it relates to the constitutional requirement, generated extensive deliberation by lower courts and commentators. Faced with a deluge of actual ineffectiveness claims, the lower courts were forced to formulate standards to distinguish effective from ineffective assistance. However, the ensuing diverse standards employed …

Human Rights As Comparative Constitutional Law, Jacob W.F. Sundberg

Akron Law Review

This was the background of the Akron symposium on human rights as comparative constitutional law. The purpose of the symposium was to expose U.S. constitutional and international law experts to the working of these human rights protection systems in which decisions under the U.N. Covenant for Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights have arrived at an independent and influential, if not even precedent-setting role in relation to the national courts. Decision making by the U.S. Supreme Court is the focus of the teaching of Constitutional Law in the United States.

Having a number of European …

The Constitutional Right To Suicide, The Quality Of Life, And The "Slippery-Slope": An Explicit Reply To Lingering Concerns, G. Steven Neeley

Akron Law Review

[M]any courts and scholars appear to be motivated by yet another and more implicit concern with the so-called "quality of life" argument. [...] This ofttimes subtle design ultimately proves to be nothing more than a variation of the "slippery-slope" argument. This paper will contend that such arguments are logically fallacious and, at best, sway only by emotional appeal. As such, this style of argument should be afforded little forensic weight as it serves only to further confuse the debate over the constitutionality of selfdirected death.