Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Supreme Court (11)
- Constitution (6)
- California (4)
- Fourth Amendment (4)
- Discrimination (3)
-
- Police (3)
- Speech (3)
- California Supreme Court (2)
- Campaign (2)
- Constitutional Law (2)
- Election (2)
- Employment (2)
- Finance (2)
- First Amendment (2)
- Ninth Circuit (2)
- Politics (2)
- Privacy (2)
- Standing (2)
- United States (2)
- 1983 (1)
- 9/11 (1)
- ADA (1)
- AUMF (1)
- Accommodation (1)
- Al-Qaeda (1)
- Americans with Disabilities Act (1)
- Antidiscrimination (1)
- Arrest (1)
- Arrests (1)
- Article 3 (1)
Articles 1 - 20 of 20
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
Property, Persons, And Institutionalized Police Interdiction In Byrd V. United States, Eric J. Miller
Property, Persons, And Institutionalized Police Interdiction In Byrd V. United States, Eric J. Miller
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
During a fairly routine traffic stop of a motorist driving a rental car, two State Troopers in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, discovered that the driver, Terrence Byrd, was not the listed renter. The Court ruled that Byrd nonetheless retained a Fourth Amendment right to object to the search. The Court did not address, however, why the Troopers stopped Byrd in the first place. A close examination of the case filings reveal suggests that Byrd was stopped on the basis of his race. The racial feature ofthe stop is obscured by the Court’s current property-basedinterpretation of the Fourth Amendment’s right to privacy.
Although …
"It's Open Season At The Border": Why The Bivens Remedy Should Extend To U.S. Border Patrol Agents In Cross-Border Shootings, Samantha Garza
"It's Open Season At The Border": Why The Bivens Remedy Should Extend To U.S. Border Patrol Agents In Cross-Border Shootings, Samantha Garza
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
County Of Los Angeles V. Mendez: Defending The Constitutionality Of The "Provocation Rule", Layla Bishara
County Of Los Angeles V. Mendez: Defending The Constitutionality Of The "Provocation Rule", Layla Bishara
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Fairness Over Finality: Peña-Rodriguez V. Colorado And The Right To An Impartial Jury, Katherine Brosamle
Fairness Over Finality: Peña-Rodriguez V. Colorado And The Right To An Impartial Jury, Katherine Brosamle
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Buck V. Davis: Anti-Discriminatory Principles In Habeas Corpus Cases, Daniella Rubin
Buck V. Davis: Anti-Discriminatory Principles In Habeas Corpus Cases, Daniella Rubin
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Spokeo Misspeaks, Lauren E. Willis
Spokeo Misspeaks, Lauren E. Willis
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Most commentators have critiqued the Supreme Court’s opinion in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins for failing to answer the question presented. But in important ways, the Spokeo opinion does not merely fail to speak—it affirmatively misspeaks. This essay suggests that underlying the Justices’ inability to see how standing law ought to apply to the facts in Spokeo is a failure to appreciate the power that consumer reports have over individuals’ life prospects today. Worse, the Justices’ unawareness of their own ignorance leads them to afford Congress little deference in identifying injuries occurring in our new information society. Their meta-ignorance also induces …
Supreme Court Supremacy In A Time Of Turmoil: James V. City Of Boise, Richard Henry Seamon
Supreme Court Supremacy In A Time Of Turmoil: James V. City Of Boise, Richard Henry Seamon
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Last Term’s decision in James v. City of Boise encapsulates the current civil rights turmoil and the legal system’s inadequate response to it. In James ̧ the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a decision in which the Idaho Supreme Court (1) awarded attorney’s fees against a civil rights plaintiff despite her credible claim of excessive police force and (2) denied that it was bound by U.S. Supreme Court decisions interpreting the federal statute authorizing the award. Although the Court in James reaffirmed the state courts’ well-settled duty to obey the Court’s decisions on federal law, this article shows that the duty …
Gun Rights Or Gun Control? How California's Waiting Period Law Can Pave The Way To Increased Regulation, Natasha Tran
Gun Rights Or Gun Control? How California's Waiting Period Law Can Pave The Way To Increased Regulation, Natasha Tran
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Politics At Work After Citizens United, Ruben J. Garcia
Politics At Work After Citizens United, Ruben J. Garcia
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
There are seismic changes going on in the political system. The United States Supreme Court has constitutionalized the concentration of political power in the “one percent” in several recent decisions, including Citizens United v. FEC. At the same time, unions are representing a shrinking share of the workforce, and their political power is also being diminished. In order for unions to recalibrate the balance of political power at all, they must collaborate with grassroots community groups, as they have done in several recent campaigns. There are, however, various legal structures that make coordination between unions and nonunion groups difficult, …
When The Police Get The Law Wrong: How Heien V. North Carolina Further Erodes The Fourth Amendment, Vivan M. Rivera
When The Police Get The Law Wrong: How Heien V. North Carolina Further Erodes The Fourth Amendment, Vivan M. Rivera
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Half-Baked: The Demand By For-Profit Businesses For Religious Exemptions From Selling To Same-Sex Couples, James M. Donovan
Half-Baked: The Demand By For-Profit Businesses For Religious Exemptions From Selling To Same-Sex Couples, James M. Donovan
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Should bakers be required to make cakes for same-sex weddings? This Article unravels the eclectic arguments that are offered in support of a religious exemption from serving gay customers in the wake of Obergefell.
Preliminary issues first consider invocations of a libertarian right to exclude. Rather than being part of our concept of liberty, this right to exclude from commercial premises is a new rule devised to prevent African Americans from participating in free society. Instead of expanding this racist rule to likewise bar gays from the marketplace, it should be reset to the antebellum standard of free access …
The Death Knell For The Death Penalty: Judge Carney's Order To Kill Capital Punishment Rings Loud Enough To Reach The Supreme Court, Alyssa Hughes
The Death Knell For The Death Penalty: Judge Carney's Order To Kill Capital Punishment Rings Loud Enough To Reach The Supreme Court, Alyssa Hughes
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
It’S Complicated: The Unusual Way Obergefell V. Hodges Legalized Same Sex Marriage, Kristin Haule
It’S Complicated: The Unusual Way Obergefell V. Hodges Legalized Same Sex Marriage, Kristin Haule
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Expanding Territorial Bounds: The Recognition Doctrine After Zivotofsky V. Kerry, Nicole Kirkilevich
Expanding Territorial Bounds: The Recognition Doctrine After Zivotofsky V. Kerry, Nicole Kirkilevich
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
For The Protection Of Society's Most Vulnerable, The Ada Should Apply To Arrests, Thomas J. Auner
For The Protection Of Society's Most Vulnerable, The Ada Should Apply To Arrests, Thomas J. Auner
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Balancing Disclosure And Privacy Interests In Campaign Finance, Sarah Harding
Balancing Disclosure And Privacy Interests In Campaign Finance, Sarah Harding
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
The law of campaign finance pits two important First Amendment interests against each other: disclosure and privacy. The Supreme Court has recognized the need to balance these two interests to allow for effective elections and to safeguard individual rights. However, through the years the Court has failed to balance these interests equally, resulting in vacillating decisions that unfairly sacrifice one for the other. From Burroughs v. United States in 1934 to Citizens United v. FEC in 2010, the Court has failed to provide a workable roadmap for legislatures in the creation of campaign finance disclosure laws and for lower courts …
The Ndaa, Aumf, And Citizens Detained Away From The Theater Of War: Sounding A Clarion Call For A Clear Statement Rule, Diana Cho
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
In the armed conflict resulting from the September 11 attacks, the executive authority to order the indefinite detention of citizens captured away from the theater of war is an issue of foreign and domestic significance. The relevant law of armed conflict provisions relevant to conflicts that are international or non-international in nature, however, do not fully address this issue. Congress also intentionally left the question of administrative orders of citizen detainment unresolved in a controversial provision of the 2012 version of the annually-enacted National Defense Authorization Act. While plaintiffs in Hedges v. Obama sought to challenge the enforceability of NDAA’s …
When Rhetoric Obscures Reality: The Definition Of Corruption And Its Shortcomings, Jessica Medina
When Rhetoric Obscures Reality: The Definition Of Corruption And Its Shortcomings, Jessica Medina
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Due to public scorn after the unraveling of the Watergate scandal, the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of the Federal Election Campaign Act’s restrictions on political contributions and expenditures. Buckley v. Valeo established that no legitimate government interest existed to justify restrictions on campaign expenditures, and only the prevention of corruption or the appearance of corruption could justify restrictions on campaign contributions. Since then, the Court has struggled to articulate a definition of corruption that balances First Amendment protections with the potential for improper influence. This Article argues that the Court’s current definition of corruption is too narrow, and proposes …
Fixing Hollingsworth: Standing In Initiative Cases, Karl Manheim, John S. Caragozian, Donald Warner
Fixing Hollingsworth: Standing In Initiative Cases, Karl Manheim, John S. Caragozian, Donald Warner
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
In Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal filed by the “Official Proponents” of California’s Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in California. Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion held that initiative sponsors lack Article III standing to defend their ballot measures even when state officials refuse to defend against constitutional challenges. As a result, Hollingsworth provides state officers with the ability to overrule laws that were intended to bypass the government establishment—in effect, an “executive veto” of popularly-enacted initiatives.
The Article examines this new “executive veto” in depth. It places Hollingsworth in context, discussing the initiative process …
Storming The Castle: Fernandez V. California And The Waning Warrant Requirement, Joshua Bornstein
Storming The Castle: Fernandez V. California And The Waning Warrant Requirement, Joshua Bornstein
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.