Law Commons^™

Certiorari In Patent Cases, Christa J. Laser

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

In the decade from 2010 to 2019, the Supreme Court has decided more patent law cases than in the prior three decades combined. A higher percentage of its docket has been patent cases--5.45%--than in any decade in the last century. A number of scholars have advanced theories of why this rate of review of patent cases has increased and provided quantitative analyses. Yet no scholarship to date has used qualitative data to investigate why the Supreme Court’s patent docket is increasing and what factors the Supreme Court considers in its review of patent cases. This paper shares statistics of the …

Originalism And Second-Order Ipse Dixit Reasoning In Chisholm V. Georgia, D.A. Jeremy Telman

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article presents a new perspective on the Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence during the Early Republic. It focuses on what I am calling second-order ipse dixit reasoning, which occurs when Justices have to decide between two incommensurable interpretive modalities. If first-order ipse dixit is unreasoned decision-making, second-order ipse dixit involves an unreasoned choice between or among two or more equally valid interpretive options. The early Court often had recourse to second-order ipse dixit because methodological eclecticism characterized its constitutional jurisprudence, and the early Court established no fixed hierarchy among interpretive modalities.

Chisholm, the pre-Marshall Court’s most important constitutional decision, illustrates …

Notice, Due Process, And Voter Registration Purges, Anthony J. Gaughan

Cleveland State Law Review

In the 2018 case of Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, a divided United States Supreme Court upheld the procedures that Ohio election authorities used to purge ineligible voters from the state’s registration lists. In a 5-4 ruling, the majority ruled that the Ohio law complied with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) as amended by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA). This Article contends that the controlling federal law—the NVRA and HAVA—gave the Supreme Court little choice but to decide the case in favor of Ohio’s secretary of state. But this article also argues …

Cell Phones Are Orwell's Telescreen: The Need For Fourth Amendment Protection In Real-Time Cell Phone Location Information, Matthew Devoy Jones

Cleveland State Law Review

Courts are divided as to whether law enforcement can collect cell phone location information in real-time without a warrant under the Fourth Amendment. This Article argues that Carpenter v. United States requires a warrant under the Fourth Amendment prior to law enforcement’s collection of real-time cell phone location information. Courts that have required a warrant prior to the government’s collection of real-time cell phone location information have considered the length of surveillance. This should not be a factor. The growing prevalence and usage of cell phones and cell phone technology, the original intent of the Fourth Amendment, and United States …

To Speak Or Not To Speak, That Is Your Liberty: Janus V. Afscme, David Forte

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Some Supreme Court precedents go through extensive death spasms before being interred. Lochner v. New York, Plessy v. Ferguson, and Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce come to mind. Others like Chisholm v. Georgia and Minersville School District v. Gobitis incurred a swift and summary execution. Still others, overtaken by subsequent cases, remain wraith-like presences among the Court’s past acts: Beauharnais v. Illinois and Buck v. Bell, for example, remain “on the books.”

Artis V. District Of Columbia—What Did The Court Actually Say?, Doron M. Kalir

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

On January 22, 2018, the Supreme Court issued Artis v. District of Columbia. A true "clash of the titans," this 5-4 decision featured colorful comments on both sides, claims of "absurdities," uncited use of Alice in Wonderland vocabulary ("curiouser," anyone?), and an especially harsh accusation by the dissent that "we’ve wandered so far from the idea of a federal government of limited and enumerated powers that we’ve begun to lose sight of what it looked like in the first place."

One might assume that the issue in question was a complex constitutional provision, or a dense, technical federal code …

Punishment Without Purpose: The Retributive And Utilitarian Failures Of The Child Pornography Non-Production Sentencing Guidelines, Brittany Lowe

Cleveland State Law Review

Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, Congress established the U.S. Sentencing Commission to formulate an empirical set of federal sentencing Guidelines. With the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, Congress intended to further the basic purposes of criminal punishment—deterrence, incapacitation, just punishment, and rehabilitation. Nevertheless, the Guidelines were instantaneously met with disapproval. Asserting that the mandatory Guidelines violated the Constitution, scholars and judges argued that the Commission usurped Congress’s role by prescribing punishments that were essentially binding law. In 2005, the Supreme Court held that the Guidelines were discretionary in United States v. Booker.

While this decision resolved many of …

The Replacements: Conflicting Standards For Obtaining New Counsel Under The Sixth Amendment, Sharon Finegan

Cleveland State Law Review

In 2006, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez emphasizing the importance of a defendant’s right to counsel of choice under the Sixth Amendment and holding a denial of this right constitutes structural error, requiring automatic reversal. Following that decision, several federal circuit courts and state appellate courts have questioned how to apply this right to circumstances where the right to choice of counsel and the right to appointed counsel overlap. When a defendant seeks to replace retained counsel for appointed counsel, should the standard governing his motion fall under the right to choice of …

Justice John Paul Stevens - His Take On Takings, Alan C. Weinstein

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This commentary reviews and analyzes Justice John Paul Stevens's role in shaping the Court's views on the takings issue in land use regulation.

The Standing And Removal Decisions From The Supreme Court's 2006 Term, Steven H. Steinglass

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This article reviews some of the more important jurisdictional decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court during the court's 2006-07 term, the first full term that included both of the court's newest justices--Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Associate Samuel A. Alito Jr. The term begins an era that will likely become known as the Roberts Court, but this term surely belonged to Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who cast the deciding vote in all 24 of the court's 5-4 decisions.

Eminent Domain: Judicial And Legislative Responses To Kelo, Alan Weinstein

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

It has been almost a year and a half since the Supreme Court ruled in Kelo v. City of New London, 125 S. Ct. 2655 (2005), that the federal Constitution does not bar government from using eminent domain for economic development purposes. That ruling precipitated an unprecedented negative reaction in state legislatures. 1 Now, Ohio has delivered the first post-Kelo state supreme court decision to address the constitutionality of eminent domain. On July 26, in City of Norwood v. Horney, 2006 WL 2096001, a unanimous Ohio Supreme Court rejected the arguments of the majority in Kelo and emphatically stated that …

Supreme Court Watch, Reginald Oh

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Discusses the March 1, 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding the constitutionality of the death penalty in Roper v. Simmons, 125 S. Ct. 1183 (2005). The Court held that the death penalty cannot be applied to individuals under the age of eighteen at the time the crime was committed without violating the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

Supreme Court Watch, Reginald Oh

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Discusses the case in the 2004-05 U.S. Supreme Court Term which decided a constitutional challenge to the State of California's practice of temporarily racially segregating its prisoners. On November 2, 2004, the Court heard oral arguments in Johnson v. California, a lawsuit brought by an African-American prison inmate in the California Department of Corrections. The petitioner contends that the state's longstanding policy of racially segregating prisoners for sixty days violates the Equal Protection Clause. On February 23, 2005, the Court issued its opinion in ]ohnson v. California, 125 S. Ct. 1141 (2005), and held that the policy of …

Re-Mapping Equal Protection Jurisprudence: A Legal Geography Of Race And Affirmative Action,, Reginald Oh

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Oh argues that when the United States Supreme Court decided Richmond v. Croson in 1989 and imposed strict scrutiny on state and local government affirmative action programs, it marked a critical moment and turning point in the evolution and development of public and legal discourse on race, racism, and race relations in America. Although many scholars have critically examined the Croson opinion, curiously, scholars have yet to recognize its full ramifications and implications. Aside from the technical doctrinal changes made to equal protection law, the Croson decision is also important because of the way the Court produced and mapped a …

Supreme Court Watch, Reginald Oh

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Oh discusses how the U.S. Supreme Court, in General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc. v. Cline, 124 S. Ct. 1236 (2004), settled a circuit court conflict over the viability of "reverse age discriminations" claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The Court, in a 6-3 decision, held that statutorily protected workers over the age of forty may not bring an ADEA claim alleging that their employer discriminated against them in favor of older employees.

Supreme Court Watch, Reginald Oh

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Professor Oh briefly describes Locke v. Davey in which the U.S. Supreme Court, in its 2003-04 term, attempted to clarify its First Amendment jurisprudence on the religion clauses. In a 7-2 decision, the Court held that the State of Washington did not violate the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause by denying government financial aid to college students seeking to pursue a course of study in religious devotional studies.

Supreme Court Watch, Reginald Oh

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Discusses the Supreme Court decision Lawrence v. Texas, 123 S. Ct. 24 72 (2003). Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy held that the Texas anti-sodomy statute, by criminalizing adult consensual sexual conduct, violated the petitioners' vital interests in liberty and privacy as protected by the substantive due process doctrine under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Supreme Court Watch, Reginald Oh

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Discusses the Supreme Court cases at the end of the 2002-2003 term.

Supreme Court Watch, Reginald Oh

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Describes the U.S. Supreme Court's 2002-2003 term.

The True Story Of Marbury V. Madison, David F. Forte

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Though normally not friends of original intent or legal tradition, today's judicial "activists" like to trace their lineage back to the (purported) original judicial activist, to the great Chief Justice who was the first to persuade the Supreme Court to strike down a law of Congress.

According to this conceit, which is now the standard interpretation enshrined in countless histories and hornbooks, Marbury v. Madison was the breakthrough that demonstrated how truly powerful the judiciary could be. In this famous case, decided 200 years ago, Marshall supposedly showed that the Constitution is an elastic document or at least could be …

Mr. Justice Holmes's Constitutionally Crooked Path Part Ii: The State Sovereignty Jurisdictional Stopgap , Mitchell B. Weiss

Cleveland State Law Review

This article analyzes the last turn in Justice Holmes's constitutionally crooked path, largely by penetrating to the very core of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Alden v. Maine. Part I therefore traces the Court's waffling attitude towards the division of regulatory power between the state and federal governments. Then, against this backdrop, Part II takes the jurisdictional turn by analyzing the Court's most recent attempt to resuscitate the Tenth Amendment's check on Congress's Commerce Power. To sharpen the focus, much of this article will focus on the Fair Labor Standards Act, a federal statute that always seems to sit …

The Clean Air Act Amendments Of 1990 And An Unbridled Spending Power: Will They Survive On The Supreme Court's Road To Substantive Federalism, Mark A. Miller

Cleveland State Law Review

The question remains as to how far the Supreme Court will go in its refortification of the Tenth Amendment. This Note explores emerging federalism trends and evaluates the CAA in light of a stronger state sovereignty that is appearing on the constitutional horizon. Parts II and III examine the CAAA and the constitutional problems engendered by the Act. Part IV examines current Tenth Amendment and Spending Clause jurisprudence, and illustrates that the CAAA is a classic example of how Congress has been able to circumvent the Tenth Amendment with its Spending power. Part V presents a new view of federalism …

The Admissibility Of Medical Testimony In Ohio: Daubert, Joiner And Ohio's Relevance-Reliability Standard, Gerald J. Todaro

Cleveland State Law Review

This article specifically examines the reliability standard imposed under Rule 702 of the Ohio Rules of Evidence and its application to medical expert testimony in Ohio. Section II reviews Daubert, its progeny, and Ohio law. This analysis reveals tension between Ohio's flexible relevance/reliability standard and the more exacting demands of Daubert. Section III examines the scientific basis of clinical diagnosis and treatment of illness and disease. This section argues that judges should take judicial notice of the conventional methodology underlying the clinical practice of medicine, and thus the preliminary question of reliability of medical expert testimony should rarely require a …

The Illiberal Court, David F. Forte

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Justice Scalia casts up a dire warning that not only has the Supreme Court in many ways removed the Constitution from the Framers, it is also removing the democratic process from the people and their representatives.

Noam Chomsky And Judicial Review, James G. Wilson

Cleveland State Law Review

This Commentary will consider four authorities who are hardly considered standard-bearers of the Left: Aristotle, Edmund Burke, James Madison, and Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. Insights from Aristotle, Burke, Madison, Holmes, and Chomsky will be combined into following set of propositions: (1) the Supreme Court has a constitutional and historical obligation to resist tyranny and other forms of constitutional perversion and factionalism; (2) the Supreme Court has a unique duty and capacity to combat abuses of private power; (3) private corporations and the well-to-do have gained so much power that they have become a dangerous faction that is turning our government …

The First Amendment: When The Government Must Make Content-Based Choices, Erwin Chemerinsky

Cleveland State Law Review

Thus, I focus my attention on the problem of the First Amendment when the government must make content-based choices. I want to divide my remarks into four parts. I begin by reviewing the traditional bedrock rule of the First Amendment: The government cannot regulate speech based on its content. Second, I identify a broad range of cases where this rule cannot apply because the government must make content-based choices. Third, I suggest that the usual First Amendment principles are not helpful in analyzing these cases. Finally, I offer some initial thoughts about directions for dealing with this problem.

Re-Righting The Right To Privacy: The Supreme Court And The Constitutional Right To Privacy In Criminal Law, Jana Nestlerode

Cleveland State Law Review

Since the 1970's, federal legislation has expanded privacy rights in nonconstitutional areas. Juxtaposed against this more liberal legislative trend is the action of a significantly more conservative judiciary which has, and is, contracting that right in those areas governed by the Constitution. An examination of the Supreme Court's most recent decisions in the criminal law arena readily bears witness to this proclivity.

The Recent Respectability Of Summary Judgments And Directed Verdicts In Intentional Age Discrimination Cases: Adea Case Analysis Through The Supreme Court's Summary Judgment Prism, Frank J. Cavaliere

Cleveland State Law Review

The purpose of this Article is to review recent Supreme Court "guidance" on standards for summary judgment and directed verdict and the effect these decisions are having upon ADEA cases.

Conservatism And The Rehnquist Court, David F. Forte

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Now that the Supreme Court has been overwhelmingly staffed by appointees of Republican Presidents, we can ask: To what extent have they been faithful to the original version of the Constitution as articulated during its early years? How have they revivified the structural protections? How have they communicated an ethical sense of their own role in the structure? The answer, unfortunately, is that the record remains disappointing.

The Future Of Minority Set-Aside Programs After City Of Richmond, Judy Kerczewski Kranjc

Cleveland State Law Review

One type of controversial affirmative action plan is the minority set-aside program. This Note will focus on the future of these plans in the wake of the recent Supreme Court decision, City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. First, an examination of the background of affirmative action leading up to set-asides is in order. Second, this Note will analyze City of Richmond and the constitutional and social issues at stake, balancing whether minority set-asides are needed with the recognition that discrimination and lack of economic opportunity for minorities still exists in our society. Finally, the Note will examine several lower …