Digital Commons Network^™

A Fundamental Failing: The Mississippi Judiciary's Abrogation Of Its Constitutional Duty, Brad Robertson

MC Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Legally Magic" Words: An Empirical Study Of The Accessibility Of Fifth Amendment Rights, Roseanna Sommers, Kate Weisburd

Northwestern University Law Review

Fifth Amendment case law (including Miranda v. Arizona) requires that individuals assert their right to counsel or silence using “explicit,” “clear,” and “unambiguous” statements—or, as some dissenting judges have lamented, using “legally magic” words. Through a survey of 1,718 members of the U.S. public, we investigate what ordinary people believe it takes to assert the right to counsel and the right to silence. We then compare their perceptions against prevailing legal standards governing invocation.

With respect to the right to counsel, the survey results indicate that members of the public have a uniformly lower threshold for invocation than do …

Criminal Juror Challenges And Csli: A Rule 16 Revision To Maintain Impartial Juries, Ivy Kaplan

Northwestern University Law Review

The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees criminal defendants “the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the State.” Voir dire, the procedure during which the prosecution and the defense may challenge prospective jurors for cause or exercise peremptory challenges, purports to uphold this right. When the prosecution has access to cellular geolocation data on prospective jurors that the defense lacks, however, it may jeopardize the defendant’s Sixth Amendment rights.

This Note proposes a solution to that problem in the form of an addition to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. …

Rising Temperatures, The Prison Litigation Reform Act, And The Heat Death Of Human Dignity In Texas Prisons, Brianne Wylie

Northwestern University Law Review

This Note seeks to shed light on the life-threatening danger of extreme heat in un-air-conditioned Texas prisons. The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) starkly limits the relief available to those suffering and dying in these prisons. This Note proposes an amendment to the legislation that could create a path toward lasting relief for incarcerated people. After analyzing the effects of increasing heat on the particularly vulnerable prison population, this Note analyzes how the Supreme Court and the Fifth Circuit have handled claims alleging constitutionally violative prison conditions under the Eighth Amendment—in short, ineffectively, if at all. This Note then details …

The Seventh Amendment Right To Jury Trial In The Administrative State: Recognizing The Dangers Of The Constitutional Moment, Martin H. Redish, Samy Abdelsalam

Notre Dame Law Review

One prominent constitutional scholar has sought to legitimize this constitutional transformation through resort to a strange and controversial analytical model he describes as the “constitutional moment.” In this Article, we plan to establish two important points: (1) there exists no principled mode of analysis of the Seventh Amendment right to jury trial that justifies the Court’s categorical dichotomy between Article III and non–Article III forums for purposes of the right’s applicability, and (2) while the theory of the “constitutional moment” would in fact justify the Court’s insulation of the administrative state from Seventh Amendment applicability, reliance on such a theory …

Non–Article Iii Federal Tribunals: An Essay On The Relation Between Theory And Practice, Richard H. Fallon Jr.

Notre Dame Law Review

Since the 1980s, the Supreme Court’s decisions involving the permissible uses of non–Article III federal tribunals have repeatedly invoked two competing theories. A “historical-exceptions” or “formalist” model would insist that only Article III judges can exercise federal adjudicative power except in three categories of cases that history marks as exceptional. A rival approach, often labeled “functionalism,” would allow further deviations from the historical norm if they are supported by sound practical justifications and do not threaten the fundamental role of the Article III judiciary within the separation of powers. This Article explores the relationship between theory and practice in explaining …

Subjective Deliberate Indifference: The Correct Standard For Pre-Trial Detainees' Fourteenth Amendment Claims For Inadequate Medical Care, Douglas Weeks

Pace Law Review

This article examines the legal standard of “subjective deliberate indifference” as it pertains to the Fourteenth Amendment claims of pre-trial detainees facing inadequate medical care. With the Supreme Court’s evolving interpretation of constitutional protections for incarcerated individuals, this piece argues that subjective deliberate indifference offers a more appropriate framework for evaluating the state’s duty to provide adequate medical treatment. By analyzing relevant case law, including the significant distinctions between pre-trial detainees and convicted prisoners, the article highlights the necessity of considering the mental state of correctional officials in medical negligence claims. Furthermore, it explores the implications of this standard on …

The Appeal Of The Apex Court In Botswana: The Case Of Carter Morupisi V. State, Muna B. Ndulo, Louis Koen, Samantha Smit

SAIPAR Case Review

This case note discusses the Botswana Court of Appeal's ruling in Carter Morupisi v State, which addressed the High Court's unprecedented attempt to review a decision of the Court of Appeal. The commentary highlights the fundamental principle of judicial hierarchy and the separation of powers in Botswana's constitutional framework. The Court of Appeal emphatically rejected the High Court's jurisdiction to review its judgments, reaffirming its position as the final arbiter (highest judicial authority). The authors emphasise that while the High Court may raise constitutional questions with regards to Apex courts decisions, it cannot adjudicate on them, reinforcing the concept of …

Reimagining Judicial Review Of Student Requests For Remote Instruction As An Ada Accommodation In Higher Education, Hannah E. Auten

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Correcting 50 Years Of Confusion On The Lmra Preempting Or Precluding Rico: A Missed Opportunity, Connor Bernard

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

We Have Lost Our Minds: Bioethics After Dobbs, Teneille R. Brown

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

This article examines the paradoxical treatment of autonomy in American healthcare law. While autonomy has become the dominant principle in medical ethics and neoliberal market philosophies, pregnant people have been systematically denied this same autonomy through increasingly restrictive abortion statutes. Using the rhetoric of “informed consent,” abortion-restrictive statutes ironically pervert the animating principles behind the doctrine—rendering it almost meaningless.  I argue that this contradiction stems from the dehumanization of pregnant people who seek abortions, particularly through the denial of their capacity to have individual, complex mental states and feelings. Drawing on moral psychology, the article demonstrates how pregnant people are …

Reconstructing Citizenship, Jenny E. Carroll, James Jeter

Faculty Scholarship

In our republican democracy, voting is a central right of citizenship. Yet millions of voters are routinely disenfranchised as a result of convictions or because their carceral status creates barriers to voting. In the past decade, academic scholarship has focused on the impact of disenfranchisement based on conviction. This work has mapped the legal and social implications of policies that deny voting rights to over five million otherwise eligible voters nationwide. Yet this work has some gaps. First, by focusing solely on conviction-based disenfranchisement, the existing scholarship has largely ignored fatal barriers to voting created (and at times perpetuated) by …

Adjudication Of Presidential Term Limits In Zambia: A Comment On Michelo Chizombe V. Edgar Chagwa Lungu And Others 2023/Ccz/0021, O'Brien Kaaba

SAIPAR Case Review

This piece examines the Zambian Constitutional Court's decision on former President Edgar Lungu's eligibility to contest future presidential elections. The Court ruled Lungu ineligible, based on the application of Article 35 of the Constitution of Zambia, which was in force during his first term. The authors highlight the national significance of this case, particularly its impact on the 2026 presidential elections and its potential to reshape opposition politics. The commentary further explores the power of an apex court to depart from its own precedents, affirming the Constitutional Court's inherent jurisdiction to do so under exceptional circumstances, aligning with practices in …

Innocence Lost: The Dangers Of Life Imprisonment For Children At Whose Pleasure: D.B. (A Juvenile) V. The People [2024] Zmca 339 (18 December 2024), Samantha Smit, Louis Koen

SAIPAR Case Review

This piece examines the Zambian Court of Appeal's decision to overturn a life imprisonment sentence imposed on juvenile offenders, replacing it with detention ‘at the President's pleasure.’ The commentary explores the legal implications of this discretionary sentence, drawing parallels with similar controversies in other African jurisdictions, particularly Kenya, where such sentences have been criticized for undermining constitutional rights and the doctrine of separation of powers. The authors argue that ‘detention at the President's pleasure’ can effectively amount to an indefinite sentence, raising concerns about the uncertainty of imprisonment duration for child offenders. They suggest that the Zambian court missed an …

Genealogy In Constitutional Law, Charles W. Tyler

Vanderbilt Law Review

Genealogy is a form of argument that seeks to discredit social phenomena by exposing their pernicious ancestry. In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has used genealogy to undermine key provisions of written law, doctrinal rules, longstanding practices, and private conduct in cases involving a wide range of constitutional issues.

After comprehensively documenting this development, this Article contends that genealogy can advance conclusions within several widely recognized modalities of constitutional interpretation. More specifically, genealogy can be used to undermine assertions of authority implicit in arguments from precedent, tradition, and ethos. And it can be used to reveal its object’s function …

Second Amendment: Incompatible Methodologies And The Bruen And Heller Opinions' Underlying Misalignment, Henry H. Robinson

Touro Law Review

In its 2022 Bruen opinion, the Supreme Court characterized the Heller opinion as having applied a “methodological approach” for interpretation of the Second Amendment. However, Bruen’s description and summary partially omitted, and was materially misaligned with, Heller’s actual reasoning. In Heller’s first step of constitutional interpretation, which addressed the first clause of the sentence comprising the Second Amendment, the opinion had selectively not applied the methodological approach described in Bruen; Heller’s first step had applied a different, incompatible methodological approach. Bruen’s description was aligned only with the second step of Heller’s constitutional reasoning, which had addressed the sentence’s second clause. …

Livin' On A Legislative Prayer: How Prayer At A School Board Meeting Survives Under An Exception To The Establishment Clause, Brian Muff

Touro Law Review

This Note discusses the circuit split between the Ninth Circuit and the Fifth Circuit on whether prayer should be permitted to open up a school board meeting. First introducing the topic and explaining the history of legislative prayer in America, the Note then discusses governing Supreme Court precedent concerning school prayer and legislative prayer. After analyzing the cases that are the subject of the circuit split, the Note concludes with a recommendation that the Supreme Court permit the recitation of prayer to begin a school board meeting, citing the commonalities between a school board and a legislature and making three …

The Punishment Of Cruel And Unusual Conditions: Extending The Purely Objective Standard Adopted In Kingsley V. Hendrickson To Claims Of Deliberate Indifference, Samantha M. Davis

Touro Law Review

In 2015, the Supreme Court in Kingsley v. Hendrickson held that a pretrial detainee claiming excessive force on the part of the state must only show that the force used was objectively unreasonable. Prior to the adoption of the purely objective standard, many courts around the country were analyzing such cases through a subjective standard to determine whether the officers subjectively knew that the force used against a pretrial detainee was unreasonable. The absence of this objective standard essentially allowed state officials to use excessive force against pretrial detainees without violating an individual’s Constitutional rights. The Supreme Court reasoned that …

Takings, Original Meaning, And Applying Property Law Principles To Fix Penn Central, John M. Groen

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Republic Of Spending, Jonathan S. Gould

Michigan Law Review

Large-scale spending measures make up many of Congress’s most important recent contributions to national policymaking. Congress has appropriated trillions of dollars to respond to emergencies, fight climate change, expand social safety net programs, spur technological innovation, and strengthen national infrastructure. While the contemporary Congress’s failure to enact landmark regulatory statutes causes many to characterize it as dysfunctional, Congress in fact remains quite active—its policymaking energy is simply concentrated in the spending domain.

Congress’s use of spending rather than regulatory legislation as its primary way of shaping national policy marks a significant shift in American governance. This Article examines the causes …

Constitutional Federalism And The Nature Of The Union, Anthony J. Bellia Jr., Bradford R. Clark

William & Mary Law Review

Federalism is an essential feature of the Constitution’s design and structure, but the Constitution does not spell out every respective authority of the federal government and the States in precise detail. This omission has led some observers to embrace broad—if not unlimited—federal power and reject certain longstanding federalism doctrines—such as state sovereign immunity, the anti-commandeering doctrine, and the equal sovereignty of the States. The objection to such doctrines is that the Constitution does not affirmatively grant States these sovereign rights and powers. This charge overlooks long-forgotten background context essential to faithful interpretation of the Constitution. The former British Colonies in …

The Power Of All: Tort In The Age Of Constitution, Cristina Carmody Tilley

Faculty Publications

Life in a multicultural nation can be fraught. The United States is a case in point, with hostile tension between members of competing identity groups playing out today on streets, in offices, and across the media. Modern Americans assume that bridging race, gender, and class inequity is the stuff of public—constitutional—law. This assumption follows the lead of modern American lawyers, who migrated to this body of law just as historians, sociologists, and economists began to insist that the private law of tort was exclusively concerned with the accidental physical harms inevitable in a modern economy. According to this econostory, tort …

Transcript: Structural Racism, The Healthcare System And Health Justice, Ruquaiijah Yearby

Journal of Law and Health

The following is a transcript from Racial Disparities and Outcomes presented at Cleveland State University College of Law by the Journal of Law and Health on Friday, February 9, 2024. This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity and to reflect updates in the relevant law since the time of transcription.

A Take On "Special Solicitude" In State Standing: Reconciling The Unreconcilable, Audrey M. Woodward

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Major Question: Who Wants A Functioning Government?, Christian Thompson

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lawyers, Guns, And Marijuana: How N.Y. State Rifle And Pistol Ass'n V. Bruen Is Shaping Federal Marijuana Law, Mia Cordle

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confronting The War On International Law In The United States, Rebecca Ingber

Online Publications

Harold Hongju Koh’s The National Security Constitution in the 21st Century is a code red threat assessment of the state of public law in America today. True to Koh’s nature, he does not leave us without hope; rather he devotes a sizeable portion of the book to calls for reform, from the legal frameworks governing war powers and intelligence to the division of labor in the national security legal bureaucracy plodding away within the deepest (secure) chambers of the executive branch itself.

In Re Misty Lee H.: Application Of The Best Interests Standard In Parental Rights Terminations, William L. Dawson Jr.

Maine Law Review

The family unit is perhaps America's most deeply rooted social institution. The integrity of the family unit has been repeatedly recognized by the United States Supreme Court as warranting constitutional protection. As a means of protecting family autonomy, natural parents possess a fourteenth amendment liberty interest in the care and custody of their children. The parental liberty interest encompasses a wide range of rights. Although substantial, these parental rights are not absolute. By virtue of the parens patriae power, the state may interfere with parental rights in order to preserve and promote the welfare of the child. The most extreme …

A Defendant's Right To Counsel In Commitment Hearings For Nonpayment Of A Criminal Fine, Barbara A. Appleby

Maine Law Review

The federal constitutional right of an indigent defendant to appointed counsel in state court proceedings derives from two constitutional provisions. First, the sixth amendment, as incorporated by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment, provides the basis for an absolute right to counsel in criminal prosecutions leading to actual imprisonment. Second, the due process clause, as an independent source of individual rights, provides the basis for the right to counsel in civil proceedings. Both the sixth amendment and the due process rights may be implicated in a hearing for non-payment of a criminal fine. Title 17-A, section 1304 of …

Separation Of Powers Restrictions On Judicial Rulemaking: A Case Study Of Federal Rule 4, Ralph U. Whitten

Maine Law Review

Debates over the validity of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have historically centered on the "substantive rights" restriction of the Rules Enabling Act of 1934. While Supreme Court decisions from Sibbach v. Wilson & Co. through Hanna v. Plumer and beyond have arguably deprived the restriction of any practical force, scholars have consistently favored a more rigorous interpretation of the directive that federal rules not "abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive rights." Despite the historic impotence of the substantive rights restriction, discussions of the validity of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure continue, even today, to center on the substantive …