Digital Commons Network^™

The Link Between Voting Rights And The Abortion Ruling, Katherine A. Shaw, Leah Litman, Melissa Murray

Online Publications

The Supreme Court’s opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization gives states the maximum amount of freedom to restrict abortion. The decision is so sweeping that, under its logic, states could ban abortion even in cases of rape or incest; they may even be able — as the dissent notes — to prohibit abortions in circumstances in which a doctor believes the procedure is necessary to preserve the life or health of the pregnant person.

The Stubborn Persistence Of The Lawyer Exemption In Canadian Collective Bargaining Legislation, David J. Doorey

Dalhousie Law Journal

In 1948, the Canadian government introduced transformative collective bargaining legislation that would serve as a template for provincial labour law in the postwar period. However, some employees were excluded entirely from this legislation, including employees in five professions, law among them. By the 1970s, the federal government and most provinces had repealed the professional exclusion from the primary collective bargaining legislation. However, four jurisdictions—Ontario, Alberta, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island (Exclusionary Provinces)—have stubbornly preserved the exclusion. This essay traces the history and justifications proffered for the lawyer exclusion from Canadian collective bargaining legislation from the 1940s to present day. …

Think State Supreme Courts Will Save Abortion Rights? Think Again., Neal Devins

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Sex Offender Legislation Ex Post Facto: The History And Constitutionality Of Michigan's Sex Offenders Registration Act, Alexander W. Furtaw

Journal of Legislation

Is Michigan’s Sex Offenders Registration Act (“MSORA”) constitutional? Until 2016, courts routinely said yes. In 2016, the Sixth Circuit in Does #1–5 v. Snyder held that the statute was an unconstitutional ex post facto law. In 2021, the Michigan Supreme Court echoed the Sixth Circuit’s holding in People v. Betts. In response, the Michigan legislature passed Public Law 295 of 2020 to amend MSORA, and courts treat the amended act as a “new” statute. Critical analysis of the amended statute’s legality is difficult because the state legislature has seemingly ignored constitutional issues with statutory proposals until after the fact, and …

Supreme Court Legitimacy: A Turn To Constitutional Practice, Thomas G. Donnelly

BYU Law Review

Commentators offer the Justices consistent—if unsolicited—advice: tend to the Supreme Court’s institutional legitimacy. However, to say this—without saying more—is to say very little. Of course, constitutional theorists already wrestle with the meaning of legitimacy—its contours, its complexity, and its influence on the Justices. Political scientists debate the relationship between institutional concerns and judicial behavior. At the same time, previous scholars largely ignore issues of constitutional practice. This is a mistake. In this Article, I take up this neglected topic. To that end, I detail how the individual Justice might work to bolster the Court’s legitimacy in concrete cases. Part of …

The Supreme Court's Draft Abortion Decision Overturning Roe V. Wade: How Originalism's Rejection Of Family Formation Rights Undermines The Court's Legitimacy And Destabilizes A Functioning Federal Government, Kari Hong

Montana Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

An Exploration Of The Wide-Reaching Effects Of The Repeal Of Roe V. Wade On Women's Access To Abortion, Mitchell J. Foster

University Honors Theses

Since 1973, the federal government, through the Supreme Court of the United States, has acted to protect, the rights of women in their ability to choose to have an abortion without excessive governmental restriction. This thesis analyzes how and why access to abortion will shift in the face of the Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade (1973), likely to occur this June. This thesis begins with an in-depth description of how and why abortion became illegal, how and why abortion became legal, and how the opposition has developed against legal abortion. Through the last few decades, though especially in …

Life And Afterlife In The Steel Seizure Case, Matthew Steilen

Buffalo Law Review

This Essay examines the proper role of the Supreme Court in deciding disputes between Congress and the President. Progressive commentators are now urging the Court to dismiss these cases as political questions, at least where doing so would give effect to congressional regulations of the President. The Court’s interference is criticized as antidemocratic. This Essay advances a different conception of the Supreme Court’s role by examining the famous Steel Seizure Case. In that case, the Court upheld an injunction barring President Truman from seizing the nation’s steel mills, on grounds that doing so was inconsistent with congressional will and without …

The Committee Of Style And The Federalist Constitution, David S. Schwartz

Buffalo Law Review

The conventional interpretation of the Constitution assumes that the Committee of Style, which created the final draft of the Constitution, lacked authority to engage with substance; therefore, any arguably substantive changes it purportedly made should be disregarded in favor of earlier draft language found in the records of the Constitutional Convention. This “Style doctrine” has been embraced by the Supreme Court and several leading constitutional scholars. This Article argues that the Style doctrine is historically unfounded and obscures the Constitution’s original meaning. The Committee of Style was not prohibited from proposing substantive changes. In any case, most of the revisions …

Checking Our Attachment To The Charter And Respecting Indigenous Legal Orders: A Framework For Charter Application To Indigenous Governments, Naiomi Metallic

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom looms large in our national identity. As a constitutional law professor at a Canadian law school, my experience is that most students and lawyers see the Charter as intrinsically tied to fundamental notions of justice and fairness in our country. Because of this, Canadian lawyers and judges, who believe the Charter to be inherently good, may find it hard to understand why Indigenous peoples resist application of the Charter to their own institutions. But Canadian jurists’ attachment to the Charter, if not kept in check, can easily lead to dismissing important objections …

Competitor Standing To The Rescue: Saving The Emoluments Clause, Demitri Dawson

Legislation and Policy Brief

No abstract provided.

Smith's Last Stand? Free Exercise And Foster Care Exceptionalism, James G. Dwyer

Faculty Publications

Part I first situates Fulton [Fulton v. City of Philadelphia] within two broader contexts—the clash between social equality rights for sexual minorities and religious freedom, and a pattern of eliding children from legal contests over their lives. It then explains why the standard constitutional framing of social equality versus religious freedom contests is improper when the state is acting as guardian and proxy for children or other non-autonomous persons. Part II sets out a proper framework for analyzing these conflicts, elucidating the scope and nature of the state’s parens patriae authority—a lacuna in constitutional jurisprudence. Part III applies …

Behind The Screen: The Constitutionality Of Remote Testimony For Survivors Of Domestic Violence, Rachel Harris

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

“Before my hearing for my order of protection, I knew that he would try to contact me through other people, send me flowers, send presents to the kids, and all of those things will make me feel powerless when I have to go into court and see him face-to-face. I knew after all of that I would tell the judge that I changed my mind and that I am going to give him another chance. But being on the screen, I tell you, gave me a sense of empowerment. When the judge asked me if I wanted an order of …

Constitutional Law—Fourteenth Amendment And Fetal Personhood—Established Injustice: American Abortion Jurisprudence And The Irreducible, Geoffrey "Chip" Gross

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Renewing The Vagueness Challenge To Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude, Melissa London

Washington Law Review

Noncitizens who have been convicted of a “crime involving moral turpitude” (CIMT) under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) can be deported. However, the INA fails to provide a definition for “moral turpitude” or a list of crimes that necessarily involve “moral turpitude.” As a result, judges are given wide discretion to decide when a crime is morally reprehensible enough to render a noncitizen deportable. This moral determination in the CIMT analysis has led to disparate results among the lower courts, which deprives noncitizens of meaningful notice of what conduct could render them deportable. In 1951, the Supreme Court held …

History And Tradition Or Fantasy And Fiction: Which Version Of The Past Will The Supreme Court Choose In Nysrpa V. Bruen?, Saul Cornell

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Faq On The New York State Equality Amendment, Center For Gender And Sexuality Law

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

Adopted in 1938, the New York State Constitution’s equality protections fall far short of a modern notion of equality that would protect the rights of all New Yorkers. Legislation currently pending in the New York Legislature would update the state’s constitution by prohibiting forms of discrimination that are currently unrecognized by the law.

Political Partisanship And Sincere Religious Conviction, Mark Satta

BYU Law Review

In order for a religious conviction to receive protection under the First Amendment or the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), it must be a sincere religious conviction. Some critics of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby have suggested that the plaintiffs in that case and in related cases were motivated more by political ideology than by sincere religious conviction. The remedy, they argue, is for courts to be quicker to scrutinize claims of religious sincerity. In this Article, I consider another possibility—namely, that current sociopolitical partisanship in the United States has eroded a clear distinction between political …

Separated At Baptism: What The Mortara Case Can Teach Us About The Rejection Of Natural Justice By Integralists And Progressives, Francis J. Beckwith

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Unintentional Destruction: Torres V. Madrid, In Defining A Fourth Amendment Seizure Of The Person As A Common Law Arrest, Turned Terry V. Ohio Into Collateral Damage, George M. Dery Iii

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

This article analyzes Torres v. Madrid, in which the Supreme Court ruled an officer seized a person when he shot her, even though the suspect temporarily eluded capture after the shooting. This work examines the logical implications of Torres’s reasoning. Torres equated a Fourth Amendment seizure of the person with a common law arrest and defined an arrest to include an officer’s slightest touching of a person, even with only a finger. This article asserts that the force of Torres’s logic has elevated the Terry stop and frisk to a full arrest because Terry’s intrusion involves official touching and control …

Slaying The Serpents: Why Alternative Intervention Is Necessary To Protect Those In Mental Health Crisis From The State-Created Danger “Snake Pit”, Kathleen Giunta

Journal of Law and Policy

The Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 and ongoing reports of police brutality around the United States sparked extensive debate over qualified immunity and the legal protections that prevent police accountability. Individuals experiencing mental health crises are especially vulnerable to police violence, since police officers lack the requisite skills and knowledge to provide effective crisis support during mental health emergencies. Although the state-created danger doctrine was created by the courts as an exception to qualified immunity, it is so rarely applied that individuals harmed or even killed by police are left without legal remedy. This Note explores qualified immunity and …

Praying For America: The Anti-Theocracy And Equal Status Principles Of The Free Exercise, Equal Protection And Establishment Clauses, Corey Brettschneider

BYU Law Review

In this essay I argue that the Constitution’s Equal Protection, Establishment, and Free Exercise Clauses share common principled limits on the role that religion can play in public life. Specifically, drawing on the free-exercise case of Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, the equal protection case of Romer v. Evans, and the establishment clause case of Town of Greece v. Galloway, I propose two principles to describe the proper place of religious justification as a basis for law. The first requirement is that in addition to any religious reasons for laws, the state must have …

We Clerked For Justices Scalia And Stevens. America Is Getting Heller Wrong., Katherine A. Shaw, John Bash

Online Publications

In the summer of 2008, the Supreme Court decided District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the court held for the first time that the Second Amendment protected an individual right to gun ownership. We were law clerks to Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the majority opinion, and Justice John Paul Stevens, who wrote the lead dissent.

The Dark Side Of Due Process: Part I, A Hard Look At Penumbral Rights And Cost/Benefit Balancing Tests, Joshua J. Schroeder

St. Mary's Law Journal

Due process is the fountainhead of legitimate government coercion. When an individual’s rights of life, liberty, or property are at stake, the government is meant to apply due process of the law or suffer reversal of its intrusions as a plain trespass. However, such reversals are merely theoretical, premised upon the willingness of federal judges to interpose their power for the protection of ordinary individuals.

The willingness of federal jurists to check the other branches of government for individual rights is transient at best. They do not usually check the global, dragnet United States surveillance programs that clearly violate the …

Revisiting The History Of The Independent State Legislature Doctrine, Hayward H. Smith

St. Mary's Law Journal

In hopes of legitimizing the independent state legislature doctrine, its proponents have recently made two claims with respect to history, which this Article refers to as the Substance/Procedure Thesis and the Prevailing View Thesis. The former admits that the original understanding was that state “legislatures” promulgating election law pursuant to the Elector Appointment and Elections Clauses are required to comply with state constitutionally-mandated “procedural” lawmaking requirements (such as a potential gubernatorial veto), but asserts that they were otherwise understood to be independent of “substantive” state constitutional restraints. The latter asserts that the independent state legislature doctrine was the “prevailing view” …

Three Observations About Justice Alito's Draft Opinion In Dobbs - Commentary, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "There is much to say about Justice Samuel Alito's draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which was leaked from the United States Supreme Court on May 2 [2022].

Obviously, the most significant direct consequence of the proposed decision, which overrules Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) while upholding the constitutionality of a Mississippi law that outlaws most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, would be the restriction or elimination of abortion services throughout much of the nation. This will have all sorts of attendant consequences, large and smaller, many of which …

Universalizing Fraud, Parmida Enkeshafi

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The criminal trial of Elizabeth Holmes has reanimated public interest in fraud. Holmes, once a Silicon Valley prodigy, was charged with two counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and eleven counts of wire fraud. A jury found Holmes guilty on four counts, potentially subjecting her to 80 years in prison. This Note uses the example of Elizabeth Holmes's case to examine more broadly the role of morality in fraud and argues for a new framework by which to articulate and prosecute fraud.

Criminal jurisprudence has struggled to construct a satisfactory definition of "white-collar crime" since sociologist Edwin H. Sutherland …

The Case For A Liberal Communitarian Jurisprudence, Amitai Etzioni

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This article seeks to show that courts face difficulties without a principled, constitutional anchoring for the conception of the common good. Courts could divine the common good from the penumbra of the Fourth Amendment in the same way the Supreme Court created a right to privacy. In addition to creating a “common good” constitutional principle, the judicial branch should establish criteria to determine when this principle should take precedence over individual rights expressly preserved in the Constitution.

In Defense Of Self And Home: The Problems With Limiting Second Amendment Rights For Young Adults Based On Their Age, Andrew White

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Tipping Point In Ohio: The Primacy Model As A Path To A Consistent Application Of Judicial Federalism, The Honorable Pierre Bergeron

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.