Fourteenth Amendment Commons^™

Guilty Until Proven Innocent: California's Prop. 50 Turns The Concept Of Due Process On Its Head, Brantley I. Pepperman

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

For decades, “good governance” has been little more than a talking point for politicians on the road to reelection or a promotion to higher office. In 2014, the California Legislature attempted to give teeth to the idea, successfully spearheading an amendment to the California Constitution approved by voters in 2016. But despite its efforts to “drain the swamp,” the Legislature gave itself a powerful tool, the authority to suspend or expel legislators without pay, that presents more problems than solutions. This article explores the implications of that amendment, including the extent to which it, as codified, comports with procedural due …

Neil Gorsuch And The Return Of Rule-Of-Law Due Process, Nathan Chapman

Popular Media

Something curious happened at the Supreme Court last week. While the country was glued to the Cirque du Trump, the rule of law made a comeback, revived by Neil Gorsuch, whose place on the Court may prove to be one of Trump’s most important legacies.

Unlike the partisan gerrymander and First Amendment cases currently pending before the Court, immigration cases are usually long on textual analysis and short on grand themes. Accordingly, court-watchers didn’t have especially high expectations for Sessions v. Dimaya.

From The Dark Tower: Unbridled Civil Asset Forfeiture, Saleema Saleema Snow

Journal Articles

The Black Lives Matter movement reinforces that race dominates all aspects of the judicial system. Police officers are significantly more likely to stop African Americans than Whites. Even when a stop or arrest is unwarranted, law enforcement agencies can still profit from the property seized under the guise of forfeiture statutes. Various state and federal civil asset forfeiture statutes legitimize law enforcement seizing cash, homes, cars, and office equipment—all with nominal due process protections. Despite evidence of discriminatory police practices, the U.S. Supreme Court deems these forfeiture practices constitutional.

This article seeks to reignite the conversation about discriminatory policing and …

Reciprocal Immunity, Colin Miller

Indiana Law Journal

This essay advances a reciprocal rights theory. It argues that the Constitution precludes statutes and rules from providing nonreciprocal benefits to the State when the lack of reciprocity interferes with the defendant’s ability to secure a fair trial, unless reciprocity would implicate a significant state interest. Therefore, unless a significant State interest is involved, a grant of immunity to a prosecution witness should trigger reciprocal immunity to a directly contradictory defense witness.