Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- First Amendment (73)
- Courts (62)
- Administrative Law (52)
- Criminal Procedure (48)
- Law and Society (44)
-
- Criminal Law (41)
- Legislation (39)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (37)
- Judges (37)
- Fourteenth Amendment (31)
- Jurisprudence (31)
- Legal History (31)
- Religion Law (31)
- State and Local Government Law (30)
- Evidence (25)
- President/Executive Department (25)
- Law and Politics (22)
- Education Law (18)
- Juvenile Law (18)
- Litigation (18)
- Torts (18)
- Law and Gender (16)
- Legal Remedies (16)
- Dispute Resolution and Arbitration (15)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (15)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (15)
- Property Law and Real Estate (14)
- Family Law (13)
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional law (74)
- First Amendment (56)
- Constitution (38)
- Supreme Court (33)
- United States Supreme Court (25)
-
- Federalism (24)
- Constitutional Law (23)
- California (21)
- Religion (20)
- Due process (19)
- Privacy (18)
- Separation of powers (17)
- Abortion (16)
- Equal protection (16)
- Evidence (15)
- Fourth Amendment (14)
- Congress (13)
- Due process of law (13)
- Fourteenth Amendment (13)
- Right to counsel (13)
- United States (13)
- Fifth Amendment (12)
- Due Process (10)
- Eminent domain (10)
- Freedom of speech (10)
- Legislation (10)
- Speech (10)
- Criminal procedure (9)
- Government (9)
- Litigation (9)
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 389
Full-Text Articles in Constitutional Law
Quit Using Acquittals: The Unconstitutionality And Immorality Of Acquitted-Conduct Sentencing, Brenna Nouray
Quit Using Acquittals: The Unconstitutionality And Immorality Of Acquitted-Conduct Sentencing, Brenna Nouray
Pepperdine Law Review
This Comment examines the phenomenon of acquitted-conduct sentencing—a practice that allows a sentencing judge to enhance a criminal defendant’s sentence due to conduct for which he has already been acquitted. Seventeen-year-old Dayonta McClinton is one of many criminal defendants who have unjustly suffered at the hands of this practice when he received a thirteen-year enhancement because of conduct for which he already received a verdict of not guilty from a jury. This Comment argues that acquitted-conduct sentencing is unconstitutional, as it violates both the reasonable doubt standard required under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the jury …
The Post-Dobbs Reality: Privacy Expectations For Period-Tracking Apps In Criminal Abortion Prosecutions, Sophie L. Nelson
The Post-Dobbs Reality: Privacy Expectations For Period-Tracking Apps In Criminal Abortion Prosecutions, Sophie L. Nelson
Pepperdine Law Review
The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in June 2022 was met with waves of both support and criticism throughout the United States. Several states immediately implemented or began drafting trigger laws that criminalize seeking and providing an abortion. These laws prompted several period-tracking app companies to encrypt their users’ data to make it more difficult for the government to access period- and pregnancy-related information for criminal investigations. This Comment explores whether the Fourth Amendment and U.S. privacy statutes protect users of period-tracking apps from government surveillance. More specifically, this Comment argues that …
The Nonexistent Speedy Trial Right, Colleen Cullen
The Nonexistent Speedy Trial Right, Colleen Cullen
Pepperdine Law Review
The United States Constitution and all fifty states guarantee a speedy trial right for individuals accused of crimes. The controlling United States Supreme Court case, decided over fifty years ago, described the Sixth Amendment as a fundamental right with Fourteenth Amendment Due Process implications. Although the right to a speedy trial is a universally recognized right, this Article compellingly demonstrates the right is actually nonexistent throughout the United States. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted and exacerbated this previously unrecognized problem in courthouses across the country, which has led to news outlets finally covering the issue of the nonexistent speedy trial. This …
The Supreme Court, Article Iii, And Jurisdiction Stuffing, James E. Pfander
The Supreme Court, Article Iii, And Jurisdiction Stuffing, James E. Pfander
Pepperdine Law Review
Reflecting on the state of the federal judiciary in the aftermath of the Biden Commission report and subsequent controversies, this Article identifies problems with the current operation of both the Supreme Court and the lower courts that make up the Article III judicial pyramid. Many federal issues have been assigned to non-Article III tribunals, courts poorly structured to offer the independent legal assessment that such Founders as James Wilson prized as they structured the federal judiciary. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court devotes growing attention to a slice of highly salient public law questions, including those presented on the shadow docket, thereby …
Jarkesy V. Sec: Are Federal Courts Pushing The U.S. Toward The Next Financial Crisis?, Jennifer Hill
Jarkesy V. Sec: Are Federal Courts Pushing The U.S. Toward The Next Financial Crisis?, Jennifer Hill
Pepperdine Law Review
In the wake of both the Great Depression and the Financial Crisis of 2008, Congress established and expanded the powers of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). As part of this expansion, the SEC in-house administrative proceedings, designed to adjudicate SEC violations before the SEC’s administrative law judges (ALJs), were born. These in-house proceedings have faced multiple constitutional attacks in the past decade. In the most recent iteration of such challenges, Jarkesy v. SEC, the Fifth Circuit held that the SEC’s in-house proceedings were unconstitutional on three grounds: (1) the in-house proceedings deprived petitioners of their constitutional right to jury …
Who Let The Ghouls Out? The History And Tradition Test’S Embrace Of Neutrality And Pluralism In Establishment Cases, Jake S. Neill
Who Let The Ghouls Out? The History And Tradition Test’S Embrace Of Neutrality And Pluralism In Establishment Cases, Jake S. Neill
Pepperdine Law Review
In June of 2022, the Supreme Court decided in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District that an Establishment Clause inquiry “focused on original meaning and history” would replace Lemon’s endorsement test. But after announcing the test, the Court neglected to describe or apply it. This Comment attempts to fill that void. After analyzing the Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence, this Comment proposes tenets of the history and tradition test and applies those tenets to Allegheny County v. ACLU, a case decided under Lemon. Finally, this Comment concludes by arguing that the history and tradition inquiry supports pluralism, humility, tolerance, and a healthy …
Judicial Fidelity, Caprice L. Roberts
Judicial Fidelity, Caprice L. Roberts
Pepperdine Law Review
Judicial critics abound. Some say the rule of law is dead across all three branches of government. Four are dead if you count the media as the fourth estate. All are in trouble, even if one approves of each branch’s headlines, but none of them are dead. Not yet. Pundits and scholars see the latest term of the Supreme Court as clear evidence of partisan politics and unbridled power. They decry an upheaval of laws and norms demonstrating the dire situation across the federal judiciary. Democracy is not dead even when the Court issues opinions that overturn precedent, upends long-standing …
Does Federal Law Ban Mailing Abortion Drugs? A Textual Analysis Of 18 U.S.C. § 1461, Peter Allevato
Does Federal Law Ban Mailing Abortion Drugs? A Textual Analysis Of 18 U.S.C. § 1461, Peter Allevato
Pepperdine Law Review
As the regulation of abortion availability returned to the States, many have grappled with so-called trigger laws: dormant laws that were set to take effect to restrict or ensure access to abortion should constitutional protection be revoked. While the federal government has no true trigger law, it does have long-unenforced laws prohibiting the mailing of “[e]very article or thing designed, adapted, or intended for producing abortion.” 18 U.S.C. § 1461 is an old law, and it has not been enforced for at least fifty years. But the law’s potential effect on the growing practice of mail-distribution of chemical abortion pills …
Co-Managers? The Need For Clarification Regarding State And Federal Powers In Federal Elections, Amber Mccomas
Co-Managers? The Need For Clarification Regarding State And Federal Powers In Federal Elections, Amber Mccomas
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
This article argues that the Court needs to clarify the distinction between the state and federal government’s roles in federal elections to avoid chaos and unconstitutional overreach. As a part of this clarification, the Court should also clarify how information is deemed “necessary.” This article looks specifically at one potential consideration: public fears regarding election security. Data and logic indicate that such fears should not be a consideration in the necessity determination as they are unreliable. Section II examines the background of the Election Assistance Commission, the applicable law, as well as criticism and support the agency has received since …
The Immigration Court System: Unconstitutionality At The Hands Of The Executive To Push Nativism, Chloe Wigul
The Immigration Court System: Unconstitutionality At The Hands Of The Executive To Push Nativism, Chloe Wigul
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
The United States’ immigration court system is located within the U.S. Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review and operated under the power of the attorney general. Consequently, the attorney general can review and overrule decisions made by the Board of Immigration Appeals, the immigration appellate body. If the attorney general uses this authority, his decision cannot be reconsidered, and his opinion becomes precedent. Immigration courts are unique in that no other court system is located within or controlled by the executive branch. Focusing on key historical eras, this Comment compares the development of immigration law and policy with …
Convenient For Who? Apportioning State Income Taxes In The Context Of Remote Work, Brandon Smith
Convenient For Who? Apportioning State Income Taxes In The Context Of Remote Work, Brandon Smith
The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law
No abstract provided.
Teacher Shortages And The Fundamental Right To Education In California, Chris Yarrell
Teacher Shortages And The Fundamental Right To Education In California, Chris Yarrell
Pepperdine Law Review
That a qualified teacher workforce functions as the most important factor affecting student learning and achievement is beyond dispute. Yet, the right to education—which is a state obligation codified within all fifty 50 state constitutions—has been vindicated largely within the province of school finance litigation. Indeed, for nearly five decades, education litigants have brought school finance disputes in virtually every state, succeeding in more than half of them. Despite the hard-won victories notched by education litigants over this time, however, courts adjudicating school finance disputes have largely failed to move beyond declaring simple proscriptions on facially unequal school funding regimes. …
The Power Of State Legislatures To Invalidate Private Deed Restrictions: Is It An Unconstitutional Taking?, Ken Stahl
Pepperdine Law Review
Over the past several years, state legislatures confronting a severe housing shortage have increasingly preempted local land use regulations that restrict housing supply in an effort to facilitate more housing production. But even where state legislatures have been successful, they now confront another problem: many of the preempted land use regulations are duplicated at the neighborhood or block level through private “covenants, conditions and restrictions” (CCRs) enforced by homeowners associations (HOAs). In response, California’s legislature has begun aggressively invalidating or “overriding” these CCRs. While many states have barred HOAs from prohibiting pets, clotheslines, signs, and flags, California has moved much …
Rounding Up The Three-Fifths Clause: Eradicating Prison Gerrymandering In The South, Abigail N. Falk
Rounding Up The Three-Fifths Clause: Eradicating Prison Gerrymandering In The South, Abigail N. Falk
Pepperdine Law Review
This Comment examines the phenomenon of prison gerrymandering, a practice that involves counting prisoners as residents of the counties where their state correctional facilities are located—rather than in their home communities—for redistricting and representational purposes. This practice of counting inflates the voting power of rural, white districts with large prison complexes and diminishes the voting power of minority communities. Prison gerrymandering has become especially pervasive across southern states while many of the South’s northern counterparts have eradicated this practice through legislative reform. This Comment proposes a solution to stop prison gerrymandering in the South, arguing a strategy to produce a …
Legalization Without Disruption: Why Congress Should Let States Restrict Interstate Commerce In Marijuana, Scott Bloomberg, Robert A. Mikos
Legalization Without Disruption: Why Congress Should Let States Restrict Interstate Commerce In Marijuana, Scott Bloomberg, Robert A. Mikos
Pepperdine Law Review
Over the past twenty-five years, states have developed elaborate regulatory systems to govern lawful marijuana markets. In designing these systems, states have assumed that the Dormant Commerce Clause (“DCC”) does not apply; Congress, after all, has banned all commerce in marijuana. However, the states’ reprieve from the doctrine may soon come to an end. Congress is on the verge of legalizing marijuana federally, and once it does, it will unleash the DCC, with dire consequences for the states and the markets they now regulate. This Article serves as a wake-up call. It provides the most extensive analysis to date of …
A Reaction To Systemic Inaction: Breaking The Congressional Logjam Where It Counts, Nicholas W. Archibald
A Reaction To Systemic Inaction: Breaking The Congressional Logjam Where It Counts, Nicholas W. Archibald
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
William Marshall proposed that congressional inaction threatening “the ability of the government to function” should be “subject to constitutional scrutiny.” This article is a response to Marshall’s proposal and offers a potential solution based on alternative dispute resolution rather than the courts. When faced with seemingly insurmountable differences, Congress must look to alternative dispute resolution to reach a breakthrough on critical issues. This paper proposes the creation of a Mediation Office to assist Congress in coming to these breakthroughs. This mechanism could also possibly intervene when the issue is between Congress and the President. Part II of this article will …
The Case For A Liberal Communitarian Jurisprudence, Amitai Etzioni
The Case For A Liberal Communitarian Jurisprudence, Amitai Etzioni
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
This article seeks to show that courts face difficulties without a principled, constitutional anchoring for the conception of the common good. Courts could divine the common good from the penumbra of the Fourth Amendment in the same way the Supreme Court created a right to privacy. In addition to creating a “common good” constitutional principle, the judicial branch should establish criteria to determine when this principle should take precedence over individual rights expressly preserved in the Constitution.
Is Misdemeanor Cash Bail An Unconstitutional Excessive Fine?, Barnett J. Harris
Is Misdemeanor Cash Bail An Unconstitutional Excessive Fine?, Barnett J. Harris
Pepperdine Law Review
The Excessive Fines Clause is one of the least developed clauses pertaining to criminal procedure in the Bill of Rights. In fact, the Supreme Court has only interpreted the Clause a few times in its entire history. Yet, on any given day, hundreds of thousands of people languish in jails without having been convicted of anything, because most of these people are unable to meet the bail amount a judge sets. This Essay examines the surprisingly under-explored relationship between misdemeanor cash bail & pretrial detention and the Excessive Fines and Excessive Bail Clauses of the Eighth Amendment, using the Supreme …
The United States Of California: Ninth Circuit Tips The Dormant Commerce Clause Scales In Favor Of The Golden State's Animal Welfare Legislation, Tanner Hendershot
The United States Of California: Ninth Circuit Tips The Dormant Commerce Clause Scales In Favor Of The Golden State's Animal Welfare Legislation, Tanner Hendershot
Pepperdine Law Review
In November 2018, California voters overwhelmingly passed Proposition 12, the Prevention of Cruelty to Farm Animals Act. This law requires in-state and out-of-state farmers to provide additional living space for egg-laying hens, breeding pigs, and calves raised for veal by 2022 if the farmers wish to continue doing business within the state. In response, North American Meat Institute (NAMI), whose members account for approximately 95% of the country’s output of various meat products, filed a lawsuit in federal district court seeking a preliminary injunction against Proposition 12’s enforcement. NAMI contended Proposition 12 violated the Dormant Commerce Clause, a legal doctrine …
Jury Nullification As A Spectrum, Richard Lorren Jolly
Jury Nullification As A Spectrum, Richard Lorren Jolly
Pepperdine Law Review
Jury nullification traditionally refers to the jury’s power to deliver a verdict that is deliberately contrary to the law’s clearly dictated outcome. A spirited scholarship is built around this conception, with some painting nullification as democratic and others as anarchic. But this debate is largely unmoored from experience. In practice, courts have formally eliminated the jury’s authority to review the law and have established procedures that make it easier to prevent and overturn seemingly nullificatory verdicts. Thus, outside of a jury’s verdict acquitting a criminal defendant, jury nullification as traditionally understood does not exist. In no other context is a …
Not White Enough, Not Black Enough: Reimagining Affirmative Action Jurisprudence In Law School Admissions Through A Filipino-American Paradigm, Joseph D. G. Castro
Not White Enough, Not Black Enough: Reimagining Affirmative Action Jurisprudence In Law School Admissions Through A Filipino-American Paradigm, Joseph D. G. Castro
Pepperdine Law Review
Writing the majority opinion upholding the use of racial preferences in law school admissions in 2003, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor anticipated that racial preferences would no longer be necessary in twenty-five years. On the contrary, 2021 has seen the astronomic rise of critical race theory, the popularity of race-driven “diversity” initiatives in higher education, and the continued surge of identity politics in the mainstream. So much has been written on affirmative action—what else could this Comment add to the conversation? Analyzing the Court’s application of strict scrutiny through a Filipino- American paradigm, this Comment ultimately concludes that affirmative action in …
Impartial Justice: Restoring Integrity To Impeachment Trials, Justin D. Rattey
Impartial Justice: Restoring Integrity To Impeachment Trials, Justin D. Rattey
Pepperdine Law Review
In recent decades, we have witnessed the diminution of the impeachment process by various actors—especially political parties. But the Founders envisioned a vastly different process, one that was insulated from partisanship. In Alexander Hamilton’s words, impeachment trials were assigned to the Senate because the Senate is “a tribunal sufficiently dignified [and] sufficiently independent.” Examples from the most recent impeachment trials of President Donald J. Trump reflect the Senate’s loss of dignity and independence, with Senator McConnell pledging to work with the White House throughout the first impeachment process and senators from both parties conceding that they made up their minds …
Blurred Lines: How To Rationally Understand The “Rational Understanding” Doctrine After Madison V. Alabama, Cassidy Young
Blurred Lines: How To Rationally Understand The “Rational Understanding” Doctrine After Madison V. Alabama, Cassidy Young
Pepperdine Law Review
In Madison v. Alabama, the Supreme Court held that a capital inmate’s inability to remember his crime did not render him incompetent to be executed. The Court reasoned that an individual who suffers from episodic memory loss may still “rationally understand” society’s reasons for sentencing him to death for a crime he once committed. This Note explores the impact of memory loss on a person’s self-identity, and consequently challenges the notion that a capital inmate who no longer remembers his crime can truly have a rational understanding of it. Specifically, this Note examines how memory loss substantially weakens the two …
Overruling Roe V. Wade: Lessons From The Death Penalty, Paul Benjamin Linton
Overruling Roe V. Wade: Lessons From The Death Penalty, Paul Benjamin Linton
Pepperdine Law Review
In Furman v. Georgia (1972), the Supreme Court struck down the Georgia and Texas death penalty statutes, thereby calling into question the validity of every other state death penalty statute. In their concurring opinions, Justices Brennan and Marshall expressed the view that, given society’s gradual abandonment of the death penalty, capital punishment violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishments.” Justice Powell and three other justices dissented, arguing that the Court had misread the state of the law regarding society’s acceptance of the death penalty. Four years after Furman, in a quintet of cases, the Court held that …
No Amendment? No Problem: Judges, “Informal Amendment,” And The Evolution Of Constitutional Meaning In The Federal Democracies Of Australia, Canada, India, And The United States, John V. Orth, John Gava, Arvind P. Bhanu, Paul T. Babie
No Amendment? No Problem: Judges, “Informal Amendment,” And The Evolution Of Constitutional Meaning In The Federal Democracies Of Australia, Canada, India, And The United States, John V. Orth, John Gava, Arvind P. Bhanu, Paul T. Babie
Pepperdine Law Review
This article considers the way in which judges play a significant role in developing the meaning of a constitution through the exercise of interpretive choices that have the effect of “informally amending” the text. We demonstrate this by examining four written federal democratic constitutions: those of the United States, the first written federal democratic constitution; India, the federal constitution of the largest democracy on earth; and the constitutions of Canada and Australia, both federal and democratic, but emerging from the English unwritten tradition. We divide our consideration of these constitutions into two ideal types, identified by Bruce Ackerman: the “revolutionary” …
New Technology And The Right To Privacy: Do E-Scooters Implicate The Fourth Amendment?, Alexander P. Carroll
New Technology And The Right To Privacy: Do E-Scooters Implicate The Fourth Amendment?, Alexander P. Carroll
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
The Fourth Amendment protects individual’s right to privacy from unwarranted searches and seizures, but the analysis for when the Fourth Amendment applies has become more complicated as new technology is developed. E-scooters are a new piece of technology which may implicate the Fourth Amendment. Cities across the country are beginning to require the mobility companies which provide e-scooter services to turn over location data in order to receive an operating permit. This article first provides a background of the Fourth Amendment, then provides details regarding the new city regulations. The article includes a discussion of the privacy concerns as well …
Hybrid Federalism And The Employee Right To Disconnect, Paul M. Secunda
Hybrid Federalism And The Employee Right To Disconnect, Paul M. Secunda
Pepperdine Law Review
The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) administers specific workplace and health standards that generally and expressly preempt the entire field of workplace safety and health law. However, where such federal OSHA standards do not exist or states have developed their own approved OSHA plans, OSHA does not merely set a regulatory floor either. A type of “hybrid federalism” has been established, meaning a strong federal-based field preemption approach to labor and employment law issues, but tied to a conflict preemption approach. Applying this hybrid preemption approach to the employee right to disconnect problem provides the best opportunity to …
A Defense Of The Electoral College In The Age Of Trump, John Yoo
A Defense Of The Electoral College In The Age Of Trump, John Yoo
Pepperdine Law Review
In the aftermath of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election, where Donald J. Trump lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes but still secured victory in the Electoral College, renewed efforts to delegitimize or abolish the Electoral College system have surfaced. Critics, calling for a direct national vote for President, attacked the legitimacy of the election and decried the Constitution’s method of presidential selection as antiquated and undemocratic. Some legal scholars even suggested that the Electoral College must be abolished to disentangle it from America’s racist past and history of slavery. Recently, though, reformers in several States have banded …
Our Campaign Finance Nationalism, Eugene D. Mazo
Our Campaign Finance Nationalism, Eugene D. Mazo
Pepperdine Law Review
Campaign finance is the one area of election law that is most difficult to square with federalism. While voting has a strong federalism component—elections are run by the states and our elected officials represent concrete geographical districts—our campaign finance system, which is rooted in the First Amendment, almost entirely sidesteps the boundaries of American federalism. In so doing, our campaign finance system creates a tenuous connection between a lawmaker’s constituents, or the people who elect him, and the contributors who provide the majority of his campaign cash. The recent explosion of outside spending in American elections by wealthy individuals and …
Federalism Limits On Non-Article Iii Adjudication, F. Andrew Hessick
Federalism Limits On Non-Article Iii Adjudication, F. Andrew Hessick
Pepperdine Law Review
Although Article III of the Constitution vests the federal judicial power in the Article III courts, the Supreme Court has created a patchwork of exceptions permitting non-Article III tribunals to adjudicate various disputes. In doing so, the Court has focused on the separation of powers, concluding that these non-Article III adjudications do not unduly infringe on the judicial power of the Article III courts. But separation of powers is not the only consideration relevant to the lawfulness of non-Article III adjudication. Article I adjudications also implicate federalism. Permitting Article I tribunals threatens the role of state courts by expanding federal …