Digital Commons Network^™

"The Only Thing We Have To Fear Is Fear Itself": The Constitutional Infirmities With Felon Disenfranchisement And Citing Fear As The Rationale For Depriving Felons Of Their Right To Vote, Erika Stern

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

Felon disenfranchisement, a mechanism by which felons and former felons are deprived of their right to vote, is a widespread practice that has been challenged on many grounds. However, felon disenfranchisement has not yet been properly challenged under the First Amendment. This Article argues that states implicate felons’ First Amendment rights through felon disenfranchisement without citing adequate or compelling rationales to justify this severe intrusion. In fact, at least one rationale, a rationale based on the fear of the way felons might vote, is itself inconsistent with First Amendment principles. Disenfranchising felons based on a fear of the way that …

Six Overrulings, Andrew Koppelman

Michigan Law Review

John Paul Stevens, who retired in 2010 at the age of ninety after more than thirty-four years on the Supreme Court, has capped his astoundingly distinguished career by becoming an important public intellectual. He reviews books, gives high-profile interviews, wrote a memoir of the chief justices he has known, and has now written a second book. Six Amendments revisits half a dozen old, lost battles. Stevens appeals over the heads of his colleagues to a higher authority: the public. Now that he is off the Court, Stevens explains why six decisions in which he dissented should be overruled by constitutional …

A Contagion Of Fear: Post-9/11 Alarm Expands Executive Branch Authority And Sanctions Prosecutorial Exploitation Of America's Privacy, Carol M. Bast, Cynthia A. Brown

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

Why Can't I Know How The Sausage Is Made?: How Ag-Gag Statutes Threaten Animal Welfare Groups And The First Amendment, Daniel L. Sternberg

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

No abstract provided.

Solving Batson, Tania Tetlow

William & Mary Law Review

The Supreme Court faced an important ideological choice when it banned the racial use of peremptory challenges in Batson v. Kentucky. The Court could either ground the rule in equality rights designed to protect potential jurors from stereotyping, or it could base the rule on the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to an “impartial jury” drawn from a “fair cross-section of the community.” By choosing the equal protection analysis, the Court turned away from the defendant and the fair functioning of the criminal justice system, and instead focused on protecting potential jurors. In doing so, the Court built a fatal error …

The Privacies Of Life: Automatic License Plate Recognition Is Unconstitutional Under The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy Law, Jessica Gutierrez-Alm

Hamline Law Review

Abstract

Violently Possessed: Johnson As The Vehicle For Limiting Sentencing Enhancement Under The Armed Career Criminals Act, Jonathan Robe

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Johnson v. United States in which the Court will decide whether conviction for mere possession of a short-barreled shotgun qualifies as a "violent felony" that warrants sentence-enhancement under the Armed Career Criminals Act. The Author argues that he plain text of the statute and the Court's prior cases on the issue suggest tat convictions for "mere possession" do not satisfy the definition of "violent felony" and that the Court should overturn the Eighth Circuit's ruling upholding Johnson's sentence enhancement.

Lethal Injections: States Medicalize Execution, Joel B. Zivot

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Death Penalty: Should The Judge Or The Jury Decide Who Dies?, Valerie P. Hans, John H. Blume, Theodore Eisenberg, Amelia Courtney Hritz, Sheri L. Johnson, Caisa Elizabeth Royer, Martin T. Wells

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This article addresses the effect of judge versus jury decision making through analysis of a database of all capital sentencing phase hearing trials in the State of Delaware from 1977– 2007. Over the three decades of the study, Delaware shifted responsibility for death penalty sentencing from the jury to the judge. Currently, Delaware is one of the handful of states that gives the judge the final decision-making authority in capital trials. Controlling for a number of legally relevant and other predictor variables, we find that the shift to judge sentencing significantly increased the number of death sentences. Statutory aggravating factors, …

Has The "Machinery Of Death" Become A Clunker?, Stephen F. Smith

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreign Precedents In Constitutional Adjudication By The Supreme Court Of Singapore, 1963-2013, Jack Tsen-Ta Lee

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

This article surveys the use of foreign precedents in constitutional adjudication by the Supreme Court of Singapore for over a half century during the terms of the first three Chief Justices—Wee Chong Jin (1963–1990), Yong Pung How (1990–2006), and Chan Sek Keong (2006–2012)—and the first year in office of the fourth Chief Justice, Sundaresh Menon (2012–2013). It concludes that while judges have always cited foreign case law, they have only actually applied foreign cases where the wording of the Constitution and the constitutional arrangements in Singapore are fairly analogous to the constitutional texts and arrangements upon which the cases were …

A Survey Of The History Of The Death Penalty In The United States, Sheherezade C. Malik, D. Paul Holdsworth

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Under The Prison Litigation Reform Act's So-Called Three Strikes Provision, When Does A Dismissal Count As A Strike: Coleman V. Tollefson (13-1333), Betsy Ginsberg

Articles

The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996 amended the federal in forma pauperis statute to include, among other provisions, what has become known as the “three strikes provision.” Under this provision, prisoners who have accumulated three strikes—three dismissals of cases that were frivolous, malicious, or failed to state a claim—are no longer permitted to proceed in forma pauperis unless they can show immediate danger of serious physical injury. This case asks the Court to determine whether a dismissal by the district court immediately counts as a strike or whether it does not count until any appeal of the dismissal has …

Using Outcomes To Reframe Guilty Plea Adjudication, Anne R. Traum

Florida Law Review

The Supreme Court’s 2012 decisions in Lafler v. Cooper and Missouri v. Frye lay the groundwork for a new approach to judicial oversight of guilty pleas that considers outcomes. These cases confirm that courts possess robust authority to protect defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel and that plea outcomes are particularly relevant to identifying and remedying prejudicial ineffective assistance in plea-bargaining. The Court’s reliance on outcome-based prejudice analysis and suggestions for trial court-level reforms to prevent Sixth Amendment violations set the stage for trial courts to take a more active, substantive role in regulating guilty pleas. …

Indemnification As An Alternative To Nullification, Robert A. Mikos

Montana Law Review

No abstract provided.

Letting Innocence Suffer: The Need For Defense Access To The Law Enforcement Dna Database, Jason Kreag

Cardozo Law Review

Law enforcement has gradually amassed a sizable DNA database that holds considerable promise for solving cold cases and identifying suspects. The Supreme Court has blessed this effort, allowing investigators to include profiles of arrestees as well as convicted persons in the database. At present, though, law enforcement has a near monopoly on use of the DNA database, leaving defendants at the whim of the law enforcement officials who control access to this tool. Legal scholars have alternatively praised and decried the database, but none has examined its prospects for proving defendants' innocence post-conviction. This Article fills that void by identifying …

The Mold That Shapes Hearsay Law, Richard D. Friedman

Florida Law Review

In response to an article previously published in the Florida Law Review by Professor Ben Trachtenberg, Professor Friedman argues that the historical thesis of Crawford v. Washington is basically correct: The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment reflects a principle about how witnesses should give testimony, and it does not create any broader constraint on the use of hearsay. Friedman argues that this is an appropriate limit on the Clause, and that in fact for the most part there is no good reason to exclude nontestimonial hearsay if live testimony by the declarant to the same proposition would be admissible. …

From Wolves, Lambs (Part I): The Eighth Amendment Case For Gradual Abolition Of The Death Penalty, Kevin Barry

Florida Law Review

This spring, the Connecticut Supreme Court will take up a novel question, unprecedented in modern death penalty jurisprudence: Can a state gradually abolish its death penalty? Restated, can it leave the sentences of those currently on death row in place but abolish the death penalty going forward? This Article argues that it can. On simple statutory construction grounds, “prospective-only” repeals of death penalty legislation are not given retroactive effect. Although the constitutional considerations are admittedly less straightforward, prospective-only repeals do not offend the Constitution. The death penalty remains constitutional per se under the Eighth Amendment, and “as-applied” challenges under Atkins …

Jennings V. Stephens And Judicial Efficiency In Habeas Appeals, Eric O'Brien

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews the Supreme Court case Jennings v. Stevens which deals with several areas of federal habeas corpus law and procedure. The Court will consider, inter alia, whether a habeas petitioner who succeeds in federal district court nevertheless needs to request a certificate of appealability to bring an alternate grounds for habeas relief at the appellate level. Further, the Court can resolve a major circuit split on whether a court considering an ineffective assistance of counsel claim should consider each instance of ineffective assistance as a single claim or as all parts of one claim. Eric O'Brien suggests …

Pardons And The Theory Of The “Second-Best”, Chad Flanders

Florida Law Review

This Article explains and defends a “second-best” theory of pardons. Pardons are second-best in two ways. First, pardons are second-best because they represent, in part, a response to a failure of justice: the person convicted was not actually guilty, or he or she was punished too harshly, or the punishment no longer fits the crime. In the familiar analogy, pardons act as a “safety valve” on a criminal justice system that doesn’t work as it ideally should. Pardons, in the nonideal world we live in, are sometimes necessary.

But pardons are also second-best because they can represent deviations from other …

The Rostrum Principle: Why The Boundaries Of The Public Forum Matter To Statutory Interpretation, Amy Widman

Florida Law Review

This Article explores a normative proposal for statutory interpretation in light of this media-saturated age. The proposal, referred to in this Article as the Rostrum Principle, encourages the Court to interpret ambiguous terms in legislation with a presumption toward the way the legislation was “sold” to the public. This Article further explores the shifting public forum—away from the Congressional Record and formal legal frameworks to include cable news television, newspaper op-eds, and even Twitter. The explosion of popular and social media and politicians’ increasingly sophisticated use of these forms of communication goes far toward setting the debate regarding pending legislation. …

Judiciary Rising: Constitutional Change In The United Kingdom, Erin F. Delaney

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Overcriminalizing Speech, Michal Buchhandler-Raphael

Scholarly Articles

Recent years have seen a significant expansion in the criminal justice system’s use of various preemptive measures, aimed to prevent harm before it occurs. This development consists of adopting a myriad of prophylactic statutes, including endangerment crimes, which target behaviors that merely pose a risk of future harm but are not in themselves harmful at the time they are committed.

This Article demonstrates that a significant portion of these endangerment crimes criminalize various forms of speech and expression. Examples include conspiracies, attempts, verbal harassment, instructional speech on how to commit crimes, and possession crimes. The Article argues that in contrast …

Justice Scalia's Fourth Amendment: Text, Context, Clarity, And Occasional Faint-Hearted Originalism, Timothy C. Macdonnell

Scholarly Articles

Since joining the United States Supreme Court in 1986, Justice Scalia has been a prominent voice on the Fourth Amendment, having written twenty majority opinions, twelve concurrences, and six dissents on the topic. Under his pen, the Court has altered its test for determining when the Fourth Amendment should apply; provided a vision to address technology's encroachment on privacy; and articulated the standard for determining whether government officials are entitled to qualified immunity in civil suits involving alleged Fourth Amendment violations. In most of Justice Scalia's opinions, he has championed an originalist/textualist theory of constitutional interpretation. Based on that theory, …

Government Retention And Use Of Unlawfully Secured Dna Evidence, Wayne A. Logan

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

“When Mercy Seasons Justice”: Interstate Recognition Of Ex-Offender Rights, Wayne A. Logan

Scholarly Publications

To the great relief of many, states are now rethinking their draconian criminal justice policies of the past several decades. In addition to shrinking prison and jail populations, reforms are underway to expand opportunities for relief from the collateral consequences of conviction, such as the loss of the right to vote, serve as a juror, or work in certain occupations, which can impede the ability of ex-offenders to successfully reintegrate into society. In coming years, as states seek to reduce their high recidivism rates, such relief efforts will likely continue to grow in number; as they do, we should expect …

The Civil Rights Approach To Campus Sexual Violence, Nancy Chi Cantalupo

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Due Process And The Failure Of The Criminal Court, Steven Zeidman

Publications and Research

No abstract provided.

Domestic Violence And The Confrontation Clause: The Case For A Prompt Post-Arrest Confrontation Hearing, Robert M. Hardaway

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

Part I and Part II of this article discuss the consequences of Crawford v. Washington for domestic violence victims and detail the problem of domestic violence in America, including the current prosecution strategies and challenges in domestic violence cases. Part III reviews the evolution of confrontation law jurisprudence. Part IV sets forth a proposed Crawford-compliant procedure that also protects domestic violence victims. Part V addresses anticipated objections to the prompt-post arrest confrontation hearing.

Confronting The Overcriminalization Of America, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 757 (2015), Timothy P. O'Neill

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.