Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Supreme Court of the United States Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Fourteenth Amendment

Brigham Young University Law School

Journal

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States

The Congruent Constitution (Part Two): Reverse Incorporation, Jay S. Bybee Dec 2022

The Congruent Constitution (Part Two): Reverse Incorporation, Jay S. Bybee

BYU Law Review

In Bolling v. Sharpe (1954), a companion case to Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court thought it “unthinkable” that the Equal Protection Clause would not apply to the federal government as well as the states and declared it “reverse incorporated” through the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The Equal Protection Clause is the most familiar example of reverse incorporation, but it is neither the first nor the only provision of the Constitution that, by its terms, applies to the states alone, but which the Supreme Court has made applicable to the federal government through the Due …


The Congruent Constitution (Part One): Incorporation, Jay S. Bybee Nov 2022

The Congruent Constitution (Part One): Incorporation, Jay S. Bybee

BYU Law Review

In Barron v. Mayor of Baltimore (1833), the Supreme Court held that the Bill of Rights applied to the federal government alone. Following the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, the Supreme Court reconsidered the rule of Barron. The Court first reaffirmed the rule of Barron and held that neither the Privileges or Immunities Clause nor the Due Process Clause made the Bill of Rights applicable to the states. It then entered a period of “absorption,” where the Court held that the Due Process Clause guaranteed some minimal rights found in the Bill of Rights, but not necessarily the …


The Case Of The Smart City, Bruce Peabody, Kyle Morgan Feb 2022

The Case Of The Smart City, Bruce Peabody, Kyle Morgan

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

January 7, 2021, marked the seventy-fifth anniversary of Marsh v. Alabama, the case in which the Supreme Court of the United States extended the protections of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to a privately held “company town.” This article makes the case that the longstanding Marsh precedent, and the basic jurisprudential framework it set out, remain important in working through twenty-first century problems regarding public-private partnerships and their impact on constitutional rights. We bring this old ruling into our new century by extrapolating a hypothetical legal controversy from legislation currently under consideration in the states. Thus, the heart of our …