Digital Commons Network^™

Putting Rationality Back Into The Rational Basis Test: Saving Substantive Due Process And Redeeming The Promise Of The Ninth Amendment, Jeffrey D. Jackson

University of Richmond Law Review

This article argues for the adoption of a strengthened rational basis test that would allow courts to scrutinize the actual purpose behind legislation and demand that the legislation actually be reasonably related to its valid legislative purpose. Part II looks at the question of why it is desirable to save substantive due process rather than replace it with some other doctrine. Part III examines how substantive due process came to be the dominant form of protection for unenumerated rights, and how it has evolved from its antecedents in English law to the current test. It concludes that substantive due process …

The Political (And Other) Safeguards Of Religious Freedom, Richard W. Garnett

Journal Articles

This essay is a contribution to a symposium marking the 20th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s still-controversial decision in Employment Division v. Smith. That decision, it is suggested, should not be read as reflecting or requiring hostility or indifference towards claims for legislatively enacted accommodations of religion. Smith is not an endorsement of religion-blind neutrality in constitutional law; instead, it assigns to politically accountable actors the difficult, but crucially important, task of accommodating those whose religious exercise would otherwise be burdened by generally applicable laws. The essay goes on to suggest several things that must be true of our law …

Prophylactic Rules And State Constitutionalism, Arthur Leavens

Faculty Scholarship

When the post-Warren Supreme Court began trimming back individual rights, some state courts responded by interpreting analogous or cognate state constitutional provisions to find broader protections, prompting a vigorous debate concerning the legitimacy and interpretive methodology of such state constitutionalism. How can two constitutional provisions, sharing the same language and history, mean different things? This Article looks at that question in the context of so-called prophylactic rules—those specific constitutional rules meant to guide the implementation of broader federal constitutional principles. Miranda ’s warning-and-waiver construct is probably the best known prophylactic rule, but such rules abound, particularly in criminal procedure.

This …

Redressing Deprivations Of Rights Secured By State Constitutions Outside The Shadow Of The Supreme Court's Constitutional Remedies Jurisprudence, Gary S. Gildin

Faculty Scholarship

The second generation of state constitutionalism is now emerging. With the methodology of autonomous state constitutional protection more clearly defined, courts and legislatures are turning to the task of determining when, and from whom, they should award damages to citizens deprived of their state constitutional rights. State courts, as well as legislatures contemplating statutes authorizing damage actions, will be tempted to borrow United States Supreme Court interpretations of 42 U.S.C. §1983 in shaping civil relief for infringement of state constitutional rights. This article argues that the Supreme Court’s Section 1983 remedies doctrine is a product of statutory, structural and institutional …

The Reconciliation Doctrine In The Mclachlin Court: From A “Final Legal Remedy” To A “Just And Lasting” Process, Constance Macintosh

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The issue upon which this paper focuses is one that runs through much of the Aboriginal rights jurisprudence over the last ten years: the idea of “reconciliation." However, the way in which the term is deployed, the values that inform it, the logic that drives it, and the conclusions that it supports have shifted and are continuing to shift. There are considerable differences between how this term was used at the time of Lamer C.J., its meaning for the bench under McLachlin C.J., and the new role it has evolved to take on most recently. In particular, reconciliation has come …

The Architecture Of First Amendment Free Speech, Edward J. Eberle

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Guarding Their Sanctuary On The Offense: Criminal Contempt Actions By Domestic Violence Victims In Private Capacity, Mili Patel

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Buck V. Bell: A Constitutional Tragedy From A Lost World, Victoria Nourse

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Some constitutional tragedies are well known: Plessy v. Ferguson and Korematsu v. United States are taught to every first-year law student. Buck v. Bell is not. Decided in 1927 by the Taft Court, the case is known for its shocking remedy--sterilization--and Justice Holmes's dramatic rhetoric: "Three generations of imbeciles are enough." A mere five paragraphs long, Buck v. Bell could represent the highest ratio of injustice per word ever signed on to by eight Supreme Court Justices, progressive and conservative alike.

Buck v. Bell is not a tragedy as some others might define tragedy: it is not a well-known opinion, …

Why Is The Japanese Supreme Court So Conservative?, Shigenori Matsui

All Faculty Publications

The Constitution of Japan, enacted on November 3, 1946, and effective as of May 3, 1947, gave the judicial power to the Supreme Court and the inferior courts established by the Diet, the national legislature, and gave the power of judicial review to the judiciary. Equipped with the power of judicial review, the Japanese Supreme Court was expected to perform a very significant political role in safeguarding the Constitution, especially its Bill of Rights, against infringement by the government. Yet, it has developed a very conservative constitutional jurisprudence ever since its establishment. This article examines why the Japanese Supreme Court …

Constitutional Precedents In Japan: A Comment On The Role Of Precedent, Shigenori Matsui

All Faculty Publications

Japan is a civil law country, and the precedent of the Supreme Court is not binding on either the Supreme Court itself or lower courts. Judges are supposed to return to the text of the statute for each legal dispute and apply the rules to specific cases. Judicial decisions are not law to be applied by the courts. However, since judges have followed the precedent of the Supreme Court most of the time, these precedents have a de facto binding power even though they are not legally binding. In this Comment, the author focuses on constitutional law precedents to illustrate …

Randomization And The Fourth Amendment, Bernard Harcourt, Tracey L. Meares

Faculty Scholarship

Randomized checkpoint searches are generally taken to be the exact antithesis of reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment. In the eyes of most jurists checkpoint searches violate the central requirement of valid Fourth Amendment searches – namely, individualized suspicion. We disagree. In this Article, we contend that randomized searches should serve as the very lodestar of a reasonable search. The notion of "individualized" suspicion is misleading; most suspicion in the modem policing context is group based and not individual specific. Randomized searches by definition are accompanied by a certain level of suspicion. The constitutional issue, we maintain, should not turn on …

Boumediene, Munaf, And The Supreme Court's Misreading Of The Insular Cases , Andrew Kent

Faculty Scholarship

In 2008, the Supreme Court embraced both global constitutionalism - the view that the Constitution provides judicially enforceable rights to non-citizens outside the sovereign territory of the United States - and what I call human-rights universalism - the view that the Constitution protects military enemies during armed conflict. Boumediene v. Bush found a constitutional right to habeas corpus for non-citizens detained as enemy combatants at the Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba, while Munaf v. Geren - decided the same day as Boumediene and involving U.S. citizens detained in Iraq during the war there - hinted that the Due Process …

The Black Poor, Black Elites, And America's Prisons, James Forman Jr.

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Fourth Amendment Rights Of Children At Home: When Parental Authority Goes Too Far, Kristin N. Henning

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Although it is virtually undisputed that children have some Fourth Amendment rights independent of their parents, it is equally clear that youth generally receive less constitutional protection than adults. In a search for continuity and coherence in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence involving minors, Professor Henning identifies three guiding principles—context, parental authority, and the minor’s capacity—that weave together children’s rights cases. She argues that parental authority too often prevails over children’s rights, even when context and demonstrated capacity would support affirmation of those rights. Context involves both the physical setting in which Fourth Amendment protections are sought and the nature of the …

The Extraordinary Mrs. Shipley: How The United States Controlled International Travel Before The Age Of Terrorism, Jeffrey D. Kahn

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Terrorist watchlists used to restrict travel into and out of the United States owe their conceptual origins to Mrs. Ruth B. Shipley, the Chief of the State Department’s Passport Division from 1928 to 1955. Mrs. Shipley was one of the most powerful people in the federal government for almost thirty years, but she is virtually unknown today. She had the unreviewable discretion to determine who could leave the United States, for how long, and under what conditions.

This article examines how Mrs. Shipley exercised her power through a detailed study of original documents obtained from the National Archives. It then …

Michigan V. Bryant: Defining The “Testimonial Statement”, Hsien-Ying Shine Chen

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

The Melendez-Diaz Dilemma: Virginia's Response, A Model To Follow, Anne Hampton Andrews

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

No Direction Home: Constitutional Limitations On Washington's Homeless Encampment Ordinances, Jordan Talge

Washington Law Review

The Washington State Constitution protects the free exercise of religion. It also vests strong police power in local governments. When these two constitutional provisions conflict, the Washington State Supreme Court must draw the line between valid police power action and impermissible burden on free exercise. In City of Woodinville v. Northshore United Church of Christ, a municipal government crossed that line. The City of Woodinville, Washington refused to consider a church’s application to host a homeless encampment. The Court held this outright refusal to be an unjustified infringement on the church’s free exercise of religion. The Court did not, …

Unraveling Lawrence's Concerns About Legislated Morality: The Constitutionality Of Laws Criminalizing The Sale Of Obscene Devices, Nathan R. Curtis

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judging Myopia In Hindsight: Bivens Actions, National Security Decisions, And The Rule Of Law, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

Liability in national security matters hinges on curbing both official myopia and hindsight bias. The Framers knew that officials could be short-sighted, prioritizing expedience over abiding values. Judicial review emerged as an antidote to myopia of this kind. However, the Framers recognized that ubiquitous second-guessing of government decisions would also breed instability. Balancing these conflicting impulses has produced judicial oscillation between intervention and deference. Recent decisions on Bivens claims in the war on terror have defined extremes of deference or intervention. Cases like Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Arar v. Ashcroft display a categorical deference that rewards officials' myopia. On the …

Mcdonald V. Chicago: Which Standard Of Scrutiny Should Apply To Gun-Control Laws?, Lawrence Rosenthal, Joyce Lee Malcolm

NULR Online

In this debate, Professors Rosenthal and Malcolm debate the standard of scrutiny that the Supreme Court should apply to restrictions on the Second Amendment in the wake of its recent decision, McDonald v. City of Chicago. Professor Rosenthal begins Part I by noting the importance of gun-control laws to police; he considers a lower standard of scrutiny necessary to allow law enforcement officials to protect the community. Turning to the practical consequences of Chicago and Washington, D.C.'s recent gun-control laws, which make owning a gun nearly impossible in those cities, Professor Malcolm argues for a standard of strict scrutiny …

Sex And The Supremes: Towards A Legal Theory Of Sexuality, Elaine Craig

PhD Dissertations

This thesis examines how the Supreme Court of Canada, across legal contexts, has tended to conceptualize sexuality. It focuses primarily on areas of public law including sexual assault law, equality for sexual minorities, sexual harassment and obscenity and indecency laws. There were a number of trends revealed upon reviewing the jurisprudence in this area. First, the Court’s decisions across legal contexts reveal a tendency to conceptualize sexuality as innate, as a pre-social naturally occurring phenomenon and as an essential element of who we are as individuals. This is true whether one is speaking of the approach to gay and lesbian …

Keep Off The Grass!: An Alternative Approach To The Gun Control Debate, Lance Lindeen

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Religion-Based Claims For Impinging On Queer Citizenship, Bruce Macdougall, Donn Short

Dalhousie Law Journal

Competing claims for legal protection based on religion and on sexual orientation have arisen fairly frequently in Canada in the past decade or so. The authors place such competitions into five categories based on the nature of who is making the claim and who is impacted, the site of the competition, and the extent to which the usual legal and constitutional norms applicable are affected. Three of the five categories identified involve a claim that a religion operate in some form in the public area so as to impinge on the usual protection of equality on the basis of sexual …

Constitutional Fiats: Presidential Legislation In India's Parliamentary Democracy, Shubhankar Dam

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

The article presents information on the presidential legislation of the parliamentary democracies, India and Pakistan. It discusses the role of the President acting as the Council of Ministers for the enactment of legislations as ordinances without the consent of the Parliament. Information on the legal interpretation of the ordinances and its interaction with the principles of the parliamentary system of the government is also presented.

The Cross-Dressing Case For Bathroom Equality, Jennifer Levi, Daniel Redman

Seattle University Law Review

While transgender rights advocates have won many battles in the fight for equality, bathroom discrimination remains a significant obstacle to transgender people’s full participation in society. This Article discusses the reasoning behind the cases that have rejected transgender people’s discrimination claims based on bathroom exclusion. The Article then demonstrates how these arguments mirror the rationales offered by supporters of long-dead, unconstitutional cross-dressing laws. Synthesizing the two bodies of case law, Levi and Redman offer a new way forward for transgender advocates seeking bathroom equality.

Criminal Practice Developments In Maryland Evidence Law And Confrontation Clause Jurisprudence, Lynn Mclain

All Faculty Scholarship

This paper was prepared as a handout for a presentation given on July 9th., 2010 to staff at the Harford County Public Defender’s Office, Bel Air, MD. The specific sections of the paper are: Discovery of Witnesses’ Identities: Protective Orders; Jury Selection; Communications from Jurors; Preservation of the Record: Rules 4-323, 5-103, and 5-702; Judicial Notice: Rule 5-201; Balancing Risk of Unfair Prejudice and Confusion against Probative Value: Rule 5-403; Character Evidence; Fifth Amendment Privilege: Miranda; Competency of Witnesses: Rule 5-601; Impeachment by Prior Convictions: Rule 5-609; Questioning by Court: Rule 5-614; Expert Testimony: Rules 5-702 – 5-706; Hearsay; The …

The Misapplication Of Leung Kwok Hung In Hong Kong: Authorizing The Rationality Requirement For Textually Absolute Rights, Albert Connor Buchman

Washington International Law Journal

The Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (BORO) guarantees many fundamental rights to Hong Kong’s permanent residents. In these constitutionally significant statutes, two types of rights exist: 1) textually qualified rights, which contain qualifying language indicating for what purposes a legislated restriction is permissible, such as when necessary for national security, public order, public health or morals, and 2) textually absolute rights, which contain no language indicating when a legislated restriction on that right is permissible. In Leung Kwok Hung & Others v. HKSAR, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal formulated a rationality requirement for when restrictions are …

Regulating The Airwaves In Israel's Burgeoning Democracy: Why The Israeli High Court Of Justice Should Have Acknowledged Free Speech In The Case Of Arutz Seven, Maya Tarr

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The note examines the role of the Supreme Court of Israel in promoting democracy and freedom of speech, highlighting its interpretation of Basic Laws to include these rights. It critiques the Court's analysis in the Hok Habezek amendment case for not adequately addressing freedom of speech, despite its significant rulings in cases like Kol Haam v. Minister of Interior Affairs.

Raising The Bar: Standards-Based Training, Supervision, And Evaluation, Adele Bernhard

Articles & Chapters

In this short Article, I sketch the methodology my colleagues and I at Pace Law School use to incorporate practice standards into our clinical teaching and reflect on how a standards-based teaching paradigm could be adapted to the training, supervision, and evaluation of public defenders. Then, I briefly consider how standards and standards-based teaching assist in the administration of assigned counsel plans and in the evaluation of the performance of public defender organizations. Although this Article does not cover any of these topics in depth, my goal is to introduce the reader to a standards-based approach to teaching and suggest …