Digital Commons Network^™

The Problematic Nature Of Punishment For Secret Taping, Carol M. Bast

University of San Francisco Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Is The Standard Of Review For (Mixed) Constitutional Questions?, Anthony R. Sangiuliano, Mark Friedman

All Papers

According to the framework for selecting the standard of review in civil appeals developed in Housen v Nikolaisen, questions of mixed fact and law are reviewed on a standard of palpable and overriding error. This framework applies to allegations that a statute is constitutionally invalid. However, in Société des casinos du Québec inc v Association des cadres de la Société des casinos du Québec, the Supreme Court held that when a statute is challenged as unconstitutional before an administrative tribunal, questions of mixed fact and law are subject to a correctness standard on judicial review as an exception to the …

Restoring Unanimity To The Alabama Death Penalty, Daniel Butler Friedman

Articles & Chapters

In Alabama, one of the jurisdictions most responsible for executions in the United States, the death penalty statute contains a very unusual provision: juries can sentence defendants to death even if they are not unanimous. This is a surprising fact to many people, including lawyers, who largely believe that the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated non-unanimous juries in 2020. That provision is enormously important to the capital punishment regime in Alabama, where 80% of people on death row were sentenced non-unanimously. The law's history, however, is poorly understood. This article lays out that history, showing it to be part of the …

The Abuses Of History In Constitutional Interpretation, Sherif Girgis

Journal Articles

From the Article

Jack Balkin’s Memory and Authority powerfully describes the kaleidoscopic quality of historical arguments in constitutional law. The book also moves easily between description and prescription. This Essay explores whether it moves too easily from one to the other. I consider whether the book’s analysis is so keen to capture our actual practices that it leaves itself too few resources for evaluating them—whether its account of history’s uses, made expansive by a zeal to fit how lawyers actually reason, crowds out any robust account of how they ought not to reason. While I am inclined to think so, …

An Analysis Of The Constitutionality Of Florida's 2024 Hb 3: “Online Protections For Minors,” Comparative To Other State Regulations Of The Internet, Evan J. Siegel

Honors Undergraduate Theses

This thesis examines the constitutionality of the Florida House of Representatives’ 2024 priority bill, HB 3: “Online Protections for Minors,” through its ongoing litigation in North Florida. The broad nature of the bill, which is now Florida law, and its burden on accessing constitutionality protected speech and/or expression may not be consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. How the law defines and shapes what material may be accessible to people on the Internet, or the means they would need to use to create a social media account, are questions many other courts have begun …

The Reality Of The Good Faith Exception, Michael Gentithes, Matthew Tokson

Akron Law Faculty Publications

This Article has reexamined the law and theory of the good faith exception. It fnds that the exception, originally confned to narrow circumstances, is turning into a protection for nearly any investigatory activity with an arguable connection to an existing precedent or statute. Our study is the frst to empirically demonstrate the exception’s substantial infuence on modern Fourth Amendment law. Courts rely on the exception with remarkable frequency, and a large proportion of courts invoking the exception avoid any substantive constitutional ruling, stunting the development of Fourth Amendment doctrine. Further, our close theoretical examination of the good faith exception reveals …

Book Review: We're All Traditionalists Now (Most Of The Time), Richard H. Fallon, Jr., The Changing Constitution: Constitutional Law In The Trump-Era Supreme Court, Michael Gentithes

Akron Law Faculty Publications

This review highlights the scope and importance of Richard Fallon’s book, The Changing Constitution: Constitutional Law in the Trump-Era Supreme Court. Fallon, a giant of constitutional work, provides a comprehensive, accessible, and vitally important catalogue of the Court’s methodological changes in his posthumously published book. The book argues that while textualism and originalism “have achieved unparalleled prominence,” the Court is also “not consistently originalist” and often relies on a version of traditionalism, similar to but importantly distinct from originalism, that marks an important and undertheorized change. And in yet other areas, the Court eschews either originalism or traditionalism for …

Understanding Brady Violations, Jennifer Mason Mcaward

Journal Articles

This largest-ever study of adjudicated violations of Brady v. Maryland provides a detailed and nuanced understanding of who suppresses material evidence in criminal cases, as well as why, how, where, and how often. Its findings complicate the conventional wisdom that Brady violations are the work of nefarious prosecutors who intentionally withhold material evidence from criminal defendants. While it is true that “bad faith” permeates this area of constitutional noncompliance, a substantial minority of Brady cases stem from “good faith” errors by prosecutors and suppression by law enforcement officers. Most Brady violations occur in a small number of states, and most …

Gerard V. Bradley And The American Law Of Church And State, Richard W. Garnett

Journal Articles

This paper provides an overview and appreciation of Prof. Gerard V. Bradley’s scholarly contributions to the American constitutional law of church and state. The Supreme Court of the United States has, in recent years, handed down a number of closely watched and much-remarked-on rulings in cases involving the First Amendment’s Religion Clause and various religion-related statutes. The Court has moved the law of religious freedom and church–state relations toward coherence and clarity, and better aligned it with American history, tradition, and practice, and with an appropriate understanding of judges’ capacities and of the judicial role in a democracy. It appears …

Brief For Tax Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners In Learning Resources (No. 24-1287) And Respondents In V.O.S. Selection (No. 25-250), Conor Clarke, Jon Endean, Ari Glogower, Daniel J. Hemel

Scholarship@WashULaw

The Constitution gives Congress, and not the President, the authority to “lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises.” The Constitution also mandates that revenue measures begin in the House of Representatives, requires that such measures be geographically uniform, and prohibits the states from imposing import duties without congressional consent. Read together with Article I’s vesting of “all legislative Powers” in Congress and the familiar requirements of bicameralism and presentment, these provisions reflect a recurring constitutional commitment: Tariffs are national and legislative—and thus to be determined by a representative Congress.

History bolsters these textual commitments. State conflict over import duties …

The Original Function Of Tax Apportionment, Conor Clarke, Peter J. Wiedenbeck

Scholarship@WashULaw

The Constitution’s requirement that direct taxes be apportioned by state population is both confounding and important. At best, tax apportionment is regarded as reflecting the unique federalism concerns of the Founding; at worst, it is viewed as a tainted product of the constitutional compromise over slavery. And, in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Moore v. United States (2024)—which refused to rule out that apportionment might be required for taxes on unrealized gains—tax apportionment is the subject of renewed legal and scholarly interest.

We consider one historical dimension of tax apportionment that has not been developed elsewhere: its original …

Disagreement And Historical Argument Or How Not To Think About Removal, Andrea Scoseria Katz, Noah A. Rosenblum, Jane Manners

Scholarship@WashULaw

Scholars have debated the reach of the President’s power to remove government officers for over one hundred years. This old fight is now suddenly urgent as President Trump asserts far-reaching powers to control the federal bureaucracy and the Supreme Court transforms Unitary Executive Theory into caselaw. Yet the scholarly case for an indefeasible presidential removal power has never been weaker.

This Essay continues an ongoing conversation about how to read some critical early republic evidence about removal. It briefly recapitulates the stakes of the disagreement before offering in-depth analyses of developments in Pennsylvania removal practice, including a reading of the …

The Curiously Minor Role Of Minor V. Happersett (Foreword), Susan Frelich Appleton, Travis Crum, Hannah Keidan

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Foreword introduces a symposium marking the 150th anniversary of Minor v. Happersett, a Supreme Court decision unanimously holding that the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause did not enfranchise women. Notwithstanding its impact on the women's suffrage movement and the subsequent ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment, Minor presents a puzzle: it is a relatively obscure precedent that remains deeply relevant to contemporary legal debates. To elucidate this point, this Foreword juxtaposes Minor with two notorious Supreme Court decisions: Dred Scott and Dobbs.

Like Dred Scott, Minor pairs a morally repugnant result with legalistic reasoning. But whereas …

Video Analytics And Fourth Amendment Vision, Andrew Guthrie Ferguson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

What does the Fourth Amendment have to say about video analytics running on citywide camera systems? Video analytics (also known as computer vision) involves hardware and software in cameras that turns video surveillance streams into useful data, identifying, categorizing, matching, and alerting police about objects, people, and incidents. Video analytics can identify objects (e.g., hat, backpack, person, car) and track that person or thing back in time and through the streets using video surveillance footage. For police officers conducting virtual patrols or retrospective investigations, video analytics lets police scan thousands of linked cameras for suspicious behavior or a particular suspect, …

You Had One Job: The Supreme Court's New Chance To Fix The Constitutional Law Of Sentencing Factfinding, Benjamin J. Priester

Faculty Articles

Four decades after the enactment of the federal Sentencing Reform Act, one might expect a settled consensus to have emerged addressing the constitutional constraints on implementing norms such as predictability, consistency, and uniformity in the imposition of criminal punishment in the United States. In reality, the United States Supreme Court has failed to provide stability or clarity in the doctrinal principles implicated in millions of criminal cases nationwide. Spanning a quarter century, the Apprendi v. New Jersey line of cases has featured narrow or fragmented majorities, significant concurring opinions, and multiple instances of individual justices either overtly admitting to changing …

How Does The Modern Supreme Court Treat The Idea Of Retribution In The Context Of Capital Punishment?, Paige Forsberg

Honors Undergraduate Theses

This thesis explores the modern U.S. Supreme Court's treatment of retribution in the context of capital punishment, analyzing how justices have framed and justified the death penalty as a form of justice. Through the examination of key Supreme Court rulings and legal arguments, this study evaluates the evolving role of retribution in the Court’s decisions on death penalty cases, highlighting how judicial reasoning has shifted over time in response to legal, philosophical, and societal developments.

Retribution, long considered one of the primary justifications for capital punishment, is examined through a nuanced lens in this study. While historically viewed as a …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Professor Corinna Barrett Lain In Support Of Neither Party, Corinna Lain

Law Faculty Publications

“I don’t think it’s a secret that we inherited one of the worst, most incompetent and most ill-funded Department of Corrections in the country. . . [a]nd I don’t think it takes a leap to suggest that we should understand whether they are capable of carrying out the death penalty before we do it.” That is how Attorney General Kris Mayes described Arizona’s Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation & Reentry (“ADCRR”) less than two years ago. Ryan Thornell, director of the ADCRR, agreed, attesting in a declaration in 2023 that the ADCRR lacked “the necessary institutional knowledge and expertise to conduct …

The Comstock Act’S Equal Protection Problem, Danny Y. Li

Michigan Law Review Online

Following its victory in Dobbs, the antiabortion movement has set its sights on a national abortion ban. Affiliates of the second Trump Admin- istration—including the vice president-elect—have endorsed the re- newed enforcement of the 1873 Comstock Act as one avenue for implementing such a ban. This Essay argues that contemporary enforce- ment of the Comstock Act as a national abortion ban would be unconsti- tutional. The Act violates the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection guarantee because it was enacted with the discriminatory purpose of in- hibiting illicit sex to promote women’s sexual purity. Only contemporary reenactment of the law without constitutionally …

How The Antidiscrimination Law Of Commercial Transactions Really Works, Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

From Gods To Google, Rebecca Aviel, Margot Kaminski, Toni M. Massaro, Andrew Keane Woods

Publications

The First Amendment has become a significant barrier to sensible technology regulation. The conventional explanation for this is the Court's deregulatory turn in free-speech law. But the Lochnerization story is incomplete. The Court's profound solicitude for religious speakers plays a central role in the current digital-free-expression landscape. By protecting the speech of certain religious dissidents, the Court has created a set of constitutional entitlements that logically extend to technology firms. Along the way, the Court has eroded its ability to apply the First Amendment sensibly to novel technologies.

This Feature draws the doctrinal through line from gods to Google. We …

What Did Gitlow Do?, James Y. Stern

Faculty Publications

Gitlow is generally regarded as the first modern incorporation case, the genesis of both federal free speech curbs on state action and the larger project of making the same limitations that the federal Constitution imposes on the federal government applicable to the states. In both respects, moreover, it can also be seen as an important milestone in the larger twentieth century transformation of federal court practice and constitutional understanding centered on the assertion of individual rights. That linkage is no accident. For all the talk about federalism and state sovereignty in the U.S. Reports, the modern jurisprudence of constitutional rights …

History's Identity Crisis, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

Lower court judges across the country are struggling to manage the Supreme Court’s new “history and tradition” test that applies to Second Amendment challenges. This Article articulates one fundamental reason for the struggle: nobody is quite sure what a judge is actually doing when she evaluates claims about what happened in the past. Is it traditional legal reasoning— weighing evidence and looking for patterns? Is it fact-finding of the sort we think expert historians should testify about—conveying to a trial judge the best evidence we have about the purpose of colonial gun laws? Or is it a different sort of …

After Courts: Democratizing Statutory Law, Ryan D. Doerfler, Samuel Moyn

Michigan Law Review

In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton argued for locating interpretive authority over law separately from those institutions tasked with formulating it. Hamilton’s vision, never accurate as a description of American practice, has not been credible for a long time. To the extent enormous power is still allocated to judges, our legal institutions have been out of step with our legal theory, which has long regarded them as political actors and policymakers. More practically, every term it is clearer and clearer that the role of the Supreme Court in statutory cases (including checking administrative rulemaking and other processes) is, if anything, …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Voting Matters: Materiality Considerations And The Shareholder Vote, Renee M. Jones

Seattle University Law Review

For the shareholder franchise to have meaning, shareholders must have access to relevant information to inform their voting decisions. The securities laws’ disclosure requirements play an essential role in informing the shareholder vote.

This Essay focuses on the question of the materiality of information in the context of shareholder voting. It addresses the question of whether ESG-related information is material, positioning the materiality inquiry within the context of shareholders’ voting decisions. It explores the definition of materiality with a focus on the “reasonable investor” concept embedded within the definition. The Essay argues that the implicit expectations of many commentators that …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Understanding The Big Three’S Wavering Support Of Environmental And Social Shareholder Proposals, Jeff Schwartz, Jefferson Jensen

Seattle University Law Review

Because of their substantial equity portfolios, BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street (the Big 3) are central players in corporate governance. It is, therefore, critical to understand how they vote. One puzzle is that their support for shareholder proposals on environmental and social matters appears to waiver. In 2020, for instance, BlackRock supported 11.1% of environmental proposals at S&P 500 firms. In 2021, it seemingly reversed course, supporting 55.2%. It then flipped again, supporting 32.1% in 2022. Such statistics suggest that the Big 3 are constantly changing their views on these topics. This Article seeks to better understand whether this is …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

The Regulation Of Presidential Elections, Lori A. Ringhand

Scholarly Works

There is an unresolved dispute lingering just beneath the surface of a host of laws regulating our elections: does Congress have power under Articles I and II of the Constitution to legislate the nuts-and-bolts rules governing presidential elections? The issue exists because of a textual gap in congressional authority. Article 1 section 4 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to override a state's choices about the "times, places, and manner" of congressional elections held in the state. Article II section 1 gives the legislature of each state power to determine the “manner” in which its presidential electors are appointed, …

Resisting Federal Preemption, Desiree Leclercq

Scholarly Works

One of the most pressing issues in constitutional law is how states may—and should—resist federal preempting laws and policies with which they disagree. It’s a problem faced by red and blue states alike in an age of extreme political polarization. Despite having legitimate reasons to resist the federal government on matters that affect local citizens and interests, states seem to have few options. Conventional wisdom is that they engage in either direct resistance through litigation that challenges the constitutionality of preempting laws, or evasion by quietly enacting arguably non-compliant laws hoping to avoid enforcement. Both strategies adopt a belligerent stance …