Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

"The Story Of United States V. United States District Court (Keith): The Surveillance Power", Trevor W. Morrison Nov 2008

"The Story Of United States V. United States District Court (Keith): The Surveillance Power", Trevor W. Morrison

Columbia Public Law & Legal Theory Working Papers

This chapter, prepared for Presidential Power Stories (edited by Christopher Schroeder and Curtis Bradley), tells the story of United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, better known as the Keith case. Keith is the Supreme Court's first and still most important statement on the extent to which the President, acting in the interests of national security, may authorize the warrantless wiretapping or other electronic surveillance of persons within the United States. The case began as a criminal prosecution of members of the radical "White Panther Party" for the bombing of a CIA office ...


Nowhere To Hide: Overbreadth And Other Constitutional Challenges Facing The Current Designation Regime, Ilya O. Podolyako Sep 2008

Nowhere To Hide: Overbreadth And Other Constitutional Challenges Facing The Current Designation Regime, Ilya O. Podolyako

Student Scholarship Papers

This Article examines the legal foundation and policy implications of the President’s power to designate terrorist organizations. These administrative actions carry severe repercussions because of the criminal prohibition on knowingly providing material support to the designated entities, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 2339B. Due to the overlap of the President’s Commander-in-Chief power to block enemy assets and specific Congressional authorization of such actions, the designations themselves appear to be immune from constitutional challenges. It is the addition of concomitant criminal sanctions, however, that drastically expands the potency of the designations and turns them into an effective national ...


Initiating A New Constitutional Dialogue: The Increased Importance Under Aedpa Of Seeking Certiorari From Judgments Of State Courts, Christopher N. Lasch, Giovanna Shay Feb 2008

Initiating A New Constitutional Dialogue: The Increased Importance Under Aedpa Of Seeking Certiorari From Judgments Of State Courts, Christopher N. Lasch, Giovanna Shay

Faculty Scholarship Series

The Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) contains a provision restricting federal courts from considering any authority other than holdings of the Supreme Court in determining whether to grant a state prisoner’s petition for habeas corpus. Through an empirical study of cert filings and cases decided by the Supreme Court, we assess this provision’s impact on the development of federal constitutional criminal doctrine. Before AEDPA and other restrictions on federal habeas corpus, lower federal courts and state courts contributed to doctrinal development by engaging in a “dialogue” (as described by Robert M. Cover and T. Alexander Aleinikoff ...


Presidential Authority And The War On Terror, Joseph W. Dellapenna Feb 2008

Presidential Authority And The War On Terror, Joseph W. Dellapenna

Working Paper Series

Immediately after the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush claimed, among other powers, the power to launch preemptive wars on his own authority; the power to disregard the laws of war pertaining to occupied lands; the power to define the status and treatment of persons detained as “enemy combatants” in the war on terror; and the power to authorize the National Security Agency to undertake electronic surveillance in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. With the exception of the power to launch a preemptive war on his own authority (for which he ...


Pfo Law Reform, A Crucial First Step Towards Sentencing Sanity In Kentucky, Robert G. Lawson Jan 2008

Pfo Law Reform, A Crucial First Step Towards Sentencing Sanity In Kentucky, Robert G. Lawson

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The purpose of this article is to engage in some analysis and discussion of the part of this sentencing law that cries out loudest for reform (the state's persistent felony offender law), reform that in short order would begin to deflate the population that has our prisons and jails grossly overcrowded. In this analysis and discussion, there is some brief consideration of the justifications used to support repeat offender laws (Part I), a segment on the history and evolution of Kentucky's law (Part II), an examination of a selection of repeat offender laws from other states (Part III ...


Guilty Pleas Or Trials: Which Does The Barrister Prefer?, Peter W. Tague Jan 2008

Guilty Pleas Or Trials: Which Does The Barrister Prefer?, Peter W. Tague

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Barristers in England and attorneys in the United States have been upbraided for pursuing their interests to their clients' detriment in recommending guilty pleas over trials. While this accusation against American attorneys could be true since their incentives are sometimes skewed to favor guilty pleas, it is not accurate with respect to barristers in England. This is because the latter’s selfish incentives--to maximize income and avoid sanction--incline them to prefer trials over guilty pleas. In Melbourne and Sydney, barristers have never been similarly accused. Indeed, the topic has not been studied. Based on interviews with legal professionals in those ...