Constitutional Law Commons^™

Was Justice Ginsburg Roe-Ght?: Reimagining U.S. Abortion Discourse In The Wake Of Argentina's Marea Verde, 48 Mitchell Hamline L. Rev. 128 (2022), Kim D. Ricardo

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Judicial Pragmatism: Strengths And Weaknesses In Common Law Adjudication, Legislative Interpretation, And Constitutional Interpretation, 52 Uic J. Marshall L. Rev. 369 (2019), Doori Song

UIC Law Review

Judicial pragmatism is a judicial methodology known for its future-looking mode of analysis, empirically-based decision making, and openness to judicial activism. In terms of strengths, judicial pragmatism helps to (1) maximize wealth and efficiency, (2) resolve truly novel cases, and (3) account for legislative shortcomings. In terms of weaknesses, judicial pragmatism poses the risks of (1) judicial tyranny, (2) overdependence on the social sciences, and (3) marginalization of important moral values. Although judicial pragmatism has generally been accepted as a helpful analytical approach, questions still remain over the extent to which it is helpful to judges in common law adjudication, …

From The Italian Mafia To Suppressing Societal Challenges: The Evolution Of Federal Criminal Rico And The Constitutional Objections Against It, 51 J. Marshall L. Rev. 647 (2018), Bianca Ciarroni

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reviving The Fourth Amendment: Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy In A Cell Phone Age, 50 J. Marshall L. Rev. 555 (2017), Marisa Kay

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Polarizing Procedures: Transsexual Inmates, Sex Reassignment Surgery, And The Eighth Amendment, 50 J. Marshall L. Rev. 747 (2017), Jameson Rammell

UIC Law Review

This article argues that at present, there is not sufficient certainty within the medical and scientific communities to definitively state that SRS is medically necessary for transsexual individuals, or that it effectively relieves the negative symptoms often associated with gender dysphoria. Because the Supreme Court has held that the Eighth Amendment does not require prison officials to provide the most cutting-edge treatments available, but only an adequate level of treatment, it is not a violation of the Eighth Amendment to deny a transsexual inmate’s request for SRS. Part I explores the medical and scientific communities’ current understanding of gender dysphoria, …

Extraterritorial Constitutionalism: A Rule Proposed, 50 J. Marshall L. Rev. 787 (2017), Joseph Alfe

UIC Law Review

Does the Fourth Amendment apply in cases of cross-border shootings of foreign nationals, when those shots were fired by United States Border Patrol agents from American soil, striking a victim in Mexico? In oral argument, Petitioner failed to heed the trail of breadcrumbs strewn at his feet by inquisitive Supreme Court Justices. A workable, yet narrow rule that would plug the critically important gap in application of the United States Constitution to remedy such cross-border atrocities, was not articulated. I propose one here. The world’s busiest border is that which is shared between the United States and Mexico. Our countries …

Navigating The Rubicon: Constitutionalism And The Inevitability Of The Social Contract, 51 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (2017), Lillian M. Spiess

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Corporation In The Marketplace Of Ideas, 51 J. Marshall L. Rev. 19 (2017), Matthew Telleen

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Refracted Constitution: Classical Liberalism And The Lessons Of History, 101 Iowa L. Rev. Online 97 (2016), Samuel R. Olken

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

As a prism refracts light, bending its rays in different directions and revealing its many colors, the Constitution also refracts the myriad perceptions of its interpreters. The debate published last fall in the Iowa Law Review between Professors Herbert Hovenkamp and Richard Epstein over whether the Constitution is, in the words of Professor Epstein, “a classical liberal document,” reveals divergent perspectives about the role of history in constitutional interpretation. Professor Epstein, who for much of his career has analyzed constitutional issues through the lens of law and economics, is primarily a legal theorist for whom history provides examples of how …

Town Of Greece And City Of Saguenay: Non-Establishment Principles With Or Without An Establishment Clause, 14 First Amend. L. Rev. 343 (2016), Donald L. Beschle

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Implicit In The Concept Of Ordered Liberty: How Obergefell V. Hodges Illuminates The Modern Substantive Due Process Debate, 49 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1021 (2016), Matthew Grothouse

UIC Law Review

This Article uses the historical sweep of the Due Process Clause to evaluate the merits of Obergefell’s majority and dissenting opinions. Specifically, the Article explains why the Due Process Clause’s prohibition on arbitrary punishments in general—and legislative judgments in particular—invariably mandates the judicial nullification of arbitrary and irrational legislative acts. What exactly constitutes a “legislative judgment” and how much deference courts should exercise in examining legislative acts are the crucial and largely unanswered questions lying at the heart of the Obergefell case (and in substantive due process cases in general). Although the Obergefell Court’s discussion focuses on a single case, …

Brief Of Constitutional Law Scholars And Practitioners As Amici Curiae In Support Of Plaintiffs-Appellants And Supporting Reversal,Georges V. United Nations, Docket No. 15-00455 (Second Circuit 2015), Steven D. Schwinn

Court Documents and Proposed Legislation

Prospective amici curiae are scholars and practitioners of United States Constitutional law. Together, Amici have substantial experience researching, publishing, teaching, and litigating in the field of Constitutional law, particularly on the constitutional right of access to the courts. Amici have a strong interest in ensuring that immunity does not infringe on individual constitutional rights, specifically the fundamental right of access to the courts. They submit their brief in support of Plaintiffs-Appellants’ position that immunity should not be accorded to the Defendants-Appellees in this case, where doing so would unconstitutionally impinge on Plaintiffs-Appellants’ fundamental right of access to the courts.

Confronting The Overcriminalization Of America, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 757 (2015), Timothy P. O'Neill

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Decline Of Legal Classicism And The Evolution Of New Deal Constitutionalism, 89 Notre Dame L. Rev. 2051 (2014), Samuel R. Olken

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores how some of the salient characteristics of classical legal thought influenced the evolution of the Supreme Court's constitutional jurisprudence during the New Deal era. It focuses upon the Court's jurisprudence of economic liberty in the context of substantive due process. Though a similar pattern of evolution occurred in the Court's Commerce Clause jurisprudence, examination of this area of constitutional development is beyond the scope of this Article. Part I provides an overview of legal classicism and its influence upon late nineteenth and early twentieth-century constitutional law. The next Part examines the paradox of legal classicism and its …

The Strange Politics Of Medicaid Expansion, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 947 (2014), Steven Schwinn

UIC Law Review

This paper first outlines the Medicaid program, Medicaid expansion in the PPACA, and the Court’s ruling on Medicaid expansion in NFIB. It next explores the impacts of the opposition to Medicaid expansion. In particular, it details the substantial federal resources that opposing states will leave on the table, the health insurance coverage that states stand to deny to their poor citizens, and the constitutional law that opposing states left in NFIB.

Where Are We At? The Illinois Constitution After Forty-Five Years, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1 (2014), Ann Lousin

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is Welching On Public Pension Promises An Option For Illinois? An Analysis Of Article Xiii, Section 5 Of Illinois Constitution, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 167 (2014), Eric Madiar

UIC Law Review

This Article reviews not only the Pension Clause’s language and origins, but also the constitutional convention debates discussing it, and relevant court decisions construing the provision. The Article also evaluates the arguments made by legal commentators on behalf of particular stakeholders about whether the Clause allows the legislature to cut the pension benefits of current public employees and retirees as well as other related issues. The Article concludes that the General Assembly cannot unilaterally cut the pension benefits of current employees or retirees as a means to reduce the State’s existing pension liabilities based on the Clause’s plain language, the …

Escape From Freedom: Why “Limited Lockstep” Betrays Our System Of Federalism, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 325 (2014), Timothy P. O'Neill

UIC Law Review

The Illinois Supreme Court has ironically chosen to make the Illinois Constitution completely insignificant in several areas of constitutional law. It has accomplished this through “the limited lockstep doctrine.” This approach is used to interpret cognate provisions of the U.S. and Illinois Constitutions.

The Confrontation Clause And Forensic Autopsy Reports-A "Testimonial", 74 La. L. Rev. 117 (2013), Marc Ginsberg

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines the landscape of legal issues involved in determining whether the presence at trial of a surrogate pathologist, whose testimony refers to a forensic autopsy report prepared by the examining pathologist and provides the foundation for the admissibility of the forensic autopsy report, implicates the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. This Article concludes that the practice of surrogate testimony and admission of the forensic autopsy report, well known and often required in criminal homicide prosecutions, implicates and violates the Confrontation Clause.

Supreme Court Leaks And Recusals: A Response To Professor Steven Lubet’S Scotus Ethics In The Wake Of Nfib V. Sebelius, 47 Val. U. L. Rev. 925 (2013), Kevin Hopkins

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

As Professor Steven Lubet notes in his article, Stonewalling, Leaks, and Counter-Leaks: SCOTUS Ethics in the Wake of NFIB v. Sebelius, the ethical conduct of Supreme Court Justices has once again gained national attention. This time, however, the context for public outcry is due to actions of an in-house source who released confidential information to a member of the press concerning the voting behavior and the overall sentiments of members of the Court's minority in one of the most significant and controversial rulings of the year: NFIB v. Sebelius (the "Affordable Care Act"). Professor Lubet uses this leaking of significant …

Waiving Goodbye To A Fundamental Right: Allocation Of Authority Between Attorneys And Clients And The Right To A Public Trial, 38 J. Legal Prof. 1 (2013), Alberto Bernabe

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Using The Language Of Turner V. Rogers To Advocate For A Right To Counsel In Immigration Removal Proceedings, 46 J. Marshall L. Rev. 893 (2013), Shane T. Devins

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Mercenary Gap: How To Protect The Constitutional Rights Of American Contractors In The Age Of The Private Military Firm, 46 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1121 (2013), John Sviokla

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Requiem For Protest: Anglo-American Perspectives On Protest Post-9/11, 46 J. Marshall L. Rev. 455 (2013), Christopher Newman

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Saving The Deific Decree Exception To The Insanity Defense In Illinois: How A Broad Interpretation Of Religious Command May Cure Establishment Clause Concerns, 46 J. Marshall L. Rev. 561 (2013), Bella Feinstein

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Balanced Budget Amendment Fit For The Constitution: The Elimination Of Partisanship And Substantive Provisions, 46 J. Marshall L. Rev. 583 (2013), Shane Nichols

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Clever Contraband: Why Illinois’ Lockstep With The U.S. Supreme Court Gives Police Authority To Search The Bowels Of Your Vehicle, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 425 (2013), Jason Cooper

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Does A Broad Free Exercise Right Require A Narrow Definition Of Religion, 39 Hastings Const. L.Q. 357 (2012), Donald L. Beschle

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

In the 1990 case of Employment Division v. Smith, a sharply divided Supreme Court abandoned the routine application of strict scrutiny when considering Free Exercise Clause claims seeking exemption from generally applicable legal duties or prohibitions. The Court returned to an older view of the Free Exercise Clause as protecting believers only from government acts that were aimed specifically at beliefs, and that grew out of hostility to the religion rather than a desire to further legitimate secular goals.

Reaction to Smith was largely negative, and legislative and state court responses followed, seeking to restore strict scrutiny as the appropriate …

The Framers' Federalism And The Affordable Care Act, 44 Conn. L. Rev. 1071 (2012), Steven D. Schwinn

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

Federalism challenges to the Affordable Care Act ("ACA") are inspired by the relatively recent resurgence in federalism concerns in the Supreme Court's jurisprudence. Thus, ACA opponents seek to leverage the Court-created distinction between encouragement and compulsion (in opposition to Medicaid expansion), and the Court-created federalism concern when Congress regulates in a way that could destroy the distinction between what is national and what is local (in opposition to universal coverage).

But outside the jurisprudence, the text and history of constitutional federalism tell another story. The text and history suggest that the Constitution created a powerful federal government, of the people …

The Birthright Citizenship Controversy: A Study Of Conservative Substance And Rhetoric, 18 Tex. Hisp. J. L. & Pol'y 49 (2012), Allen R. Kamp

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

This essay is a critique of the conservative rhetoric used in attack of birthright citizenship--as granted by Clause One of the Fourteenth Amendment, which states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” The rhetoric of that attack violates the traditional canons of conservative argumentation and interpretation, such as original intent and textualism. As such, conservatives' arguments call into question the seriousness of their allegiance to these canons.

This article will not discuss the pros and cons of what we …