Constitutional Law Commons^™

Constitutional Dignity And The Criminal Law, James E. Baker

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Criminal law is important because it helps to define who we are as a constitutional democracy. There is much that distinguishes our form of government from others, but certainly much of that distinction is found in the Bill of Rights and in two simple words: due process. All of which help to affirm the value and sanctity of the individual in our society. Broadly then, criminal law helps to define who we are as a nation that values both order and liberty.

That is what many of the greatest judicial debates are about, like those involving Holmes, Hand, Jackson, and …

The War On Terrorism And The Constitution, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

Discussion of civil liberties during wartime often omit the fact that there can be no meaningful liberty at all if our homes and offices are bombed or our loved ones are killed or injured by acts of terror. The Government must be given the tools necessary to accomplish its vital mission. The first priority must be to win the war against terrorism. There are, however, other priorities. The United States, in its just battle for freedom, must ensure that freedom is preserved during that battle as well. Moreover, care must be taken so that an exaggerated cry of “emergency” is …

Medicaid And The Unconstitutional Dimensions Of Prior Authorization, Jagan Nicholas Ranjan

Michigan Law Review

The political outcry over prescription drug costs has been one of the most vociferous in recent memory. From tales depicting renegade seniors sneaking cheap prescriptions of Vioxx out of Tijuana across the border, to the promises of reduced prices made by front-runners during the 2000 Presidential election, the calls for lower drug prices have been forceful and demanding. This war for lower-priced pharmaceuticals fought by consumers, interest groups and politicians against the pharmaceutical industry itself has recently developed yet another front. The latest battle is over Medicaid. The new victims are the poor. Presently, federal statutory provisions in the Medicaid …

Towards Tribal Sovereignty And Judicial Efficiency: Ordering The Defenses Of Tribal Sovereign Immunity And Exhaustion Of Tribal Remedies, Kirsten Matoy Carlson

Michigan Law Review

In 1985, the Narragansett Indian Tribe ("Tribe") created the Narragansett Indian Wetuornuck Housing Authority ("Authority"). The Authority, which acts on the Tribe's behalf in its housing development and operations, entered into a contract with the Ninigret Development Corporation for the construction of a low-income housing development. After construction began, disputes developed over how to proceed with the construction. When conciliation efforts failed, the Authority cancelled the contract. The Narragansett Tribal Council, the governing body of the Tribe, followed the forum selection clause in the contract and notified the disputants that it would hold a hearing to resolve the dispute. Ninigret …

The Law Of Nations And The Offenses Clause Of The Constitution: A Defense Of Federalism, Michael T. Morley

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

The Fourth Amendment In The Hallway: Do Tenants Have A Constitutionally Protected Privacy Interest In The Locked Common Areas Of Their Apartment Buildings?, Sean M. Lewis

Michigan Law Review

One afternoon, a police officer spots a man driving a Cadillac through a run·down neighborhood. His interest piqued, the officer decides to follow the vehicle. The Cadillac soon comes to rest in front of an apartment building, and the driver, Jimmy Barrios-Moriera, removes a shopping bag from the trunk and enters the building. The moment Barrios-Moriera disappears within the doorway, the officer sprints after him because he knows that the door to the apartment building will automatically lock when it closes. He manages to catch the door just in time and rushes in. Barrios-Moriera is already halfway up a flight …

Suspecting The States: Supreme Court Review Of State-Court State-Law Judgments, Laura S. Fitzgerald

Michigan Law Review

At the Supreme Court these days, it is unfashionable to second-guess states' fealty to federal law without real proof that they are ignoring it. As the Court declared in Alden v. Maine: "We are unwilling to assume the States will refuse to honor the Constitution or obey the binding laws of the United States. The good faith of the States thus provides an important assurance that 'this Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof ... shall be the supreme Law of the Land.'" Accordingly, without proof that a state has "systematic[ally]" …

How The Supreme Court Delivers Fire And Ice To State Criminal Justice, Ronald F. Wright

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Subversive Strand Of The Warren Court, Gary Peller

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Rehnquist Court, Structural Due Process, And Semisubstantive Constitutional Review, Dan T. Coenen

Scholarly Works

Semisubstantive review, as I use that label, entails four key features. First, the subject matter of judicial inquiry is not the process applied in adjudicating a discrete dispute; rather, the matter at hand is the constitutionality of a statute or other generalized expression of legal policy. Second, some procedural omission by the lawmaker -- rather than an incurably substantive flaw in the end product of its work -- lays the groundwork for a judicial intervention that invalidates the challenged rule or negates how that rule otherwise would operate. It may be, for example, that a federal statute read as a …

Law Of The Case In Nevada: Confusing Relatives, Scott Doney

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Causation, Constitutional Principles, And The Jurisprudential Legacy Of The Warren Court, Michelle Adams

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Come Back To The Nickel And Five:* Tracing The Warren Court's Pursuit Of Equal Justice Under Law, Jim Chen

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Warren Court, Criminal Procedure Reform, And Retributive Punishment, Darryl K. Brown

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Irreparability Resurrected?: Does A Recalibrated Irreparable Injury Rule Threaten The Warren Court's Establishment Clause Legacy?, Doug Rendleman

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Proposed Amendments To Fed. R. Crim. P. 26: An Exchange: Remote Testimony - A Prosecutor's Perspective, Lynn Helland

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Although the Supreme Court has declined, for now, to endorse the Judicial Conference proposal to add a Rule 26(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to permit live video testimony under limited circumstances, I agree with Professor Friedman that the matter is far from over. This is both because the potential benefits to be realized from the use of remote video testimony are too large to ignore and because, on closer inspection, any Confrontation Clause concerns that might underlie the Court's hesitation to adopt the proposal are not warranted. My purpose in writing is to summarize some of the …

Marbury Ascendant: The Rehnquist Court And The Power To "Say What The Law Is", Timothy Zick

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Emergencia, Derecho , Justicia Y Seguridad Jurídica, Horacio M. Lynch

Horacio M. LYNCH

Análisis de la respuesta judicial a la crisis económica de 2002 involucrando, entre otras, las siguientes cuestiones: los amparos, su tramitación, y sus secuelas; la declaración de la inconstitucionalidad de oficio, "órdenes imposibles de cumplir", la colisión de derechos; y cuestiones político institucionales, como la gobernabilidad y el gobierno de los jueces.

How Is Constitutional Law Made?, Tracey E. George, Robert J. Pushaw Jr.

Michigan Law Review

Bismarck famously remarked: "Laws are like sausages. It's better not to see them being made." This witticism applies with peculiar force to constitutional law. Judges and commentators examine the sausage (the Supreme Court's doctrine), but ignore the messy details of its production. Maxwell Stearns has demonstrated, with brilliant originality, that the Court fashions constitutional law through process-based rules of decision such as outcome voting, stare decisis, and justiciability. Employing "social choice" economic theory, Professor Stearns argues that the Court, like all multimember decisionmaking bodies, strives to formulate rules that promote both rationality and fairness (p. 4). Viewed through the lens …

The Steel Seizure Case: One Of A Kind?, Neal Devins, Louis Fisher

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

A Roundtable Discussion With Stephen L. Carter & Michael J. Gerhardt, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

Transcript of a discussion regarding the United States Supreme Court, the Supreme Court justices and justice nominees, the Senate process for confirming nominees and related issues such as fitness to serve on the court and judicial activism.

Supreme Court Of Arkansas Rule 4-3(J): No-Merit Briefs In Arkansas And The Need To Amend The Rule, Jeffrey A. Weber

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Teoría General De La Prueba Judicial, Edward Ivan Cueva

Edward Ivan Cueva

No abstract provided.

Anastasoff, Unpublished Opinions, And Federal Appellate Justice, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

In Anastasoff v. United States, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently invalidated the court's local rule of appellate procedure providing that "unpublished opinions are not precedent and parties generally should not cite them." Eighth Circuit Judge Richard S. Arnold authored the opinion, holding that this local requirement violates Article ill of the United States Constitution. Regardless of whether the provocative decision in Anastasoff is constitutionally sound, the opinion trenchantly emphasizes the critical significance of a public policy issue that has remained essentially untreated for too long.

The three-judge panel, thus, threw …

Foreign Relations And Federal Questions: Resolving The Judicial Split On Federal Court Jurisdiction, Erin E. Terrell

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The federal circuit courts have disagreed concerning a fundamental issue of federal court jurisdiction: whether cases that may implicate or involve the "foreign relations" of the United States, but do not otherwise raise a more traditional "federal question" under federal law, may be removed from state courts to federal courts. This Note examines the cases that have created the split, and proposes two potential resolutions to it, one judicial and the other legislative.

The Courts' Inconsistent Treatment Of Bethel V. Fraser And The Curtailment Of Student Rights, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 181 (2002), David L. Hudson

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Pluralism And Democratic Politics: Reflections On The Interpretive Approach Of Baker V. Carr, Guy-Uriel Charles

Faculty Scholarship

Baker v. Carr is one of the Supreme Court's most important opinions, not least because its advent signaled the constitutionalization of democracy. Unfortunately, as is typical of the Court's numerous forays into democratic politics, the decision is not accompanied by an apparent vision of the relationship among democratic practice, constitutional law, and democratic theory. In this Article, Professor Charles revisits Baker and provides several democratic principles that he argues justifies the Court's decision to engage the democratic process. He examines the decision from the perspective of one of its chief contemporary critics, Justice Frankfurter. He sketches an approach, described as …

The Ins And Outs, Stops And Starts Of Speedy Trial Rights In Colorado--Part Ii, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

This two-part article reviews the constitutional and statutory right to a speedy trial and discusses the case law interpreting that right. The first part was printed in July 2002.

See Part I at http://scholar.law.colorado.edu/articles/550/.

Baker's Promise, Equal Protection, And The Modern Redistricting Revolution: A Plea For Rationality, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The conventional wisdom contends that Baker v. Carr did not set down a standard for lower courts to follow. This Article responds to this position. It reaches three conclusions. First, it argues the implicit promise of Baker v. Carr pointed toward a loose, flexible rationality standard for deciding redistricting controversies. Under this approach, states were given much room to enact redistricting plans in accordance to their states' particular needs. Second, the lower courts applied precisely this standard in litigation in the wake of Baker, and did so quite capably. This conclusion responds to those who exhort the imposition of a …

A Symposium Précis, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

This article is an introduction and overview of the Drake University Law School symposium Judicious Choices: Nominating and Confirming Supreme Court Justices held in March of 2002. It identifies important constitutional law issues in nominating and confirming the President's appointments to Supreme Court Justices in the United States.