Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional Law (16)
- Jurisprudence (15)
- Law and Society (10)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (9)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (8)
-
- Fourteenth Amendment (6)
- Judges (6)
- Courts (5)
- Equal protection (4)
- First Amendment (4)
- Politics (4)
- Religion (4)
- Same-sex marriage (4)
- Constitutional theory (3)
- Constitutionalism (3)
- Due process (3)
- Human Rights Law (3)
- Legal History (3)
- Biopolitics (2)
- Conflict of Laws (2)
- Constitutional (2)
- Constitutional law (2)
- Criminal Law (2)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (2)
- Dicta (2)
- Equal Protection (2)
- Equity (2)
- Establishment clause (2)
- Fourteenth amendment (2)
- General Law (2)
- Publication
-
- Adam Lamparello (5)
- Michael C. Dorf (5)
- Robert M. Sanger (2)
- Samuel R. Olken (2)
- Steven D. Schwinn (2)
-
- Steven H. Shiffrin (2)
- Cecil J. Hunt II (1)
- Charles E. A. Lincoln IV (1)
- David Barnhizer (1)
- Evelyn Aswad (1)
- Frederick H. Zemans (1)
- Jamie Cameron (1)
- Jarrod Tudor (1)
- John T. Valauri (1)
- Juan Luis Hernández Macías (1)
- Lawrence B. Solum (1)
- Markus Gunneflo (1)
- Michael Anthony Lawrence (1)
- Michael P. Seng (1)
- Patrick McKinley Brennan (1)
- Randy J Kozel (1)
- Trevor J Calligan (1)
- Yuvraj Joshi (1)
- Zeina Jallad (1)
- File Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 36
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
How Much Fuel To Add To The Fire Of Genius? Some Questions About The Repair/Reconstruction Distinction In Patent Law , Arthur Gajarsa, Evelyn Aswad, Joseph Cianfrani
How Much Fuel To Add To The Fire Of Genius? Some Questions About The Repair/Reconstruction Distinction In Patent Law , Arthur Gajarsa, Evelyn Aswad, Joseph Cianfrani
Evelyn Aswad
No abstract provided.
The Respectable Dignity Of Obergefell V. Hodges, Yuvraj Joshi
The Respectable Dignity Of Obergefell V. Hodges, Yuvraj Joshi
Yuvraj Joshi
In declaring state laws that restrict same-sex marriage unconstitutional, Justice Kennedy invoked “dignity” nine times—to no one’s surprise. References in Obergefell to “dignity” are in important respects the culmination of Justice Kennedy’s elevation of the concept, dating back to the Supreme Court’s 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. In Casey, “dignity” expressed respect for a woman’s freedom to make choices about her pregnancy. Casey laid the foundation for Lawrence v. Texas, which similarly respected the freedom of choice of homosexual persons. Yet, starting in United States v. Windsor and continuing in Obergefell, the narrative began to change. Dignity veered …
Access To Justice For A New Century: The Way Forward, Julia H. Bass, W. A. Bogart, Frederick H. Zemans
Access To Justice For A New Century: The Way Forward, Julia H. Bass, W. A. Bogart, Frederick H. Zemans
Frederick H. Zemans
This book is a timely addition to the literature on access to justice. The book's essays address all aspects of the topic, including differing views on the meaning of access to justice; ways to improve access to legal services; litigation and its role in achieving social justice; and the roles of lawyers, citizens, and legal insitutions.
Access to Justice for a New Century is based on papers given at an international symposium presented by the Law Society of Upper Canada, sponsored by the Law Foundation of Ontario.
Governance And Anarchy In The S.2(B) Jurisprudence: A Comment On Vancouver Sun And Harper V. Canada, Jamie Cameron
Governance And Anarchy In The S.2(B) Jurisprudence: A Comment On Vancouver Sun And Harper V. Canada, Jamie Cameron
Jamie Cameron
The article identifies and explains a double standard in the Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence. The contrast is between the open court jurisprudence, which is a model of good constitutional governance – or principled decision making – and the Court’s s.2(b) methodology, which is “anarchistic” or capricious and undisciplined, in the sense of this article. Two landmark cases decided in 2004 illustrate the double standard: the first is Re Vancouver Sun, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 332, which dealt with the open court principle under Parliament’s anti-terrorism provision for investigative hearings, it represents a high water mark for open court and s.2(b) …
The Constitutional Rhetoric Of White Innocence
The Constitutional Rhetoric Of White Innocence
Cecil J. Hunt II
This article discusses the Supreme Court’s use of the rhetoric of white innocence in deciding racially inflected claims of constitutional shelter. It argues that the Court’s use of this rhetoric reveals that it has adopted a distinctly white-centered-perspective which reveals only a one-sided view of racial reality and thus distorts its ability to accurately appreciate the true nature of racial reality in contemporary America. This article examines the Court’s habit of consistently choosing a white-centered-perspective in constitutional race cases by looking at the Court’s use of the rhetoric of white innocence first in the context of the Court’s concern with …
Obergefell V. Hodges: How The Supreme Court Should Have Ruled, Adam Lamparello
Obergefell V. Hodges: How The Supreme Court Should Have Ruled, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
In Obergefell, et al. v. Hodges, Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion legalizing same-sex marriage was based on “the mystical aphorisms of a fortune cookie,” and “indefensible as a matter of constitutional law.” Kennedy’s opinion was comprised largely of philosophical ramblings about liberty that have neither a constitutional foundation nor any conceptual limitation. The fictional opinion below arrives at the same conclusion, but the reasoning is based on equal protection rather than due process principles. The majority opinion holds that same-sex marriage bans violate the Equal Protection Clause because they: (1) discriminate on the basis of gender; (2) promote gender-based stereotypes; and …
The Constitution And Informational Privacy, Or How So-Called Conservatives Countenance Governmental Intrustion Into A Person's Private Affairs, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 871 (1985), Michael P. Seng
Michael P. Seng
No abstract provided.
Hegelian Dialectical Analysis Of United States Election Laws, Charles E. A. Lincoln Iv
Hegelian Dialectical Analysis Of United States Election Laws, Charles E. A. Lincoln Iv
Charles E. A. Lincoln IV
This Article uses the dialectical ideas of German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1833) in application to the progression of United States voting laws since the founding. This analysis can be used to interpret past progression of voting rights in the US as well as a provoking way to predict the future trends in US voting rights. First, Hegel’s dialectical method is established as a major premise. Second, the general accepted history of United States voting laws from the 1770s to the current day is laid out as a minor premise. Third, the major premise of Hegel’s dialectical method weaves …
The Power Of The Body: Analyzing The Corporeal Logic Of Law And Social Change In The Arab Spring, Zeina Jallad, Zeina Jallad
The Power Of The Body: Analyzing The Corporeal Logic Of Law And Social Change In The Arab Spring, Zeina Jallad, Zeina Jallad
Zeina Jallad
The Power of the Body:
Analyzing the Logic of Law and Social Change in the Arab Spring
Abstract:
Under conditions of extreme social and political injustice - when human rights are under the most threat - rational arguments rooted in the language of human rights are often unlikely to spur reform or to ensure government adherence to citizens’ rights. When those entrusted with securing human dignity, rights, and freedoms fail to do so, and when other actors—such as human rights activists, international institutions, and social movements—fail to engage the levers of power to eliminate injustice, then oppressed and even quotidian …
The High Price Of Poverty: A Study Of How The Majority Of Current Court System Procedures For Collecting Court Costs And Fees, As Well As Fines, Have Failed To Adhere To Established Precedent And The Constitutional Guarantees They Advocate., Trevor J. Calligan
Trevor J Calligan
No abstract provided.
Justice Kennedy's Decision In Obergefell: A Sad Day For The Judiciary, Adam Lamparello
Justice Kennedy's Decision In Obergefell: A Sad Day For The Judiciary, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
Same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marriage under the Equal Protection Clause, not under Justice Kennedy’s self-serving and ever-changing definition of liberty. The long-term impact of Kennedy’s decision will be to the Court’s institutional legitimacy. Chief Justice Roberts emphasized that the legitimacy of this Court ultimately rests “upon the respect accorded to its judgments,” which is based on the perception—and reality—that we exercise humility and restraint in deciding cases according to the Constitution and law.” Justice Kennedy’s decision eschewed these values, giving the Court the power to discover “new dimensions of freedom,” and to ensure that all citizens, through …
The Pluralistic Foundations Of The Religion Clauses, Steven Shiffrin
The Pluralistic Foundations Of The Religion Clauses, Steven Shiffrin
Steven H. Shiffrin
Contemporary Supreme Court interpretations suggest that the religion clauses are primarily rooted in the value of equality. The United States Supreme Court has argued that in the absence of discrimination against religion (or the presence of other constitutional values), there is no violation of the Free Exercise Clause when a statute inadvertently burdens religion. Similarly, equality values have played a strong role in the Court's Establishment Clause jurisprudence. Many distinguished commentators have pointed to the equality focus and have argued that it gives insufficient attention to the value of religious liberty. Professor Shiffrin argues that these commentators are right in …
The Framers' Federalism And The Affordable Care Act, 44 Conn. L. Rev. 1071 (2012), Steven D. Schwinn
The Framers' Federalism And The Affordable Care Act, 44 Conn. L. Rev. 1071 (2012), Steven D. Schwinn
Steven D. Schwinn
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 …
Foreword: The Impact Of Citizens United, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. Xxiii (2011), Steven D. Schwinn
Foreword: The Impact Of Citizens United, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. Xxiii (2011), Steven D. Schwinn
Steven D. Schwinn
No abstract provided.
Foreword, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 317 (2004), Samuel R. Olken
Foreword, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 317 (2004), Samuel R. Olken
Samuel R. Olken
No abstract provided.
Justice Sutherland Reconsidered, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 639 (2009), Samuel R. Olken
Justice Sutherland Reconsidered, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 639 (2009), Samuel R. Olken
Samuel R. Olken
No abstract provided.
A Fourth Amendment Framework For The Fee Exercise Clause, Adam Lamparello
A Fourth Amendment Framework For The Fee Exercise Clause, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
This article proposes a paradigm for resolving disputes under the free exercise clause that is analogous to the framework used by the court under the fourth amendment when balancing privacy rights against investigatory powers of law enforcement. In its Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, the Court provides varying degrees of protection to privacy – and imposes different evidentiary requirements on law enforcement – depending on the context in which privacy is affected, the intrusiveness of a particular search, and the asserted governmental interests. For example, privacy receives the strongest protections in areas such as the home, thus requiring law enforcement to have …
Shredded Fish Redux, Robert Sanger
Shredded Fish Redux, Robert Sanger
Robert M. Sanger
The Yates case, in which certiorari had been granted to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit had been discussed in a previous column of Criminal Justice. The article was entitled “Shredded Fish” because the sea captain in Yates was prosecuted under the document shredding provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 for destroying fish. That case has now been decided by the United States Supreme Court in Yates v. United States, on February 25, 2015. The case involves the rule of lenity as well as a discussion of overcriminalization.
A Comparison Of The Jurisprudence Of The Ecj And The Efta Court On The Free Movement Of Goods In The Eea: Is There An Intolerable Separation Of Article 34 Of The Tfeu And Article Of 11 Of The Eea?, Jarrod Tudor
Jarrod Tudor
Article 11 of the European Economic Area (“EEA”) and Article 34 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”) prohibit quantitative restrictions on the free movement of goods. The EEA is monitored by the European Free Trade Area Court (“EFTA Court”) and the TFEU is monitored by the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”). In theory, the EFTA Court and the ECJ should interpret Article 11 and Article 34 in the same manner in order to promote harmonization of the law on the free movement of goods and allow for further economic integration between EFTA and the EU. …
To Furman Or Not To Furman, Robert M. Sanger
To Furman Or Not To Furman, Robert M. Sanger
Robert M. Sanger
In capital litigation, the United States Supreme Court in Furman v. Georgia and following cases required capital punishment systems to have a form of "narrowing" so that the death penalty was imposed only on the worst of the worst. The death penalty states have failed to successfully implement this concept. As a result, "narrowing" is currently raised in all capital cases by competent defense counsel both at trial and in post conviction litigation. It is raised in addition to all other issues, including issues related to the questions of whether exclusion from the death penalty should be expanded and whether …
Fundamental Unenumerated Rights Under The Ninth Amendment And Privileges Or Immunities Clause, Adam Lamparello
Fundamental Unenumerated Rights Under The Ninth Amendment And Privileges Or Immunities Clause, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
The failure to link the Ninth Amendment and Privileges or Immunities Clause for the purpose of creating unenumerated fundamental rights has been a persistent but rarely discussed aspect of the Court’s jurisprudence. That should change. There need not be an ongoing tension between the Court’s counter-majoritarian role and the authority of states to govern through the democratic process. If the Constitution’s text gives the Court a solid foundation upon which to recognize new rights and thereby create a more just society, then the exercise of that power is fundamentally democratic. The Ninth Amendment and Privileges or Immunities Clause provides that …
The Scope Of Precedent, Randy J. Kozel
The Scope Of Precedent, Randy J. Kozel
Randy J Kozel
The scope of Supreme Court precedent is capacious. Justices of the Court commonly defer to sweeping rationales and elaborate doctrinal frameworks articulated by their predecessors. This practice infuses judicial precedent with the prescriptive power of enacted constitutional and statutory text. The lower federal courts follow suit, regularly abiding by the Supreme Court’s broad pronouncements. These phenomena cannot be explained by—and, indeed, oftentimes subvert—the classic distinction between binding holdings and dispensable dicta. This Article connects the scope of precedent with recurring and foundational debates about the proper ends of judicial interpretation. A precedent’s forward- looking effect should not depend on the …
Why Chief Justice Roy Moore And The Alabama Supreme Court Just Made The Best Case For Same-Sex Marriage, Adam Lamparello
Why Chief Justice Roy Moore And The Alabama Supreme Court Just Made The Best Case For Same-Sex Marriage, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
The Alabama Court of the Judiciary should remove Roy Moore from the Supreme Court of Alabama for a second and final time. Over ten years after being ousted from the Alabama Supreme Court, Chief Justice Moore is embroiled in yet another controversy that involves disregarding the federal courts and creating chaos in the legal system. In fact, Moore recently stated that he would ignore the Supremacy Clause and not respect a U.S. Supreme Court decision invalidating same-sex marriage bans. That statement brings back memories of Governor Wallace’s infamous stand at the schoolhouse door. At least Wallace had a change of …
Justice-As-Fairness As Judicial Guiding Principle: Remembering John Rawls And The Warren Court, Michael Anthony Lawrence
Justice-As-Fairness As Judicial Guiding Principle: Remembering John Rawls And The Warren Court, Michael Anthony Lawrence
Michael Anthony Lawrence
This Article looks back to the United States Supreme Court’s jurisprudence during the years 1953-1969 when Earl Warren served as Chief Justice, a period marked by numerous landmark rulings in the areas of racial justice, criminal procedure, reproductive autonomy, First Amendment freedom of speech, association and religion, voting rights, and more. The Article further discusses the constitutional bases for the Warren Court’s decisions, principally the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection and due process clauses.
The Article explains that the Warren Court’s equity-based jurisprudence closely resembles, at its root, the “justice-as-fairness” approach promoted in John Rawls’s monumental 1971 work, A Theory of …
A Nonoriginalist Perspective On The Lessons Of History, Michael C. Dorf
A Nonoriginalist Perspective On The Lessons Of History, Michael C. Dorf
Michael C. Dorf
No abstract provided.
Dicta And Article Iii, Michael C. Dorf
Legal Indeterminacy And Institutional Design, Michael C. Dorf
Legal Indeterminacy And Institutional Design, Michael C. Dorf
Michael C. Dorf
No abstract provided.
Coming Off The Bench: Legal And Policy Implications Of Proposals To Allow Retired Justices To Sit By Designation On The Supreme Court, Lisa T. Mcelroy, Michael C. Dorf
Coming Off The Bench: Legal And Policy Implications Of Proposals To Allow Retired Justices To Sit By Designation On The Supreme Court, Lisa T. Mcelroy, Michael C. Dorf
Michael C. Dorf
In the fall of 2010, Senator Patrick Leahy introduced a bill that would have overridden a New Deal-era federal statute forbidding retired Justices from serving by designation on the Supreme Court of the United States. The Leahy bill would have authorized the Court to recall willing retired Justices to substitute for recused Justices. This Article uses the Leahy bill as a springboard for considering a number of important constitutional and policy questions, including whether the possibility of 4-4 splits justifies the substitution of a retired Justice for an active one; whether permitting retired Justices to substitute for recused Justices would …
Majoritarian Difficulty And Theories Of Constitutional Decision Making, Michael C. Dorf
Majoritarian Difficulty And Theories Of Constitutional Decision Making, Michael C. Dorf
Michael C. Dorf
Recent scholarship in political science and law challenges the view that judicial review in the United States poses what Alexander Bickel famously called the "counter-majoritarian difficulty." Although courts do regularly invalidate state and federal action on constitutional grounds, they rarely depart substantially from the median of public opinion. When they do so depart, if public opinion does not eventually come in line with the judicial view, constitutional amendment, changes in judicial personnel, and/or changes in judicial doctrine typically bring judicial understandings closer to public opinion. But if the modesty of courts dissolves Bickel's worry, it raises a distinct one: Are …