Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons^™

Presidents And The U.S. Constitution: The Executive’S Role In Interpreting The Supreme Law Of The Land, Mitchell Scacchi

Honors Theses and Capstones

In 1832, President Andrew Jackson issued a veto message claiming the same duty as the Supreme Court to interpret the U.S. Constitution. Do modern presidents exercise the principal role in interpreting the U.S. Constitution that President Jackson claimed was their duty, and, if so, in what ways do they choose to articulate their interpretations? The hypothesis is that modern presidents have exercised a principal role in interpreting the U.S. Constitution similar to the interpretative duty expressed by President Jackson, and they perform this duty, in part, through the issuance of veto messages and signing statements. After a content analysis of …

Do We Intend To Keep Our Republic?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] Commentators recently have reminded us of a famous statement Benjamin Franklin allegedly made upon exiting Independence Hall on the final day of the 1787 Constitutional Convention. When asked whether the proposed Constitution would establish a monarchy or a republic, Franklin supposedly answered: "A republic, if you can keep it."

The anecdote, which both inspired the title of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch's recent book and was recounted by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi when she announced the impeachment inquiry into the conduct of the president, reminds us that our republican form of government is not to be taken …

State Constitutions And The Protection Of Rights, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

This article, using a recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling on partisan gerrymandering, explores how state constitutions can be significantly more protective of rights than the federal constitution.

Racism And Impeachment Power, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] “Does racism constitute a legitimate basis for removing a president? More generally, what is the scope of Congress's removal power?

”In all but the most extraordinary circumstances, the remedy for incompetent political leadership -indeed, even abhorrent political leadership lies in the next election. But the Constitution does provide Congress with tools to remove certain federal officeholders between elections.”

Masterpieces Or Simply Wedding Cakes? Exploring The Boundaries Of Freedom Of Speech Through United States Supreme Court Case Masterpiece Cakeshop V. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Margaret Mclean Quick

Honors Theses and Capstones

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Barriers To Congressional Reform, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

Americans celebrate our Constitution as a beacon that can guide us through difficult situations. And justly so. But at times, the Constitution also has stood as a barrier to necessary reform.

Sexual Misconduct And Congressional Self-Governance, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "Over the past year, a number of prominent politicians (including President Donald Trump) have been publicly accused of serious sexual misconduct and abuse of power. The question therefore has arisen: Can these politicians either be barred from taking office or removed from office on the basis of these accusations?

There is only way to remove a sitting president: impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. But the topic of impeaching and removing a president warrants its own column. This column will instead focus on what Congress may do when its members and members-elect face charges …

Finding Freedom For The Thoughts We Hate, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

In his dissenting opinion in United States v. Schwimmer (1929), Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., famously defended tolerance as an indispensable constitutional value. He wrote: “[I]f there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought – not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.”

Yet accepting that the Constitution protects the thought that we hate can be difficult, even during the best of times. And these are far from the best of times. Nuclear brinksmanship …

Norms, Law And The Impeachment Power, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt]

"Most experts believe that, while a president can be criminally prosecuted after leaving office, he cannot be prosecuted while he is president. And while the president may be sued civilly while holding office, the office confers powerful immunities and other constitutional defenses that are unavailable to ordinary civilian defendants."

Can Courts Save Us From Unconstitutional Government Conduct?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "We are living in a troubled time. Across the political spectrum, there is a great deal of concern that government officials have been derelict in honoring their oaths to support and defend the Constitution."

The Origins And Boundaries Of Executive Privilege, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "When the president or persons working with the president are under investigation . . . the doctrine of executive privilege -which entitles the president to keep confidential certain communications to and from his advisers -inevitably becomes relevant."

The Boundaries Of Partisan Gerrymandering, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] “In my most recent column, I expressed concern about the effectiveness of the constitutional decision rules that currently govern gerrymandering – the redrawing of electoral districts in a manner that favors the incumbent majority at the expense of those out of power.

Briefly, the Constitution has not been interpreted to prohibit redistricting with an eye toward advancing the interests of the political party in power. But it has been interpreted to bar legislators from redistricting on racial grounds – at least in most circumstances.

The problem is that voters from certain racial groups tend to vote overwhelmingly for …

Race, Partisan Gerrymandering And The Constitution, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] “For the most part, the Constitution speaks in generalities. The 14th Amendment, for example, instructs the states to provide all persons the "equal protection of the laws." But obviously, this cannot mean that states are always forbidden from treating a person differently than any other person. Children can, of course, be constitutionally barred from driving, notwithstanding the Equal Protection Clause. Thus, there is a need within our constitutional system to refine the Constitution's abstract provisions.”

The Trump Presidency And The Press, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "It is not difficult to understand why presidents frequently voice frustration with the press. Imagine being subjected to critical analysis 24/7 by reporters, bloggers and pundits who often lack complete and accurate information but face competitive pressure to publish quickly."

Can President Trump 'Open Up' The Libel Laws?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "Libel and slander are branches of the law of defamation. Defamation law authorizes remedies for reputational harm caused by some false statements of fact. A libel is a defamatory statement that is printed or written; a slander is a defamatory statement that is spoken.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, candidate Donald Trump suggested that, if elected, he would "open up our libel laws" to facilitate lawsuits by public officials against news organizations."

Textualism And Originalism In Constitutional Interpretation, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "In a 2016 lecture at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, Judge Neil Gorsuch warmly praised former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's approach to constitutional interpretation. Because President Trump has nominated him to serve on the Supreme Court, it is important to understand the approach Judge Gorsuch favors."

Why I So Enjoyed Learning With And From Calvin Massey, Vikram David Amar

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “I am pleased and proud to participate in this tribute to Calvin Massey, with whom I had the pleasure to work and play for about two decades. When I think of Calvin—and I think of him often—I think of a generous friend, a gregarious colleague and a genuinely good man. He possessed many admirable traits, but today I want to focus on three: (1) his breadth; (2) his independent mind; and (3) his thoughtfulness.”

Domicile, Student Voters And The Constitution, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "The wisdom of using the Electoral College to choose our president is a hot topic. For the second time in 16 years (and the fifth time in our history), the "winner" of the national popular vote lost the presidential election in the Electoral College. To many, this "undemocratic" outcome seems wrong."

Does The Constitution Allow President To Ban Muslims?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "The president-elect has stated that he intends to protect national security by banning Muslim immigration into the United States. He also has signaled an openness to some form of Muslim registration program. Does the Constitution impose barriers to the adoption of such policies?"

Difficult Questions For The Senate Minority, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

This column is the first in a biweekly Constitutional Connections series that will examine the constitutional implications of various topics in the news. The author, John Greabe, teaches constitutional law and related subject at the University of New Hampshire School of Law. He also serves on the board of trustees of the New Hampshire Institute for Civics Education.

My Turn: 'We The People' And The Garland Nomination, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "Because I teach constitutional law, a friend recently asked me whether Judge Merrick Garland or President Obama might successfully sue to compel the Senate to take action on the nomination of Judge Garland to fill the vacancy on the United States Supreme Court.

Almost certainly not, I told him. Under settled precedent, a judge would dismiss such a case as raising a non-legal ''political" question. It would be very difficult to develop acceptable decisional standards for such a claim. Moreover, courts are reluctant to entertain lawsuits challenging mechanisms that the Senate uses to oversee the judiciary."

The Divergence Of Modern Jurisprudence From The Original Intent For Federalist And Tenth Amendment Limitations On The Treaty Power, Steven T. Voigt

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “That the federal treaty-making authority is constrained by the other parts of the Constitution does not sound like the stuff of law journals. It seems like common sense. After all, we would not expect someone to argue that the ability to “regulate Commerce” entitles Congress to disregard the Third Amendment and quarter soldiers in our houses. We would not expect to see an argument that the power to “establish Post Offices” enables Congress to disregard the freedom of the press in the First Amendment. So, why is the Tenth Amendment so fully disregarded with respect to treaties?”

Obama's Failed Attempt To Close Gitmo: Why Executive Orders Can't Bring About Systemic Change, Erin B. Corcoran

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Machine Made Of Words: Our Incompletely Theorized Constitution, Gregory Brazeal

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt]”Many scholars have observed that the Constitution of the United States can be understood as an example of what Cass Sunstein calls an “incompletely theorized agreement.” The Constitution contains a number of extremely general terms, such as “liberty,” “necessary and proper,” and “due process.” The Framers of the Constitution, it is suggested, did not attempt to specify precisely how each of these principles would operate in every case. On this view, the Constitution is incompletely theorized in the sense of representing “a comfortable and even emphatic agreement on a general principle, accompanied by sharp disagreement about particular cases.” For example, …

Completely Unguided Discretion: Admitting Non-Statutory Aggravating And Non-Statutory Mitigating Evidence In Capital Sentencing Trials, Sharon Turlington

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “As an attorney practicing exclusively in the area of death penalty defense at the trial level for the last ten years, my perspective on the problems inherent in the system seems vastly different from that presented in academic research and even in case law. While most of the recent changes in death penalty law have focused on the right of the defendant to have sentencing enhancing elements of an offense proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, much of the evidence presented in an actual death penalty jury trial is non-statutory aggravation and non-statutory mitigation. Generally, non-statutory aggravating …

Death Is Unconstitutional: How Capital Punishment Became Illegal In America—A Future History, Jur. Eric Engle Ph.D.

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “A constitution is an organic fact of every state: it is a part of the being of the state. People, like the state, also have a constitution—a character. Just as people change over time, so do states. But just as there are natural limits on what people can or cannot become, so there are natural limits on what the state can and cannot fairly do. No man, nor any group of men, ex ante may justly take the life of another person, though perhaps their killing may be excused (or forgiven) ex post.”

"The death of Death would surely …

Human Zoning: The Constitutionality Of Sex-Offender Residency Restrictions As Applied To Post-Conviction Offenders, Ryan Hawkins

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[H]igh recidivism rates shows that the threat of jail time alone is not sufficient to curb sex crimes. With this in mind, legislators sought to find other ways that would protect potential victims. Community notification laws were the first policy to be implemented. Community notification methods included press releases, flyers, phone calls, door-to-door contact, neighborhood meetings, and Internet sites, which informed citizens of the name, location, and/or other information of persons who had been convicted of sex crimes.

Part II of this note will describe current sex-offender restrictions in place across the country. Part III will provide a constitutional analysis …

States’ Rights And The Scope Of The Treaty Power: Could The Patriot Act Be Constitutional As A Treaty?, Simcha Herzog

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “Consider the following hypothetical scenario: after an appeal by the American Civil Liberties Union, the Supreme Court determines that the Patriot Act is unconstitutional. This decision so infuriates President Bush that he seeks out the advice of his legal counsel in a frantic attempt to bypass the Court’s ruling. After some research, President Bush’s legal advisers give him two options: he can either attempt to pass an amendment to the constitution or, with the “advice and consent of the Senate,” he can sign the Patriot Act as a treaty with a foreign nation. Either of these measures will evade …