Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 5th Amendment (1)
- American Judicial System (1)
- Civil Rights (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
-
- Covid-19 (1)
- Department of Education (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Emergency Orders (1)
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Los Angeles County Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Fundamental rights (1)
- Hunter v. Department of Education (1)
- Incorporated rights (1)
- Intermediate scrutiny (1)
- LGBTQ (1)
- Legitimacy (1)
- Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (1)
- Ministerial Exception (1)
- Pandemic (1)
- Penn Test (1)
- Police Powers (1)
- Proportionality test (1)
- Rational basis test (1)
- Religious Exemption (1)
- Religious Liberty (1)
- Rights adjudication (1)
- Shadow Docket (1)
- Small Business (1)
- Specialized Courts (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Constitutional Law
Constitutional Cautions Post-Covid-19: A Proposal For 5th Amendment Protection From Police Power Overreach, Ethan Finster, Jessica Dofelmire, Editor
Constitutional Cautions Post-Covid-19: A Proposal For 5th Amendment Protection From Police Power Overreach, Ethan Finster, Jessica Dofelmire, Editor
Brigham Young University Prelaw Review
The invocation of police powers by state governments throughout the Covid-19 pandemic to restrict business activity created a legal protection around government action that prevents 5th Amendment claims. This protection persists whether or not those actions fit within precedential criteria for takings. While police powers are certainly an important aspect of governance in times of crisis, the infringement of individuals’ constitutional rights that accompanied their utilization must be addressed. Moreover, their use during the pandemic set a potentially dangerous precedent for their use in future emergencies. Considering the growing concern surrounding the adequacy of Takings Clause precedent for preventing government …
The Constitutionality Of The Title Ix Religious Exemption, Madelyn Jacobsen, Rebecca Batty, Editor
The Constitutionality Of The Title Ix Religious Exemption, Madelyn Jacobsen, Rebecca Batty, Editor
Brigham Young University Prelaw Review
Petitioners in Hunter v. Department of Education questioned the constitutionality of the Title IX religious exemption as the basis of their 2021 class-action lawsuit. They claimed that more than 30 religious schools maintained discriminatory policies against LGBTQ students under the exemption. The religious exemption, often painted as unconstitutional discrimination, permits religious schools' adherence to sincerely held religious beliefs—and promotes a distinctive religious education that secular schools lack. This paper examines legal precedents relevant to religious freedom, higher education, and discrimination that demand the Title IX religious exemption remains in effect.
A Balancing Act: Overcoming Incommensurability In Rights Adjudication, Samantha Knutson Jex
A Balancing Act: Overcoming Incommensurability In Rights Adjudication, Samantha Knutson Jex
Brigham Young University Prelaw Review
The Supreme Court's current system for rights adjudication is insufficient in cases where both sides feel that a fundamental right has been violated, such as Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. To overcome this insufficiency, I argue that the Court should implement a new test that is a modified combination of the Supreme Court's strict scrutiny and the test used internationally for rights adjudication--the proportionality test. I call this new test the "Incommensurability Test" and explain how it works and why it is beneficial for rights adjudication in the United States. Applying the "Incommensurability Test" would enable the Court …
The Shadow Docket: What Is Happening And What Should Be Done, Collin Mitchell
The Shadow Docket: What Is Happening And What Should Be Done, Collin Mitchell
Brigham Young University Prelaw Review
In light of recent emergency decisions made by the Court ranging from issues addressing the COVID-19 pandemic, religious freedom, abortion rights, and polarized redistricting plans, the Supreme Courts use of the shadow docket has come under renewed scrutiny. This paper argues that the Court's use of the shadow docket, while permissible in the past, is threatening the legitimacy of the Supreme Court and unduly burdening the American Judicial System at large. Due to these effects, this paper advocates to reduce the Supreme Court's use of the shadow docket through the creation of a new specialized court system to handle emergency …