Law Commons^™

The Voice Of Reason—Why Recent Judicial Interpretations Of The Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act’S Restrictions On Habeas Corpus Are Wrong, Judith L. Ritter

Judith L Ritter

By filing a petition for a federal writ of habeas corpus, a prisoner initiates a legal proceeding collateral to the direct appeals process. Federal statutes set forth the procedure and parameters of habeas corpus review. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) first signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, included significant cut-backs in the availability of federal writs of habeas corpus. This was by congressional design. Yet, despite the dire predictions, for most of the first decade of AEDPA’s reign, the door to habeas relief remained open. More recently, however, the Supreme Court reinterpreted a key portion …

Correcting A Fatal Lottery: A Proposal To Apply The Civil Discrimination Standards To The Death Penalty, Joseph Thomas

Joseph Thomas

Claims of discrimination are treated differently in the death penalty context. Discrimination in employment, housing, civil rights and jury venire all use a burden-shifting framework with the preponderance of the evidence as the standard. Discrimination that occurs in death penalty proceedings is the exception to the rule -- the framework offers less protections; there is only one phase of argumentation, with a heightened evidentiary standard of “exceptionally clear proof.” With disparate levels of protections against discrimination, the standard and framework for adjudicating claims of discrimination in the death penalty is unconstitutional.

Death is different as a punishment. But does discrimination …

Correcting A Fatal Lottery: A Proposal To Apply The Civil Discrimination Standards To The Death Penalty, Joseph Thomas

Joseph Thomas

Claims of discrimination are treated differently in the death penalty context. Discrimination in employment, housing, civil rights and jury venire all use a burden-shifting framework with the preponderance of the evidence as the standard. Discrimination that occurs in death penalty proceedings is the exception to the rule -- the framework offers less protections; there is only one phase of argumentation, with a heightened evidentiary standard of “exceptionally clear proof.” With disparate levels of protections against discrimination, the standard and framework for adjudicating claims of discrimination in the death penalty is unconstitutional.

Death is different as a punishment. But does discrimination …

Recent Landmark Criminal Law Decisions Of The Supreme Court: The Jurisprudence Of The Supreme Court: Fair Trial, Juvenile Justice, The Death Penalty, And The Right To Counsel, Richard Klein

Richard Daniel Klein

The Supreme Court has recently adjudicated some crucial issues regarding criminal matters and constitutional jurisprudence. The Court expanded the constitutional authority vested in Congress, provided defendants with constitutional remedies and protections, indicated that even a substantial amount of publicity surrounding a trial does not warrant a change of venue, left defense attorneys in awe of their new-found obligations, and settled important divisions among the U.S. circuit courts of appeal. Skilling v. U.S. revealed that a change of venue based on a claim of a tainted jury pool presents a difficult, if not impossible task, for criminal defendants. Padilla expanded the …

How Diversity Fared In The Court’S October 2012 Term, Lynne Rambo

Lynne H. Rambo

No abstract provided.

What Happens In Greece Stays In Greece?, Gerard Bradley

Gerard V. Bradley

Gerry Bradley contributed the article What Happens in Greece Stays in Greece? to the National Review Online Bench Memo.

Drug Exceptionalism, Erik Luna

Erik Luna

No abstract provided.

Top Court Won't Block Town Prayers, Richard Garnett

Richard W Garnett

Contribution to CNN Opinion by Rick Garnett. Richard Garnett says predicting court decisions is risky, but the odds are the court won't overturn public meeting prayers.

Praying In Greece, Gerard Bradley

Gerard V. Bradley

Contribution by Gerry Bradley in The Public Discourse. Judicial precedent, historical awareness, and the very nature of prayer all make it clear: legislators have the right to begin their assemblies with a prayer. The Supreme Court is hearing oral argument today in Greece v. Galloway, a case about lawmakers who begin their assemblies with prayer. The dispute has nothing to do with the financially beleaguered Aegean republic, even though one of the prayers at issue hailed Athena and Apollo. This Greece is a town in upstate New York, near Rochester. In 1999, the town began to open its Board meetings …

Board Meeting Prayer Bound For Supreme Court In Church-State Case, Richard Garnett

Richard W Garnett

ABC News quoted Rick Garnett in the article by Ariane de Vogue. Richard Garnett, an expert on church-state issues at the Notre Dame Law School says, “At the heart of this new case is whether the court should stick with a relatively bright-line rule that treats legislative prayers as presumptively permissible, given their long use in our country, or whether the court should move to more of an all-things-considered inquiry that treats such prayers like Christmas displays and the like.”

The Scope Of Congress's Thirteenth Amendment Enforcement Power After City Of Boerne V. Flores, Jennifer Mason Mcaward

Jennifer Mason McAward

Section Two of the Thirteenth Amendment grants Congress power “to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.” In Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co., the Supreme Court held that Section Two permits Congress to define the “badges and incidents of slavery” and pass “all laws necessary and proper” for their abolition. Congress has passed a number of civil rights laws under this understanding of its Section Two power. Several commentators have urged Congress to expansively define the “badges and incidents of slavery” and use Section Two to address everything from racial profiling to discrimination on the basis of gender and sexual …

Congressional Authority To Interpret The Thirteenth Amendment: A Response To Professor Tsesis, Jennifer Mason Mcaward

Jennifer Mason McAward

This essay explores the proper scope of Congress’s power to enforce the Thirteenth Amendment’s prohibition on slavery and involuntary servitude. It reviews the historical context surrounding the drafting of the Thirteenth Amendment enforcement power, and it points to structural constitutional considerations relevant to the understanding of that power. It concludes by suggesting some related topics that deserve further exploration.

Settled Versus Right: Constitutional Method And The Path Of Precedent, Randy J. Kozel

Randy J Kozel

No abstract provided.

Holdings, Dicta, And The Paradigms Of Precedent, Randy J. Kozel

Randy J Kozel

In United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court invalidated a key provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. In doing so, it raised significant questions about the power of states to limit the institution of marriage to opposite-sex couples. That issue was not presented in Windsor itself, but Windsor’s reasoning and rhetoric have already begun to play a pivotal role in ensuing challenges to state laws. Determining the future effects of Windsor, or of any other Supreme Court decision, requires defining the scope of judicial precedent. One account of precedent is restrictive: Only a court’s holdings must …

Avoiding Constitutional Questions As A Three-Branch Problem, William K. Kelley

William K. Kelley

This article criticizes the cardinal rule of statutory construction known as the avoidance canon - that statutes must be interpreted to avoid raising serious constitutional questions - as failing to respect the proper constitutional roles of both Congress and the Executive. It argues that the avoidance canon in practice cannot be grounded in legislative supremacy, which is the common justification for it offered by the Supreme Court, because it assumes without foundation that Congress would always prefer not to come close to the constitutional line in enacting statutes. Instead, the avoidance canon creates pressure for courts to adopt statutory meanings …

The Export Clause And The Constitutionality Of A Cap And Trade Mitigation Policy For Carbon Dioxide, Ross Astoria

Ross Astoria

The Export Clause of the Constitution prohibits the taxing of “Articles exported from any State.” In this paper I examine the effect that Export Clause jurisprudence might have on the choice of national carbon dioxide mitigation policies. I conclude that it is unlikely that a “downstream” price on carbon dioxide emissions could include exported hydrocarbons. One corollary is that, since cap and trade policies are “downstream” pricing mechanism, it would be difficult, perhaps impossible, to craft cap and trade so as to cover exported hydrocarbons. In contrast, an “upstream” carbon tax does not suffer from this constitutional infirmity. I therefore …

Garnett On The Constitutionality Of Legislative Prayer (Audio), Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

Bloomberg Law Podcast Host June Grasso examines the major legal issues affecting business. Professor Richard Garnett of Notre Dame Law School discusses an upcoming Supreme Court case on whether prayer at the start of town meetings violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. He talks with June Grasso on Bloomberg Radio's "Bloomberg Law."

Supreme Court To Hear Case On Separating Church And State, Gerard Bradley

Gerard V. Bradley

Gerard Bradley was quoted in the Los Angeles Times article Supreme Court to hear new case on religion in public lifeby David G. Savage on November 2, 2013. Notre Dame Law professor Gerard Bradley thinks justices may be ready to "reject or seriously modify the 'endorsement' test."

Legislative Prayer Gets Supreme Court Review, Richard Garnett

Richard W Garnett

Rick Garnett was quoted in the Associated Press article by MARK SHERMAN

The article was also published in

Wall Street Journal, Businessweek, NPR. NBC News, Fox News, Yahoo! News

Richard Garnett, a University of Notre Dame law professor and former Supreme Court clerk, said it is likely that the court will reverse the appeals court and that a narrow ruling of the sort sought by the administration could cause some liberal justices to join their conservative colleagues.

But because the case can be resolved narrowly, Garnett said it probably is not one the justices will use to order judges to …

Religion, Division, And The First Amendment, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

Nearly thirty-five years ago, in Lemon v. Kurtzman, Chief Justice Warren Burger declared that state programs or policies could excessive(ly) - and, therefore, unconstitutionally - entangle government and religion, not only by requiring or allowing intrusive public monitoring of religious institutions and activities, but also through what he called their divisive political potential. Chief Justice Burger asserted also, and more fundamentally, that political division along religious lines was one of the principal evils against which the First Amendment was intended to protect. And from this Hobbesian premise about the inten(t) animating the First Amendment, he proceeded on the assumption that …

Supreme Court Wrestles With Prayer At Public Meetings, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

Religion And Group Rights: Are Churches (Just) Like The Boy Scouts?, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

What role do religious communities, groups, and associations play - and, what role should they play - in our thinking and conversations about religious freedom and church-state relations? These and related questions - that is, questions about the rights and responsibilities of religious institutions - are timely, difficult, and important. And yet, they are often neglected.

It is not new to observe that American judicial decisions and public conversations about religious freedom tend to focus on matters of individuals' rights, beliefs, consciences, and practices. The special place, role, and freedoms of groups, associations, and institutions are often overlooked. However, if …

The New Federalism, The Spending Power, And Federal Criminal Law, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

It is difficult in constitutional-law circles to avoid the observation that we are living through a revival of federalism. Certainly, the Rehnquist Court has brought back to the public-law table the notion that the Constitution is a charter for a government of limited and enumerated powers, one that is constrained both by that charter's text and by the structure of the government it creates. This allegedly revolutionary Court seems little inclined, however, to revise or revisit its Spending Power doctrine, and it remains settled law that Congress may disburse funds in pursuit of ends not authorized explicitly in Article I …

Judicial Enforcement Of The Establishment Clause, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

This paper is the author’s contribution to a roundtable conference, held in October of 2008 at Notre Dame Law School, devoted to Prof. Kent Greenawalt’s book, Religion and the Constitution: Establishment and Fairness. It is suggested that Greenawalt’s admirably context-sensitive approach to church-and-state questions might lead us to think that the best course for judges is to find (somehow) some bright-line, on-off “rules” and “tests”, constructed to identify and forbid the most obvious violations of the Religion Clause’s core (whatever that is), and to give up on -- or, perhaps, “underenforce” -- the rest.

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

Richard W Garnett

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 …

Assimilation, Toleration, And The State's Interest In The Development Of Religious Doctrine, Richard Garnett

Richard W Garnett

Thirty-five years ago, in the context of a church-property dispute, Justice William Brennan observed that government interpretation of religious doctrine and judicial intervention in religious disputes are undesirable, because when civil courts undertake to resolve [doctrinal] controversies..., the hazards are ever present of inhibiting the free development of religious doctrine and of implicating secular interests in matters of purely ecclesiastical concern. This statement, at first, seems wise and fittingly cautious, even unremarkable and obvious. On examination, though, it turns out to be intriguing, elusive, and misleading. Indeed, Justice Brennan's warning presents hazards of its own, and its premises - if …

Introduction: Religion, Division, And The Constitution, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

No abstract provided.

Judicial Review, Local Values, And Pluralism, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

At the Federalist Society's 2008 National Student Symposium, a panel of scholars was asked to consider the question, does pervasive judicial review threaten to destroy local identity by homogenizing community norms? The answer to this question is yes, pervasive judicial review certainly does threaten local identity, because such review can homogenize[e] community norms, either by dragging them into conformity with national, constitutional standards or (more controversially) by subordinating them to the reviewers' own commitments. It is important to recall, however, that while it is true that an important feature of our federalism is local variation in laws and values, it …

Religious Freedom, Church Autonomy, And Constitutionalism, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

No abstract provided.

Chief Justice Rehnquist's Enduring Democratic Constitution, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

William H. Rehnquist's essay, The Notion of a Living Constitution, was delivered as the Will E. Orgain Lecture and then published thirty years ago, back when Rehnquist was still a relatively junior Associate Justice. The piece provides a clear and coherent statement of Rehnquist's judicial philosophy, and the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy and the Texas Law Review deserve thanks for their initiative and generosity in reproducing it, in memory of his life and work.

This introduction to Rehnquist's essay highlights his view that the Notion of a Living Constitution was to be resisted, not out of pious …