Digital Commons Network^™

Overcrowding In Prisons And Jails: Maryland Faces A Correctional Crisis

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Equal Protection And Criminal Sentencing: Legal And Policy Considerations, Mark Berger

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

There Shall Be One Supreme Court, Arthur J. Goldberg

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Bakke V. The Regents Of The University Of California, Jon Van Dyke

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Civil Disobedience: The Problem Of Selective Obedience To Law, Steven R. Schlesinger

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Judicial Review, James Bradley Thayer, And The Reasonable Doubt Test, Sanford Byron Gabin

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Recent Developments, Various Editors

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Admiralty, Edward P. Carey

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

The Corporate Patent - Reform Or Retrogression, Mary Helen Sears

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law: Goss V. Lopez: Much Ado About Nothing Or The Tempest, Brannon Heath

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Federal Courts, Injunctions, Declaratory Judgments, And State Law: The Supreme Court Has Finally Fashioned A Workable Abstention Doctrine, Clair E. Dickinson

Cleveland State Law Review

The American judicial system is founded on several policies which act as guideposts for the courts. Among these is the policy that states should be as free from federal control as possible. At the opposite end of the spectrum is the view that federal courts have a duty to protect individuals from violations of their constitutional rights. These policies meet, and seemingly clash, when a plaintiff enters a federal court either to request a declaratory judgment that a state statute is unconstitutional or to seek an injunction against the enforcement of the statute. The balancing of these competing interests has …

Towards A Constitutional Right To Counsel In Matrimonial Litigation, Gary R. Matano

Fordham Urban Law Journal

The marriage institution is the basic unit in the anatomical composition of American society as it exists today. The right to marry and the right to divorce when marriage fails have long been held in the highest esteem by our nation's courts. But some citizens of the State of New York are judicially denied the right to terminate their marriages because they are indigents. The court has denied indigents their requested assignments of counsel when the assistance of counsel was unquestionably necessary for prospective matrimonial litigants. The first problem posed by that holding is that it operates as a virtual …

Restoring The Balance: The Second Amendment Revisited, David I. Caplan

Fordham Urban Law Journal

In this article, the Second Amendment is analyzed through a discussion of the history of the right to private arms under English common law, the Second Amendment's legislative history and context, and the United States Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Miller. The articles argues that the private right of keeping arms plays a fundamental role in the constitutional system of checks and balances and that the Second Amendment supports the twin goals of individual and collective defense against violence and aggression. The article concludes that efforts to limit firearms possession to the organized militia undermines these twin goals …

Infants - Foster Families - Remove Of Foster Children From Foster Homes Without A Prior Hearing Violates Their Constitutional Rights To Procedural Due Process, Andrea G. Iason

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This case note examines the decision of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in Organization of Foster Familines for Equality and Reform v. Dumpson, 418 F. Supp. 277 (S.D.N.Y. 1976), which held that the removal of foster children from foster homes in which they had been living for more than one year, without a prior hearing, violated their constitutional rights to procedural due process. The court reaffirmed the concept that a child is a person under the fourteenth amendment with protected interests, such as the preference to live in a certain home, and that …

Credentials Of State Delegations To The U.N. General Assmebly: A New Approach To Effectuation Of Self-Determination For Southern Africa, Edward Mcwhinney

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Judicial Review Of Military Administrative Decisions, John Michael Haggerty

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Racial Designation In Louisana: One Drop Of Black Blood Makes A Negro, Kenneth A. Davis

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Due Process V. Defense Counsel's Unilateral Waiver Of The Defendant's Right To Testify, Seth Dawson

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

A Moment Of Truth On Racially Based Admissions, Larry M. Lavinsky

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

The Constitution And The Moral Order, William J. Bennett

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Congressional Papers And Judicial Subpoenas And The Constitution, David H. Kaye

Faculty Scholarship

Some contemporary Congresses have lost sight of the original scope of their predecessors' assertions of privilege and now claim an absolute privilege to withhold both the originals and copies of subpoenaed papers. A few judicial opinions suggest as much or more. It is possible that even cursorily documented, ill-considered dicta can take root and flourish, and to prevent that, this article This article charts the constitutional boundaries of Congress' privilege to withhold its internal papers from judicial subpoena. It surveys the privileges expressly given Congress in the text of the Constitution as well as the privileges that might be implied …

Making Sense Of The Prejudgment Seizure Cases, Richard Kay, Harold M. Lubin

Faculty Articles and Papers

The purpose of this article is to examine critically four recent Supreme Court cases on prejudgment seizure, Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp., Fuentes v. Shevin, Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co., and North Georgia Finishing, Inc. v. Di-Chem, Inc. These cases have been cited as an arch-example of inconsistency, even irrationality, in constitutional doctrine. Members of the Supreme Court and numerous scholars have expressed chagrin at the apparent irresponsible obscurity at this difficult intersection of creditors' remedies and constitutional rights. We believe, however, that the search for reasonable and rational constitutional standards is not a hopeless …

The 1975 New York Judicial Conference Package: Class Actions And Comparative Negligence, Adolf Homburger

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lefkowitz V. Newsome: The Supreme Court Takes Another Look At Guilty Pleas

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prospective Remedies In Constitutional Adjudication, Doug R. Rendleman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Suspect And The Grand Jury: A Need For Constitutional Protection, Marshall F. Newman

University of Richmond Law Review

In United States v. Mandujano,I the Supreme Court, while ostensibly reaffirming the proposition that the fifth amendment does not insulate a person charged with perjury from the prosecution's introduction of his false statements, has sanctioned the use of the grand jury as a subterfuge for circumventing the constitutional proscription against compulsory self-incrimination.

Congressional Control Of Agency Privilege, Mark A. Luscombe

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This note seeks to provide an introductory and largely historical analysis of "agency privilege:" the refusal of federal executive officials to furnish information and documents to congressional bodies absent the invocation of a claim of privilege by the President. After a brief survey of the origins of agency privilege in part I, the history and nature of the competing interests of congressional investigations and autonomy of executive departments and agencies will be discussed in part II. Part III explores the constitutional basis of the claim and analyzes other justifications proffered in specific circumstances. Part IV weighs the merits of various …

Revocation Of Conditional Liberty For The Commission Of A Crime: Double Jeopardy And Self-Incrimination Limitations, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Persons on deferred sentence, probation, or parole who arguably violate the criminal law may face two proceedings: a hearing to revoke their conditional liberty and a criminal trial. The possibility of two proceedings raises at least two major constitutional questions. First, are the defendant's rights under the double jeopardy or due process clauses violated if the state holds two inquiries into the alleged criminal act? Second, is the defendant's privilege against self-incrimination abridged if the revocation hearing is held before the criminal trial?

Recent Cases, Susan E. Dominick, Robert D. Butters, Walter T. Eccard

Vanderbilt Law Review

The first amendment guarantee of free exercise of religion, although couched in absolute terms, has never been considered an absolute right. The first significant free exercise case, Reynolds v.United States,' upheld the conviction of a Mormon polygamist who claimed a religious exemption from the bigamy laws on the basis of the first amendment. The Court held that while Congress was left powerless to legislate in matters of mere opinion, it was nonetheless" left free to reach actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order."'

Susan E. Dominick

=========================

The instant decision appears to be the …

Constitutional Law-Civil Rights-Standard For Relief In Racial Discrimination Cases Requires A Showing Of Discriminatory Intent, T. Keith Fogg

University of Richmond Law Review

When Congress passed Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it did not extend the coverage of the Act to public employers. Consequently, the Griggs v. Duke Power Co. decision in 1971 created the anomalous situation that private employers were held to a tougher standard of scrutiny with respect to racial considerations in their hiring procedures under Title VII than were public employers under the Constitution. This curious development in the relationship between public employment and Title VII caused many courts to alter their standards for equal protection violations in the early 1970's. In the realm of public …