Digital Commons Network^™

Removing The Presumption Of Innocence: A Constitutional Analysis Of The Ogden Trece Gang Injunction, Megan K. Baker

Utah OnLaw: The Utah Law Review Online Supplement

Gang activity poses a substantial problem in many communities. The city of Ogden, Utah, is home to many gangs, and law enforcement is constantly looking for a way to decrease gang violence. In an attempt to reduce gang violence in Ogden, Judge Ernie Jones issued the Ogden Trece gang injunction on September 27, 2010, in Weber County, Utah. The injunction, based on several similar injunctions in California, affects hundreds of alleged Ogden Trece gang members and spans an area including virtually the entire city of Ogden. The injunction prohibits those enjoined from engaging in various illegal activities as well as …

Regression To The Mean: How Miranda Has Become A Tragicomical Farce, Alfredo Garcia

St. Thomas Law Review

In my original article, I examined Miranda's historical and social background, discussed its precursors, traced the evolution of the case, and documented the dismantling of the Miranda doctrine. I also argued that the doctrine's "seductive appeal" lulled defense counsel into a false sense of security, thereby deflecting reliance on the "voluntariness" standard as a failsafe to Miranda. Further, I maintained that a waiver of Miranda in some instances served to sanitize an otherwise involuntary confession. Finally, I proposed to "do away" with Miranda, to return to the voluntariness standard with one caveat: that the government be precluded from relying on …

The Procedural Due Process Rights Of The Stigmatized Prisoner, Lindsey Webb

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

This Article addresses the role of stigma in procedural due process claims brought by prisoners. In particular, the Article focuses on inmates whom prisons have classified as sexual offenders although they have never been convicted of a sex offense. Prisons label these inmates—identified here as the “branded class”—as sexual offenders based on information outside of the inmates’ conviction histories, including charges that ended in dismissal or acquittal. As a result of the sex offender classification, prisons impose upon the branded class a wide range of sex offender-specific conditions, including mandatory treatment and sex offender registration.

In addressing procedural due process …

Clever Contraband: Why Illinois’ Lockstep With The U.S. Supreme Court Gives Police Authority To Search The Bowels Of Your Vehicle, 47 J. Marshall L. Rev. 425 (2013), Jason Cooper

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Back To The Bad Old Days: President Putin's Hold On Free Speech In The Russian Federation, Rebecca Favret

Richmond Journal of Global Law & Business

No abstract provided.

Straightforward On Its Face But Mindbending In Its Application: Juror Concurrence In Criminal Trials, Stephen Ehrlich

Cleveland State Law Review

Ever since In re Winship in 1970, it is well settled that the Due Process Clause requires a jury to find “proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime.” But as axiomatic as this holding may seem, the distinction between necessary facts of a crime and “mere means” of its commission has confounded courts for years. The Supreme Court, recognizing the need to re-address such an important issue, attempted to provide some guidance in this area through two landmark cases decided just before the turn of the twenty first century: Schad v. Arizona and Richardson …

The Inevitable Irrelevance Of Affirmative Action, Leslie Y. Garfield

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article proceeds in three parts. In Part I of this article, I provide a narrative of affirmative action jurisprudence in higher education, with a particular focus on the meaning of viewpoint diversity in higher education. This section tracks the definitional shift in preference policies from their original design as remedial and compensatory programs for those suffering the effects of educational discrimination to interest convergence programs, which assure equal benefits irrespective of race. In Part II, I explore the circumstances giving rise to Fisher, including an overview of the lower court decisions. This section presents a discussion of the likely …

A Check-In On Privacy After United States V. Jones: Current Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence In The Context Of Location-Based Applications And Services, Kathryn Nobuko Horwath

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

This note will discuss whether current Fourth Amendment jurisprudence adequately protects user location information obtained from location-based services ("LBS"), and if not, what changes can be made to ensure our right to privacy in this digital information. In Part I, the concept of LBS and a technical description of how it works is discussed. Part II summarizes the Supreme Court's recent decision in United States v. Jones on warrantless prolonged use of a GPS tracking device and will outline the Fourth Amendment jurisprudence underpinning the Court's logic. Part III delivers an in-depth description of federal statutory law that applies to …

Foreign In A Domestic Sense: American Samoa And The Last U.S. Nationals, Sean Morrison

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

Citizenship is part of the foundation of being American. Yet the United States treats some of its own as second class citizens. Deep in the South Pacific, forgotten amidst the vast ocean and coconuts, is a small series of islands that represent the only U.S. jurisdiction below the equator. American Samoa remains the last American territory that does not recognize its inhabitants as citizens. For more than a century, American Samoans have fought American wars, pledged allegiance to the American flag, and played a significant amount of American football, yet are categorized as U.S. nationals rather than citizens.

Recently, some …

Second Amendment Challenges To Student Housing Firearms Bans: The Strength Of The Home Analogy, Michael L. Smith

Faculty Articles

Public colleges and universities or state governments often ban the possession of firearms on public university or college property. These bans typically extend to student housing. While much has been written about campus bans on the carrying of concealed firearms, the topic of gun bans in the student housing context has been largely unaddressed in Second Amendment literature. This Comment seeks to fill that gap by evaluating potential student challenges to firearms bans in the student housing context in light of potential standards of review courts may apply and in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions in District of …

'Lonesome Road': Driving Without The Fourth Amendment, Lewis R. Katz

Faculty Publications

American states and municipalities have so many minor traffic regulations that every time a driver gets behind the wheel of a car he or she is likely to commit multiple violations. The violation of any traffic regulation empowers police officers to stop the vehicle, ticket and, in some states, arrest the motorist. Police are physically unable to stop and ticket, let alone arrest, every motorist committing a traffic violation. Instead, police are vested with unlimited discretion when choosing which motorists to stop, warn, ticket, or arrest. So long as there is probable cause for a traffic violation, courts will not …

The Growing Pains Of Graham V. Florida: Deciphering Whether Lengthy Term-Of-Years Sentences For Juvenile Defendants Can Equate To The Unconstitutional Sentence Of Life Without The Possibility Of Parole, Therese A. Savona

St. Thomas Law Review

This article will provide a basic understanding of Eighth Amendment jurisprudence and then explores how the most recent United States Supreme Court cases of Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama affect juvenile resentencing. Additionally, this article addresses the most recent trend presented in juvenile cases where the juvenile defendant is charged as an adult, tried as an adult, and sentenced accordingly. Specifically, the issue of a lengthy term-of-years sentence in states such as California and Florida appear to be the battleground of diverse opinions, more so perhaps than other states.

Is Economic Protectionism A Legitimate Governmental Interest Under Rational Basis Review?, Roger V. Abbot

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Of Civil Wrongs And Rights: Kiyemba V. Obama And The Meaning Of Freedom, Separation Of Powers, And The Rule Of Law Ten Years After 9/11, Katherine L. Vaughns, Heather L. Williams

Faculty Scholarship

This article is about the rise and fall of continued adherence to the rule of law, proper application of the separation of powers doctrine, and the meaning of freedom for a group of seventeen Uighurs—a Turkic Muslim ethnic minority whose members reside in the Xinjiang province of China—who had been held at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base since 2002. Most scholars regard the trilogy of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, and Boumediene v. Bush as demonstrating the Supreme Court’s willingness to uphold the rule of law during the war on terror. The recent experience of the Uighurs …

'You Are Hereby Sentenced To A Term Of . . . Enslavement?': Why Prisoners Cannot Be Exempt From Thirteenth Amendment Protection, Alvaro Hasani

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

Maxim Constitutionalism: Liberal Equality For The Common Good, Alexander Tsesis

Faculty Publications & Other Works

No abstract provided.

The First Amendment, Equal Protection, And Felon Disenfranchisement: A New Viewpoint, Janai S. Nelson

Faculty Publications

This Article engages the equality principles of the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause to reconsider the constitutionality of one of the last and most entrenched barriers to universal suffrage—felon disenfranchisement. A deeply racialized problem, felon disenfranchisement is additionally and independently a legislative judgment as to which citizen's ideas are worthy of inclusion in the electorate. Relying on a series of cases involving state interests in protecting the ballot and promoting its intelligent use, this Article demonstrates that felon disenfranchisement is open to attack under the Supreme Court's fundamental rights jurisprudence when it is motivated by a desire to …

Discriminating Speech: The Heterophilia Of The Freedom Of Speech Doctrine, Zvi Triger

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

In this Article, I seek to shed light on freedom ofspeech jurisprudence as it is reflected in the Snyder v. Phelps and Skokie cases, as well as in two analogous Israeli cases, namely petitions of members of the extreme right against the pride parades in Jerusalem, as well as petitions by the same petitioners for police permits to hold anti-Arab processions in the Arab town of Umm al-Fahm.

Comparing the cases, I identify the moral relativity built into the interpretation offreedom of expression doctrine in both countries. I introduce the concept of discriminating speech, which is speech that is designed …

Parallel Investigations Between Administrative And Law Enforcement Agencies: A Question Of Civil Liberties, Shiv Narayan Persaud

Journal Publications

No abstract provided.

A Research Agenda For Uncooperative Federalists, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Story Of Ewing: Three Strikes Laws And The Limits Of The Eighth Amendment Proportionality Review, Sara Sun Beale

Faculty Scholarship

In 1994 California enacted the nation's harshest "three strikes" law. Under this law, any felony can serve as a third strike, and conviction of a third strike requires a mandatory prison sentence of 25 years to life. In Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11 (2003), the Supreme Court held that sending a drug addict who shoplifted three golf clubs to prison for 25 years to life under the three strikes law did not violate the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment. The chapter for the forthcoming Criminal Law Stories tells the story of the Ewing case, describing …

Terry Jones And Global Free Speech In The Internet Age, G. Aaron Leibowitz

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Guns And Membership In The American Polity, Pratheepan Gulasekaram

Publications

No abstract provided.

Imagining A Same-Sex Marriage Decision Based On Dignity: Considering Human Experience In Constitutional Law, Danieli Evans

Articles

California’s Proposition 8 allows same sex couples to join through civil unions, which grant the legal benefits afforded to married couples but denies them the official label of “marriage.” The lower court eschewed the question of whether Proposition 8 burdens any fundamental right by concluding there is not even a rational basis (the minimum standard for the constitutionality of any law) for this law, as its sole effect is to deny same sex couples the designation of marriage.

We appreciate the lower court’s caution not to extend our fundamentalrights jurisprudence beyond precedent. However, we are positioned to elaborate fundamental constitutional …

Text, History, And Tradition: What The Seventh Amendment Can Teach Us About The Second, Darrell A. H. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

In District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, the Supreme Court made seemingly irreconcilable demands on lower courts: evaluate Second Amendment claims through history, avoid balancing, and retain as much regulation as possible. To date, lower courts have been unable to devise a test that satisfies all three of these conditions. Worse, the emerging default candidate, intermediate scrutiny, is a test that many jurists and scholars consider exceedingly manipulable.

This Article argues that courts could look to the Supreme Court’s Seventh Amendment jurisprudence, and in particular the Seventh Amendment’s “historical test,” to help them devise a …

Shifting Borders And The Boundaries Of Rights: Examining The Safe Third Country Agreement Between Canada And The United States, Efrat Arbel

All Faculty Publications

This article analyzes the Canadian Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal decisions assessing the Safe Third Country Agreement between Canada and the United States (STCA). It examines how each court’s treatment of the location and operation of the Canada-US border influences the results obtained. The article suggests that both in its treatment of the STCA and in its constitutional analysis, the Federal Court decision conceives of the border as a moving barrier capable of shifting outside Canada’s formal territorial boundaries. The effect of this decision is to bring refugee claimants outside state soil within the fold of Canadian constitutional …

Liberal Responsibilities, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay is a review of When the State Speaks, What Should it Say?: How Democracies can Protect Expression and Promote Equality by Corey Brettschneider (2012) and Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues by James E. Fleming & Linda C. McClain (2013).

In a parallel fashion, Fleming and McClain articulate and then defend a general conception of “constitutional liberalism” and its core individual rights against various critics, including communitarians such as Mary Ann Glendon and Michael Sandel, and “minimalists” such as Cass Sunstein and Jeremy Waldron, who argue that for various reasons those individual rights have undermined either civic society …

Chevron Meets Youngstown: National Security And The Administrative State, Joseph Landau

Faculty Scholarship

The past several years have witnessed a burst of scholarship at the intersection of national security and administrative law. Many supporters of this approach endorse a heightened, “super-strong” brand of Chevron deference to presidential decisionmaking during times of emergency. Believing that the Executive’s comparative advantage in expertise, access to information, and accountability warrant minimal judicial scrutiny, these Chevron-backers advance an Executive-centric view of national security powers. Other scholars, by contrast, dispute Chevron’s relevance to national security. These Chevron-detractors argue for an interventionist judiciary in national security matters. Both camps criticize the Supreme Court’s scaling of deference to the Executive after …

Gideon’S Amici, Why Do Prosecutors So Rarely Defend The Rights Of The Accused?, Bruce A. Green

Faculty Scholarship

In Gideon v. Wainwright, twenty-three state attorneys general, led by Walter F. Mondale and Edward McCormack, joined an amicus brief on the side of the criminal accused, urging the Supreme Court to recognize indigent defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to appointed counsel in felony cases. This was a unique occurrence. Although amicus filings by public entities have increased significantly since then, including in criminal cases, government lawyers rarely submit amicus briefs in the Supreme Court supporting criminal defendants’ procedural rights, and never en masse as in Gideon. The states’ public support for Gideon’s position points up the special nature of the …

Firearms Policy And The Black Community: An Assessment Of The Modern Orthodoxy, Nicholas J. Johnson

Faculty Scholarship

The heroes of the modern civil rights movement were more than just stoic victims of racist violence. Their history was one of defiance and fighting long before news cameras showed them attacked by dogs and fire hoses. When Fannie Lou Hamer revealed she kept a shotgun in every corner of her bedroom, she was channeling a century old practice. And when delta share cropper Hartman Turnbow, after a shootout with the Klan, said “I don’t figure I was being non-nonviolent, (yes non-nonviolent) I was just protecting my family”, he was invoking an evolved tradition that embraced self-defense and disdained political …