Digital Commons Network^™

A Chance To Save Lives: A Guide For How And Why The Us Should Mandate Vaccines For Children And Limit State Exemption Laws, Lauren Zidones

Akron Law Review

Vaccines have helped increase the life expectancy for humans in the 20th century and have reduced the number of deaths associated with infectious diseases. Despite efforts by the CDC, state and local governments, and other public health agencies, infectious diseases are still a major cause of illness, disability, and death. Steps must be taken to address the continued rise of vaccine-preventable diseases in America. Eliminating or limiting state exemptions for mandatory vaccinations for school-aged children is the simplest way to address this growing issue. However, a population of parents argue for absolute parental rights and stand against any vaccine exemption …

Panel Ii Discussion: The Anatomy Of 1983 Litigation: Best Practices In Successful Civil Rights Litigation, Gary Bledsoe, Bhavani Raveendran, Brian Dunn, Honorable Ken Hoyt, Larry Taylor

The Bridge: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Legal & Social Policy

The Civil Rights Act of 1871 is a federal statute, numbered 42 U.S.C. § 1983, that allows people to sue the government for civil rights violations. It applies when someone acting “under color of” state-level or local law has deprived a person of rights created by the U.S. Constitution or federal statutes. It is often the basis for relief when someone has been the victim of excessive use of force or other police misconduct, ostensibly while under the authority generally vested by the state or municipality. The Qualified Immunity defense in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims often make them difficult …

Recovering The Tort Remedy For Federal Official Wrongdoing, Gregory Sisk

Notre Dame Law Review

As the Supreme Court weakens the Bivens constitutional tort cause of action and federal officers avoid liability for unlawful behavior through qualified immunity, we should recollect the merit of the common-law tort remedy for holding the federal government accountable for official wrongdoing. For more than a century after ratification of the Constitution, federal officers who trespassed on the rights of American citizens could be held personally liable under common-law tort theories, but then routinely were indemnified by the government.

The modern Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) roughly replicates the original regime for official wrongdoing by imposing liability directly on the …

The Inconsistent Originalism Of Judge-Made Remedies Against Federal Officers, Stephen I. Vladeck

Notre Dame Law Review

Professor Carlos V´azquez and I have explained in depth why the Supreme Court’s evisceration of damages remedies for constitutional violations by federal officers is analytically and historically incoherent. And I have written elsewhere about the extent to which modern constitutional remedies doctrine has turned a remarkably blind eye to foundational principles of federalism—paying little more than lip service to the robust availability of common-law damages (and habeas) remedies against federal officers in state courts from the Founding through the Civil War—and, at least for damages, well into the twentieth century. I don’t mean to rehash (or relitigate) either argument here. …

Nationalism, Populism, Religion, And The Quest To Reframe Fundamental Rights, Susanna Mancini, Michel Rosenfeld

Cardozo Law Review

The article examines how nationalism and populism have increasingly utilized religion to challenge the principles of institutional secularism, which is foundational to liberal constitutional democracies. It argues that these forces exploit the interplay between religion and secularism to undermine pluralism and promote exclusionary agendas. The analysis highlights the tension between institutional secularism, which seeks to separate state and religion, and the contemporary repoliticization of religion, which threatens the pluralistic ethos essential to liberal constitutionalism.

Rules And Standards In Justice Scalia's Fourth Amendment, Robert M. Bloom, Eliza S. Walker

University of Richmond Law Review

When looking at Justice Scalia’s approach to the Fourth Amendment, most would say he was an originalist and a textualist. Justice Scalia himself would like to explain, “I’m an originalist and a textualist, not a nut.” Although originalism and textualism were often prevalent in his Fourth Amendment decisions, even more important to his decision-making was his disdain for judicial activism. To limit judicial discretion, Justice Scalia frequently opted to impose bright-line rules rather than vague standards. This is apparent not only within his jurisprudence as a whole, but also specifically in his Fourth Amendment decisions.

This Article examines Justice Scalia’s …

Jury Bias Resulting In Indefinite Commitment: Expanding Procedural Protections In Svp Civil Commitment Proceedings Under The Mathews Test, Alli M. Mentch

William & Mary Law Review

Twenty states, the District of Columbia, and the federal government have enacted Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) laws that permit the civil commitment of sex offenders. Under these laws, imprisoned sex offenders serving criminal sentences are transferred to treatment facilities and held indefinitely. As one individual describes civil commitment, “It’s worse than prison. In prison I wasn’t happy, but I was content because I knew I had a release date.” An estimated 5,400 individuals are currently civilly committed under these laws.

This Note argues that such laws do not adequately protect respondents’ due process rights. To that end, this Note proposes …

Fitbit Data And The Fourth Amendment: Why The Collection Of Data From A Fitbit Constitutes A Search And Should Require A Warrant In Light Of Carpenter V. United States, Alxis Rodis

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Judging History: How Judicial Discretion In Applying Originalist Methodology Affects The Outcome Of Post-Heller Second Amendment Cases, Mark Anthony Frassetto

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article aims to assess how the federal appellate courts have applied the originalist methodology in Second Amendment cases in the decade since Heller. It reviews how courts’ varying approaches to historical analysis—specifically, how courts have addressed what historical period to look to, how prevalent a historical tradition must be, and whether to address history at a high or low level of generality—can drastically affect the outcome of cases. As Justice Scalia acknowledged in McDonald, “Historical analysis can be difficult; it sometimes requires resolving threshold questions, and making nuanced judgments about which evidence to consult and how to …

Unmuted: Solutions To Safeguard Constitutional Rights In Virtual Courtrooms And How Technology Can Expand Access To Quality Counsel And Transparency In The Criminal Justice System, Matthew Bender

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Nondelegation Of Major Questions, Clinton T. Summers

Arkansas Law Review

The Supreme Court has many tools at its disposal to address improper delegations of legislative power by Congress to the executive branch. Two of these tools are the nondelegation doctrine and the major questions doctrine. The nondelegation doctrine is a sledgehammer. Able to declare entire statutory provisions unconstitutional, its ability to do a lot of damage is perhaps the reason the Court never uses it. Indeed, the Court has only used it twice, both times in 1935. Although it’s old and rusty, the Court continues to keep it in the toolbox just in case. Since 1935, the Court has been …

Untested And Neglected: Clarifying The Comparator Requirement In Equal Protection Claims Based On Untested Rape Kits, Emily Jones

Northwestern University Law Review

Rape kits are important tools used to store the evidence that is collected from a victim’s body and clothing following a sexual assault. Although the DNA evidence stored in rape kits is crucial to rape investigations, police departments throughout the country have routinely failed to test rape kits. This remains true despite the national funding allocated specifically for rape kit testing. This widespread neglect hinders justice and renders community members unprotected from sexual violence. The national rape kit backlog has sparked legal challenges; six lawsuits have been filed against police departments for systematically refusing to test rape kits, alleging equal …

Death-By-Incarceration In Illinois, Joseph Dole

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

No abstract provided.

Second-Class Rights And Second-Class Americans: Applying Carolene Products Footnote Four And The Court’S Enforcement Of Nationally Accepted Norms Against Local Outlier Jurisdictions In Second Amendment Enforcement Litigations, Mark W. Smith

Catholic University Law Review

In the years since deciding District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), the Supreme Court has largely abandoned the role of protecting American gun owners despite the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms. The Supreme Court has failed to use the jurisprudential tools at its disposal to ensure that the fundamental right to arms is protected as robustly as other enumerated constitutional rights. This failure is an acute one. And it is unjustifiable across a wide variety of jurisprudential methodologies, from originalism to the non-originalist approaches …

Confrontation's Multi-Analyst Problem, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Confrontation Clause in the Sixth Amendment affords the “accused” in “criminal prosecutions” the right “to be confronted with the witnesses against” them. A particular challenge for courts over at least the last decade-plus has been the degree to which the Confrontation Clause applies to forensic reports, such as those presenting the results of a DNA, toxicology, or other CSI-type analysis. Should use of forensic reports entitle criminal defendants to confront purportedly “objective” analysts from the lab producing the report? If so, which analyst or analysts? For forensic processes that require multiple analysts, should the prosecution be required to produce …

Who Has The Right?: Analysis Of Second Amendment Challenges To 18 U.S.C. § 922(G)(4), Alexandra T. Cline

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note argues that courts should decide challenges to § 922(g)(4) solely under the first step of the test, based on the notion that individuals subject to § 922(g)(4) fall outside the scope of Second Amendment protection. Thus, under the two-part test, the law would not burden conduct protected by the Amendment, rendering step two unnecessary for at least the vast majority of § 922(g)(4) challenges. This Note provides three independent ways in which courts could deem § 922(g)(4) outside the purview of the Second Amendment, and each should be considered a permissible approach.

The first Part of this Note …

Racial Equality And Inequality In America And Lessons From Other Countries, William Y. Chin

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

America, a mighty global hegemon supreme in military matters, regards itself as second to none, and where it leads, it expects other countries to follow. But on matters of race, America could follow the examples of countries that have taken the lead in experimenting with racial equality efforts and initiatives. From Brazil's "redemption through reading" prison program to the High Court of Australia's return of land to indigenous inhabitants, much could be learned from the lessons of other countries. That there is still much to learn about racial equality is evident from the police killing of George Floyd, a Black …

There Is No Justice When Low And Modest-Income D.C. Residents Are Forced To Represent Themselves In Civil Cases, Sheldon Krantz

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

After spending more than twenty years as a white-collar criminal defense lawyer at DLA Piper and prior to that serving as a federal prosecutor, law professor, and law school dean, I had the opportunity to help develop and then share responsibility for directing the non-profit D.C. Affordable Law Firm (“DCALF”). 135 I learned from this experience that lawyers are rarely available for most of the low- and modest income District of Columbia (“D.C.”) residents who find themselves embroiled in civil matters in D.C. Superior Court on matters greatly impacting their lives. They become, as a result, self-represented litigants (“SRLs”) who …

Anilca Under Attack: Will The Right To Travel Wreak Havoc With Subsistence Rights?, Kathy A. Gudgell

Journal of Natural Resources & Environmental Law

No abstract provided.

Symposium: Examining Black Citizenship From Reconstruction To Black Lives Matter: Rhetoric And Nostalgia In The Criminal Justice Reform Movement, Michael Gentithes

ConLawNOW

Today’s movement for criminal justice reform and its attendant "defund the police" slogan contain nuanced calls to redirect public funds in ways that will both control crime and support downtrodden neighborhoods. But the language in those calls can easily be misinterpreted. Such poor messaging misleads both the movement’s members and the public in two important ways. First, it repeats many of the mistakes made by protest anthems of the past. For too many Americans enduring today’s all-too-real dystopia, calls to defund sound like calls to anarchy, not arguments for peaceable, sensible reforms. Second, defunding rhetoric contains an element of historical …

Preview—United States V. Cooley: What Will Happen To The Thinnest Blue Line?, Jo J. Phippin

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States ("Supreme Court") will hear oral arguments in this matter on Tuesday, March 23, 2021. This case presents the narrow issue of whether a tribal police officer has the authority to investigate and detain a non-Indian on a public right-of-way within a reservation for a suspected violation of state or federal law. The lower courts, holding that tribes have no such authority, granted James Cooley’s motion to suppress evidence. The Supreme Court must decide whether the lower courts erred in so deciding. While the issue before the Supreme Court is itself narrow, it has …

Who Protects Whom: Federal Law As A Floor, Not A Ceiling, To Protect Students From Inappropriate Use Of Force By School Resource Officers, Elsa Haag

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Over the past forty years, students in the U.S. have experienced increasingly strict school discipline policies and increased police presence in schools. Sent into schools with the aim of improving security in the wake of mass shootings, school resource officers (SROs) are sworn law enforcement regularly assigned to schools. But there is a paucity of evidence that SROs are effective in preventing mass shootings or provide other significant benefits. Instead, research shows that the presence of SROs results in students achieving less and experiencing more physical and emotional harm, with long-term implications and costs for individuals and communities. As trained …

Acid Mine Drainage--A Review Of The Barnes & Tucker Case--Is The Requirement To Treat A "Taking" Under The Fifth Or Fourteenth Amendment?, Linda M. Stowers

Journal of Natural Resources & Environmental Law

No abstract provided.

Toronto’S 2018 Municipal Election, Rights Of Democratic Participation, And Section 2(B) Of The Charter, Jamie Cameron, Bailey Fox

Articles & Book Chapters

In 2018, the City of Toronto’s municipal election overlapped with a provincial election that brought a new government to office. While the municipal election ran for a protracted period from May 1 to October 22, the provincial election began on May 9 and ended about four weeks later, on June 7.On July 27, after only a few weeks in office, the provincial government tabled the Better Local Government Act (BLGA) and proclaimed the Bill into law on August 14.The BLGA reduced Toronto City Council from 47 to 25 wards and reset the electoral process, mandating that the election proceed under …

Hacks, Leaks, And Data Dumps: The Right To Publish Illegally Acquired Information Twenty Years After Bartnicki V. Vopper, Erik Ugland, Christina Mazzeo

Washington Law Review

This Article addresses a fluid and increasingly salient category of cases involving the First Amendment right to publish information that was hacked, stolen, or illegally leaked by someone else. Twenty years ago, in Bartnicki v. Vopper, the Supreme Court appeared to give broad constitutional cover to journalists and other publishers in these situations, but Justice Stevens’s inexact opinion for the Court and Justice Breyer’s muddling concurrence left the boundaries unclear. The Bartnicki framework is now implicated in dozens of new cases— from the extradition and prosecution of Julian Assange, to Donald Trump’s threatened suit of The New York Times …

The Vanishing Core Of Judicial Independence, Evan C. Zoldan

Nevada Law Journal

With Congress firmly in control of the jurisdiction, resources, and structure of the federal courts, the scope of the judiciary’s independence is limited indeed. If there is an attribute that can be considered the core of judicial independence, it is the power of the federal courts to decide cases pending before them. In a pair of recent decisions, however, the Supreme Court has called into question whether the federal judiciary possesses even this limited attribute of independence. This Article examines how the Court has blurred the line between the judicial and legislative powers by ceding to Congress the authority to …

Free Speech, Strict Scrutiny And A Better Way To Handle Speech Restrictions, Aaron Pinsoneault

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

When it comes to unprotected speech categories, the Roberts Court has taken an amoral and inaccurate approach. When the Court first created unprotected speech categories-- defined categories of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment-- it was unclear what rendered a category of speech unprotected. One school of thought argued that speech was unprotected if it provided little or no value to society. The other school of thought argued that speech was unprotected if it fell into a certain category of speech that was simply categorically unprotected. Then, in 2010, the Court strongly sided with the latter approach, …

When Is Police Interrogation Really Police Interrogation? A Look At The Application Of The Miranda Mandate, Paul Marcus

Catholic University Law Review

Decades after the Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona, questions abound as to what constitutes interrogation when a suspect is in custody. What appeared a concise, uniform rule has, in practice, left the Fifth Amendment waters muddied. This article addresses a potential disconnect between law enforcement and the courts by analyzing examples of issues arising from Miranda’s application in an array of case law. Ultimately, it attempts to clarify an ambiguity by offering a standard for what conduct classifies as an interrogation.

Introduction – 2019 Constitutional Cases At The Supreme Court: Up Close And In Person, Sonia Lawrence

Articles & Book Chapters

From the vantage point of Summer 2020, 2019 seems almost a mirage. The conditions created across Canada by government and individual responses to COVID-19 were all but unimaginable when 2019 drew to a close, and the legal issues that preoccupy those interested in constitutional and public law now revolve around rapidly evolving rules and policies designed to protect public goods like health and health care. Questions of profound significance to constitutional lawyers, such as the location of limits on state powers, the appropriate roles and relative competencies of courts and governments, the place of state law in creating the good …

Whose Rights Matter More—Police Privacy Or A Defendant’S Right To A Fair Trial?, Laurie L. Levenson

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The function of the prosecutor under the federal Constitution is not to tack as many skins of victims as possible to the wall. His function is to vindicate the right of the people as expressed in the laws and give those accused of crime a fair trial.

– William O. Douglas