Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (14)
- University of Richmond (4)
- Roger Williams University (3)
- William & Mary Law School (3)
- New York Law School (2)
-
- University of Colorado Law School (2)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (2)
- American University Washington College of Law (1)
- Cleveland State University (1)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (1)
- University of Georgia School of Law (1)
- University of New Hampshire (1)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (1)
- Wayne State University (1)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (15)
- Race (7)
- Brown v. Board of Education (6)
- Supreme Court (6)
- Admissibility (5)
-
- Affirmative action (5)
- Sixth Amendment (5)
- Confrontation Clause (4)
- Crawford v. Washington (4)
- Cross-examination (4)
- Fifth Amendment (4)
- Ohio v. Roberts (4)
- Testimonial (4)
- Testimony (4)
- Virginia (4)
- Constitution (3)
- Diversity (3)
- Education (3)
- Equal protection (3)
- Exclusions (3)
- Federalism (3)
- Grutter v. Bollinger (3)
- Hearsay (3)
- History (3)
- Race and law (3)
- Reliability (3)
- Witnesses (3)
- Admissions (2)
- Causes of action (2)
- Civil rights (2)
- Publication
-
- Articles (7)
- Michigan Law Review (4)
- University of Richmond Law Review (4)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (3)
- All Faculty Scholarship (2)
-
- Faculty Publications (2)
- NYLS Law Review (2)
- Oklahoma Law Review (2)
- Publications (2)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (1)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (1)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (1)
- Michigan Journal of International Law (1)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (1)
- Other Publications (1)
- Scholarly Works (1)
- Supreme Court Preview (1)
- The University of New Hampshire Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 37
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
Government Corruption And The Right Of Access To Courts, Una A. Kim
Government Corruption And The Right Of Access To Courts, Una A. Kim
Michigan Law Review
This Note addresses the question left unanswered in Harbury: whether these denial of access-to-courts cases, which Justice Souter termed "backward-looking" access claims, are valid exercises of a constitutional right. Backward-looking access claims such as Harbury's differ from traditional denial of access-to-courts claims in that their aim is not to remove impediments to bringing causes of action in the future. Rather, backward-looking access claims allege that a suit that could have been filed in the past was not brought or was not litigated effectively, because access to the courts was at that time denied or obstructed by government officials. …
Comparison To Criminal Sanctions In The Constitutional Review Of Punitive Damages, Colleen P. Murphy
Comparison To Criminal Sanctions In The Constitutional Review Of Punitive Damages, Colleen P. Murphy
Law Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Brown And The Desegregation Of Virginia Law Schools, Carl W. Tobias
Brown And The Desegregation Of Virginia Law Schools, Carl W. Tobias
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Promise Of Equality: Reflections On The Post-Brown Era In Virginia, Robert R. Mehrige Jr.
The Promise Of Equality: Reflections On The Post-Brown Era In Virginia, Robert R. Mehrige Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Call To Leadership: The Future Of Race Relations In Virginia, Rodney A. Smolla
A Call To Leadership: The Future Of Race Relations In Virginia, Rodney A. Smolla
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Virginia's Next Challenge: Economic And Educational Opportunity, Mark R. Warner
Virginia's Next Challenge: Economic And Educational Opportunity, Mark R. Warner
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
Section 6: Federalism, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 6: Federalism, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Are Single-Sex Schools Inherently Unequal?, Michael Heise
Are Single-Sex Schools Inherently Unequal?, Michael Heise
Michigan Law Review
In chess, a "fork" occurs when a player, in a single move, attacks two or more of an opponent's pieces simultaneously, forcing a necessary choice between unappealing outcomes. Similar to the potentially devastating chess move, single-sex public schooling forks many constitutionalists and feminists. Constitutionalists are forced to reexamine the "separate but equal" doctrine's efficacy, this time through the prism of gender. Although the doctrine - forged in the crucible of race and overcome in the monumental triumph we know as Brown v. Board of Education - rested dormant for generations, persistent (and increasing) single-sex education options are forcing scholars to …
The Use Of Prior Convictions After Apprendi, Colleen P. Murphy
The Use Of Prior Convictions After Apprendi, Colleen P. Murphy
Law Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Brown'S Legacy Then And Now: Race And Law School Admissions Debates Continue After Nearly 70 Years, Lauren M. Collins
Brown'S Legacy Then And Now: Race And Law School Admissions Debates Continue After Nearly 70 Years, Lauren M. Collins
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
Next month marks the 50th anniversary of the landmark desegregation case Brown v. Board of Education. Although this case represents a major victory in the battle for civil rights, the struggle against racism in education began some 20 years prior to Brown. During the 1930s and 1940s, at least seven African-American law school candidates aggressively challenged the unequal treatment of minority applicants in state courts, some eventually reaching the U.S. Supreme Court. Early successes in these cases lead to the more sweeping Brown decision, which then contributed to further law school admission policy reform. Discussion about the role of …
The Rehnquist Revolution, Erwin Chemerinsky
The Rehnquist Revolution, Erwin Chemerinsky
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
[Excerpt] "When historians look back at the Rehnquist Court, without a doubt they will say that its greatest changes in constitutional law were in the area of federalism. Over the past decade, and particularly over the last five years, the Supreme Court has dramatically limited the scope of Congress’ powers and has greatly expanded the protection of state Sovereign Immunity. Virtually every area of law, criminal and civil, is touched by these changes. Since I began teaching constitutional law in 1980, the most significant differences in constitutional law are a result of the Supreme Court’s revival of federalism as a …
Can Treasury Overrule The Supreme Court?, Gregg D. Polsky
Can Treasury Overrule The Supreme Court?, Gregg D. Polsky
Scholarly Works
This article considers whether the Treasury's check-the-box regulations, which have been widely praised by tax practitioners, are valid. These regulations generally allow any unincorporated entity to elect whether it will be treated as a corporation or a partnership for tax purposes. When these regulations were first proposed, there was some debate as to whether such an elective regime was foreclosed by the statutory scheme, which requires that "associations" be taxed as corporations. This article argues that the focus of this debate was misplaced because, even assuming that the statutory scheme itself was sufficiently ambiguous as to permit an elective regime, …
Does History Defeat Standing Doctrine?, Ann Woolhandler, Caleb Nelson
Does History Defeat Standing Doctrine?, Ann Woolhandler, Caleb Nelson
Michigan Law Review
According to the Supreme Court, the Federal Constitution limits not only the types of matters that federal courts can adjudicate, but also the parties who can bring those matters before them. In particular, the Court has held that private citizens who have suffered no concrete private injury lack standing to ask federal courts to redress diffuse harms to the public at large. When such harms are justiciable at all, the proper party plaintiff is the public itself, represented by an authorized officer of the government. Although the Court claims historical support for these ideas, academic critics insist that the law …
What Brown Teaches Us About The Rehnquist Court's Federalism Revival, Neal Devins
What Brown Teaches Us About The Rehnquist Court's Federalism Revival, Neal Devins
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Of Federalism, Human Rights, And The Holland Caveat: Congressional Power To Iplement Treaties, Ana Maria Merico-Stephens
Of Federalism, Human Rights, And The Holland Caveat: Congressional Power To Iplement Treaties, Ana Maria Merico-Stephens
Michigan Journal of International Law
This Article explores whether the Rehnquist Court's federalism doctrine, as elaborated during this last decade, should or ought to extend to the domestication of discrete provisions of ratified human rights treaties. It explores this question by examining the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Covenant) and by considering the civil remedy provision of Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) as potential implementing legislation for the equality provisions of the Covenant. In the context of this inquiry, the discussion engages federalism, as developed by the current Court, on its own terms. That is, I do not seek here to defend it …
The Useful, Dangerous Fiction Of Grand Jury Independence, Niki Kuckes
The Useful, Dangerous Fiction Of Grand Jury Independence, Niki Kuckes
Law Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
The Constitution Should Protect The Right To Same-Sex Marriage, Robert A. Sedler
The Constitution Should Protect The Right To Same-Sex Marriage, Robert A. Sedler
Law Faculty Research Publications
No abstract provided.
Two Wrongs Make A Right: Hybrid Claims Of Discrimination, Ming Hsu Chen
Two Wrongs Make A Right: Hybrid Claims Of Discrimination, Ming Hsu Chen
Publications
This Note reinterprets and recontextualizes the pronouncement in Employment Division v. Smith (Smith II) that exemptions from generally applicable laws will not be granted unless claims of free exercise are accompanied by the assertion of another constitutional right. It argues that when Arab American Muslims, and others who are of minority race and religion, bring claims for exemption from generally applicable laws on the basis of free exercise and equal protection principles, they ought to be able to invoke Smith II's hybridity exception, thus meriting heightened judicial scrutiny and increased solicitude from courts.
Introduction, Joel K. Goldstein
Introduction, Joel K. Goldstein
All Faculty Scholarship
Brown v. Board of Education [1] is the seminal case of the Twentieth Century. Mere mention of the case can start discussion on any number of topics, all important and all that relate to, or were importantly affected by, Brown. Some of those discussions relate to the immediate subject of Brown: Was state-imposed racially segregated public education a violation of the Equal Protection Clause? What is the nature of race relations in America? How close are we to achieving a racially just society? How fair is our system of public education? Others might focus on Brown for its impact on …
Diversity And The Practice Of Interest Assessment, Robert F. Nagel
Diversity And The Practice Of Interest Assessment, Robert F. Nagel
Publications
No abstract provided.
Marbury's Legacy Of Judicial Review After Two Centuries, Harry F. Tepker
Marbury's Legacy Of Judicial Review After Two Centuries, Harry F. Tepker
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Law: Beyond The Bounds Of Roe: Does Stenberg V. Carhart Invalidate The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act Of 2003, Scott A. Hodges
Constitutional Law: Beyond The Bounds Of Roe: Does Stenberg V. Carhart Invalidate The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act Of 2003, Scott A. Hodges
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Fire, Metaphor, And Constitutional Myth-Making, Robert Tsai
Fire, Metaphor, And Constitutional Myth-Making, Robert Tsai
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
From the standpoint of traditional legal thought, metaphor is at best a dash of poetry adorning lawyerly analysis, and at worst an unjustifiable distraction from what is actually at stake in a legal contest. By contrast, in the eyes of those who view law as a close relative of ordinary language, metaphor is a basic building block of human understanding. This article accepts that metaphor helps us to comprehend a court's decision. At the same time, it argues that metaphor plays a special role in the realm of constitutional discourse. Metaphor in constitutional law not only reinforces doctrinal categories, but …
Multiracial Identity, Monoracial Authenticity & Racial Privacy: Towards An Adequate Theory Of Mulitracial Resistance, Maurice R. Dyson
Multiracial Identity, Monoracial Authenticity & Racial Privacy: Towards An Adequate Theory Of Mulitracial Resistance, Maurice R. Dyson
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
This Article is divided into five parts. Part I briefly places the significance of the Supreme Court's affirmative action ruling in Grutter v. Bollinger in context, particularly the implications of its recommended twenty-five year timeframe in recognizing racial diversity. Part II examines the dangerous consequences of implicit assumptions underlying the RPI. More specifically, I investigate the potential ramifications the RPI would have had upon multiple sectors of our society, including healthcare, education, and law enforcement. In the process, I attempt to demonstrate that the concept of racial privacy is a strategic misnomer intended not to protect one's privacy, but rather …
Face To Face With The Right Of Confrontation, Richard D. Friedman
Face To Face With The Right Of Confrontation, Richard D. Friedman
Other Publications
This article is an edited excerpt from the amicus curiae brief filed in Crawford v. Washington, heard before the United States Supreme Court on November 10, 2003. Prof. Friedman wrote the brief for the Court.
The Jose Padilla Story, Donna R. Newman
The Torture Warrant: A Response To Professor Strauss, Alan M. Dershowitz
The Torture Warrant: A Response To Professor Strauss, Alan M. Dershowitz
NYLS Law Review
No abstract provided.
Postscript: Another Look At Patane And Seibert, The 2004 Miranda 'Poisoned Fruit' Cases, Yale Kamisar
Postscript: Another Look At Patane And Seibert, The 2004 Miranda 'Poisoned Fruit' Cases, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Some months after I finished writing an article that, inter alia, discussed the lower court opinions in Patane and Seibert (an article that appears elsewhere in this issue of the Journa),1 the Supreme Court handed down its decisions in those cases.2 In Patane, a 5-4 majority held admissible a Glock pistol located as a result of a failure to comply with Miranda. In Seibert, a 5-4 majority agreed with the state court that a "second confession," one obtained after the police had deliberately used a two-stage interrogation technique designed to undermine the Miranda warnings, was inadmissible. 3 In Patane, Justice …
Publications By Professor Yale Kamisar, Michigan Law Review
Publications By Professor Yale Kamisar, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
A bibliography of publications by Yale Kamisar.
Adjusting To Crawford: High Court Decision Restores Confrontation Clause Protection, Richard D. Friedman
Adjusting To Crawford: High Court Decision Restores Confrontation Clause Protection, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
In Crawford v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 1354 (2004), the U.S. Supreme Court radically transformed its doctrine governing the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Craitiord is a very positive development, restoring to its central position one of the basic protections of the common law system of criminal justice. But the decision leaves many open questions, and all lawyers involved in the criminal justice process will have to adjust to the new regime that it creates. This article outlines and summarizes the problems with the law as it stood before Crait/brd. It then explains the theoretical …