Digital Commons Network^™

Freedom And Equality On The Installment Plan, Michael Halley

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

A response to Nelson Tebbe & Robert L. Tsai, Constitutional Borrowing, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 462 (2010). Crediting the perception that the Constitution is a poorly cut puzzle whose variously configured pieces don't match, Nelson Tebbe and Robert Tsai propose that the stand-alone parts of freedom and equality can be merged and mutually enlarged through the act of borrowing. They are mistaken. While Thomas Jefferson wrote that ideas may be appropriated without being diminished and so "freely spread from one to another over the globe," the equality and freedom the Constitution addresses as actualities are constrained by a basic, familiar, …

Past As Prologue: Old And New Feminisms, Martha Chamallas

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

Each "stage" of feminist legal theory-and each brand or strand of feminism- stays alive and is never completely replaced by newer approaches. When I first attempted to synthesize the field of Feminist Legal Theory for a treatise I was writing at the end of the twentieth century, I thought it would be useful to think chronologically and to analyze the major developments of the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. I crudely divided feminist legal theory into three stages roughly corresponding to the preceding decades: the equality stage of the 1970s, the difference stage of the 1980s, and the diversity stage of …

Federal Child Welfare Legislation., Frank Vandervort

Book Chapters

This chapter provides a brief overview of federal statutes that impact the practice of child welfare law. Since the enactment of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act in 1974 (CAPTA), the federal government has played an ever increasing role in handling child maltreatment cases.

Katrina, Federalism, And Military Law Enforcement: A New Exception To The Posse Comitatus Act, Sean Mcgrane

Michigan Law Review

In the days following Hurricane Katrina, as lawlessness and violence spread throughout New Orleans, the White House considered invoking the Insurrection Act so that members of the U.S. military could legally perform law enforcement functions inside the flooded city. This Note contends that the White House's decision not to invoke the Act was substantially driven by federalism concerns-in particular, concerns about intruding on Louisiana's sovereignty. But, this Note further contends, in focusing so heavily on these state sovereignty concerns, the White House largely ignored the other side of the 'federalism coin "-namely, enabling the federal government to act where national …

What Does Graham Mean In Michigan?, Kimberly A. Thomas

Articles

In Graham v. Florida, the United States Supreme Court held that life without parole could not be imposed on a juvenile offender for a nonhomicide crime.1 In this context, the Graham Court extensively discussed the diminished culpability of juvenile criminal defendants, as compared to adults. The Court relied on current scientific research regarding adolescent development and neuroscience. While the narrowest holding of Graham has little impact in Michigan, the science it relies on, and the potential broader implications for adolescents in Michigan, are significant.

Litigation Strategies For Dealing With The Indigent Defense Crisis, Eve Brensike Primus

Articles

The indigent defense delivery system in the United States is in a state of crisis. Public defenders routinely handle well over 1,000 cases a year, more than three times the number of cases that the American Bar Association says one attorney can handle effectively. As a result, many defendants sit in jail for months before even speaking to their court-appointed lawyers. And when defendants do meet their attorneys, they are often disappointed to learn that these lawyers are too overwhelmed to provide adequate representation. With public defenders or assigned counsel representing more than 80% of criminal defendants nationwide, the indigent …

Regulating Segregation: The Contribution Of The Aba Criminal Justice Standards On The Treatment Of Prisoners, Margo Schlanger

Articles

Over recent decades, solitary confinement for prisoners has increased in prevalence and in salience. Whether given the label "disciplinary segregation," "administrative segregation," "special housing," "seg," "the hole," "supermax," or any of a dozen or more names, the conditions of solitary confinement share basic features: twenty-three hours per day or more spent alone in a cell, with little to do and no one to talk to, and one hour per day or less in a different, but no less isolated, setting-an exercise cage or a space with a shower. Long-term segregation units operated along these lines are extraordinarily expensive to build …

A Structural Vision Of Habeas Corpus, Eve Brensike Primus

Articles

As scholars have recognized elsewhere in public law, there is no hermetic separation between individual rights and structural or systemic processes of governance. To be sure, it is often helpful to focus on a question as primarily implicating one or the other of those categories. But a full appreciation of a structural rule includes an understanding of its relationship to individuals, and individual rights can both derive from and help shape larger systemic practices. The separation of powers principle, for example, is clearly a matter of structure, but much of its virtue rests on its promise to help protect the …

Relative Doubt: Familial Searches Of Dna Databases, Erin Murphy

Michigan Law Review

The continued growth of forensic DNA databases has brought about greater interest in a search method known as "familial" or "kinship" matching. Whereas a typical database search seeks the source of a crime-scene stain by making an exact match between a known person and the DNA sample, familial searching instead looks for partial matches in order to find potential relatives of the source. The use of a familial DNA search to identify the alleged "Grim Sleeper" killer in California brought national attention to the method, which has many proponents. In contrast, this Article argues against the practice of familial searching …

When A Company Confesses, Christopher Jackson

Michigan Law Review

Under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a defendant is normally obligated to attend all of the proceedings against her. However Rule 43(b)(2) carves out an exception for organizational defendants, stating that they "need not be present" if represented by an attorney. But on its face, the language of 43(b)(2) is ambiguous: is it the defendant or the judge who has the discretion to decide whether the defendant appears? That is, may a judge compel the presence of an organizational defendant? This Note addresses the ambiguity in the context of the plea colloquy, considering the text of several of the …

The Vitality Of The American Sovereign, Todd E. Pettys

Michigan Law Review

The proposition that "the people" are the preeminent sovereign in the United States has long been a tenet of American public life. The authors of the Declaration of Independence characterized the American people's sovereignty as a "self-evident" truth when announcing the colonies' decision to sever their ties with Great Britain, the delegates to the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 invoked the people's sovereignty when framing the nation's Constitution, and Americans today exercise their sovereignty each time they cast their ballots on Election Day. Yet what prerogatives, precisely, does the people's sovereignty entail? In modern America, where neither a bloody revolution nor …

Reply To Richard A. Leo And Jon B. Gould, Samuel R. Gross, Barbara O'Brien

Articles

The following is a letter to the Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law received from Professors Samuel Gross and Barbara O'Brien, responding to an article published in the Journal in Fall 2009 by Professors Richard Leo and Jon Gould. This letter is followed by a reply from Professors Leo and Gould. Professors Gross and O'Brien did not see the reply prior to the Journal going to press. As we have indicated before, we welcome letters to the Journal from readers on any topic covered in a prior issue. - Editors

Snyder V. Louisiana: Continuing The Historical Trend Towards Increased Scrutiny Of Peremptory Challenges, John P. Bringewatt

Michigan Law Review

In March 2008, the Supreme Court decided Snyder v. Louisiana, the latest in the line of progeny of Batson v. Kentucky. This Note demonstrates that Snyder is part of a historical pattern of Supreme Court decisions concerning the use of peremptory challenges in which the Court has moved away from permitting the unfettered use of the peremptory challenge in favor of stronger Equal Protection considerations. Snyder alters the requirements for trial judges in deciding Batson challenges by requiring them to provide some explanation of their reasons for accepting a prosecutor's justification of a peremptory challenge. Snyder is the …

Berghuis V. Smith: Brief For Social Scientists, Statisticians, And Law Professors, Jeffrey Fagan, Et Al., As Amici Curiae Supporting Respondent, Samuel R. Gross

Appellate Briefs

Amici curiae are leading social scientists, statisticians, and law professors actively engaged in social scientific research focused on the criminal justice system. Included among amici are authors of authoritative books and articles on statistics and the application of statistics in social science. Amici have written and conducted studies on a broad range of topics concerning the criminal justice and jury systems. Many amici are members and leaders of associations in their fields, including the National Academy of Sciences, the National Science Foundation, and the American Society of Criminology.

Amici curiae submit this brief to evaluate the various proposed methods for …

Vol. 60, No. 3, November 24, 2009, University Of Michigan Law School

Res Gestae

•Football Observations By The Unqualified •Letter to the Editor: LRAP •Justice At All Costs •The Fast and the Furious •This is Water •Ye Olde Issue Spotter •The Beer Guy •The Food Court •"Best" of LawOpen •Crossword •Kicking it Old School

Misunderstanding Provocation, Samuel H. Pillsbury

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Provocation is and always has been a compromise rule whose success depends on its ability to appeal to all ideological constituencies, and therefore will always-as long as it lasts-resist the final categorization that this question seeks. As long as provocation involves an inquiry into reasonableness, it will include considerations of justification. As long as it provides for mitigation of punishment based on the difficulty of resisting temptations to violence inspired by strong emotion, it will speak to considerations of excuse.

The Values Of Interdisciplinarity In Homicide Law Reform, Robert Weisberg

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Professor Reid Fontaine's article, Adequate (Non)Provocation and Heat of Passion as Excuse Not Justification, makes a convincing case for treating heat of passion wholly as an excuse not a justification, as the only sensible way to comprehend its various forms. In doing so, Professor Fontaine stimulates further thinking about heat of passion doctrine, along two dimensions.

Unjustified: The Practical Irrelevance Of The Justification/Excuse Distinction, Gabriel J. Chin

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In recent decades, the distinction between justification and excuse defenses has been a favorite topic of theorists of philosophy and criminal law. Notwithstanding the impressive intellectual efforts devoted to the task, no single scholar or viewpoint appears to be on the verge of generating practical consensus about the concepts of justification and excuse, categorization of the defenses, or categorization of difficult individual cases. This Essay suggests that none of these goals can be usefully advanced through the justification/excuse distinction.

On Passion's Potential To Undermine Rationality: A Reply, Reid Griffith Fontaine

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Reply is organized into several sections. Following the Introduction, I respond to my six distinguished commentators. In Section II, I consider Professor Chin's concern that the distinction between justification and excuse bears no practical relevance for the criminal law. In Section III, I respond to Professor Baron's argument that reasonable mistake of fact is consistent with justification-a view, she observes, that is generally reflected in the criminal law. Building on the discussion of whether mistake and justification are compatible, Section IV addresses Professor Pillsbury's treatment of heat of passion as a hybrid defense that uniquely incorporates components of both …

Padilla V. Kentucky: Brief For Legal Ethics, Criminal Procedure, And Criminal Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Eve Brensike Primus

Appellate Briefs

Amici curiae legal ethics, criminal procedure, and criminal law professors are 37 law professors who teach, research, and write about criminal law, criminal procedure, or legal ethics, including their intersection. The names, titles, and institutional affiliations (for identification purposes only) of these amici are listed in Appendix A. Some amici work as clinical professors, in which capacity they regularly counsel and advise clients in criminal matters and train attorneys on how to effectively represent such clients. Amici have a professional interest in this Court's consideration of the doctrinal, historical, and policy issues involved in this Court's interpretation of the Sixth …

Bowen V. Oregon: Brief Of Jeffrey Abramson, Caroline L. Davidson, Shari S. Diamond, Theodore Eisenberg, Phoebe C. Ellsworth, Samuel R. Gross, Valerie P. Hans, Stephen Kanter, Norbert L. Kerr, Stephan Landsman, Robert J. Maccoun, Susan F. Mandiberg, Margaret L. Paris, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Mary R. Rose, Michael J. Saks, And Neil Vidmar As Amici Curae In Support Of Petitioner, Phoebe C. Ellsworth

Appellate Briefs

Amici are university professors whose teaching and scholarship have addressed historical, behavioral, and constitutional questions about jury unanimity. Amici are identified in the Appendix.

In Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 (1972), and its companion case, Johnson v. Louisiana, 406 U.S. 356 (1972), a fractured Court concluded that the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments did not mandate the traditional requirement of unanimity for criminal jury trials in state courts. The Court recognized that unanimity had been a requirement of common-law juries for hundreds of years, but a plurality considered that historical background unimportant. Instead, the plurality relied on a …

"One Of The Dirty Secrets Of American Corrections": Retaliation, Surplus Power, And Whistleblowing Inmates, James E. Robertson

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Retaliation is deeply engrained in the correctional office subculture; it may well be in the normative response when an inmate files a grievance, a statutory precondition for filing a civil rights action. This Article, the first to address comprehensively the sociological and constitutional aspects of retaliation, argues for protecting grievants through safeguards much like those accorded whistleblowers. Part I of the Article provides a socio-legal primer on correctional officer retaliation by addressing the frequency of retaliation, its causes, and its constitutional taxonomy. Part II describes the elements of a prima facie case of unconstitutional retaliation under § 1983. Part III …

"An Opportunity For Effective Cross-Examination": Limits On The Confrontation Right Of The Pro Se Defendant, Alanna Clair

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The rights of a defendant to confront his accusers and conduct his defense without the assistance of counsel are sacrosanct in the American judicial system. The rights of the defendant are even sometimes exalted at the expense of the rights of the public or of victims of crime. This Note examines the problem of a pro se defendant using his confrontation right to intimidate or harass his alleged victims testifying against him. It is well-established that the confrontation right is not unconditional. The problem comes in determining whether the courts can place limits on the confrontation right of a pro …

The Court Of Life And Death: The Two Tracks Of Constitutional Sentencing Law And The Case For Uniformity, Rachel E. Barkow

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court takes two very different approaches to substantive sentencing law. Whereas its review of capital sentences is robust, its oversight of noncapital sentences is virtually nonexistent. Under the Court's reading of the Constitution, states must draft death penalty statutes with enough guidance to avoid death sentences being imposed in an arbitrary and capricious manner Mandatory death sentences are disallowed, and the sentencing authority must have the opportunity to consider mitigating evidence. The Court will scrutinize whether the death sentence is proportionate to the crime and the defendant, and it has frequently exempted certain crimes and certain offenders from …

Vol. 59, No. 11, April 21, 2009, University Of Michigan Law School

Res Gestae

•Revisiting PRS a Year Later •Letter from the Editor •No Other Warranties •This is Water •Bless Your Heart •Kicking it Old School •Beer Guy •MLaw Softball Pics •Prof. Green Retires •When You Were Cooler •Bold As Tech •Save Yourself •Law Prom Pics •Campbell Finals Pics •SFF BBall Pics

Will Quants Rule The (Legal) World?, Edward K. Cheng

Michigan Law Review

The quants are coming! And they are here to stay-so argues Professor Ian Ayres' in his new book, Super Crunchers, which details the brave new world of statistical prediction and how it has already begun to affect our lives. For years, academic researchers have known about the considerable and at times surprising advantages of statistical models over the considered judgments of experienced clinicians and experts. Today, these models are emerging all over the landscape. Whether the field is wine, baseball, medicine, or consumer relations, they are vying against traditional experts for control over how we make decisions. To be …

Do We Need A New Fourth Amendment?, Orin S. Kerr

Michigan Law Review

Slobogin's book offers a new conceptualization of the Fourth Amendment rooted in what he calls the proportionality principle: An investigative technique should be permitted under the Constitution only if the strength of the government's justification for the technique is roughly proportionate to the level of intrusion it causes . Slobogin roots this principle in Terry v. Ohio and its pragmatic balancing of law-enforcement and privacy interests. To determine how much justification the Fourth Amendment requires, Slobogin argues, courts should assess the intrusiveness of the investigatory technique and then set a proportionate threshold of proof that the government must show. The …

Gender-Related Violence And International Criminal Law And Justice, Christine Chinkin

Book Chapters

The treatment of gender-related violence within ICL is inextricably tied up with the recognition of women's rights as human rights, and the growing jurisprudence recognizing violence against women in non-armed conflict situations as human rights violations. Following from the Third World Conference on Women in Nairobi in 1985 women's NGOs campaigned to have gender-based acts of violence against women recognized as abuses of human rights, a goal that was achieved at the Vienna World Conference on Human Rights in 1993. That Conference was held against the backdrop of the 'massive, organized and systematic detention and rape of women that were …

Passions We Like… And Those We Don't: Anti-Gay Hate Crime Laws And The Discursive Construction Of Sex, Gender, And The Body, Yvonne Zylan

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

This Article proceeds as follows. In Part II, the author catalogs the history of anti-gay hate crime laws in the United States, describing the rapid spread of state-level laws extending race- and religion-based hate crime laws to LGB people. The Article also provides an overview of federal legislation addressing anti-gay hate crime. In Part III, it examines the policy environment within which anti-gay hate crime laws have been, and continue to be, considered. Specifically, the jurisprudential frameworks that shape, define, and constrain discourses of equality, rights, and social identity are analyzed. The argument is made that the policy environment of …

From Pinochet To Rumsfeld: Universal Jurisdiction In Europe 1998-2008, Wolfgang Kaleck

Michigan Journal of International Law

This Essay provides a survey of more than fifty universal jurisdiction proceedings in European courts and illustrates that universal jurisdiction is no longer a seldom-used theoretical concept, but a widespread practice. However, it is a practice that faces a number legal and practical obstacles identified here. Similar difficulties are encountered in other mechanisms used to combat impunity, including territorial and personality jurisdiction, state accountability at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), and civil litigation in the United States. The Essay then begins an evaluation of the last ten years of universal …