Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

Who's Afraid Of Being Woke? – Critical Theory As Awakening To Erascism And Other Injustices, Berta E. Hernández-Truyol Dec 2023

Who's Afraid Of Being Woke? – Critical Theory As Awakening To Erascism And Other Injustices, Berta E. Hernández-Truyol

UF Law Faculty Publications

Woke means “the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them.” Ryan Newman, General Counsel to Governor of Florida.

Stopping wokeness is to combat the belief there are systemic injustices in American society which, true to form, does sound a lot like the opposite of being awake, and that is to say, totally asleep. Alex Wagner.

[B]y condemning the word “Woke” the establishment is not only attacking African American language. It also [is] disparaging the whole concept of being “awake” which I believe is one of the essential elements of moral and religious consciousness. …


Superfluous Judicial Activism: The Takings Gloss, Michael Allan Wolf May 2023

Superfluous Judicial Activism: The Takings Gloss, Michael Allan Wolf

UF Law Faculty Publications

In the summer of 2021, the Supreme Court released opinions in three Takings Clause cases. The Justices did not focus primarily on the dozen words that compose that Clause. Instead, the Court considered the expansive judicial gloss on those words, the extratextual aspects established by takings opinions over the last 100 years, since the “too far” test introduced by Justice Holmes in Pennsylvania Coal. The “Takings Gloss” is the product of holdings expanding the meaning and reach of the Takings Clause, a tangled web of opinions that have troubled lawyers, judges, and commentators for several decades. With the latest contributions, …


On Fires, Floods, And Federalism, Andrew Hammond Jan 2023

On Fires, Floods, And Federalism, Andrew Hammond

UF Law Faculty Publications

In the United States, law condemns poor people to their fates in states. Where Americans live continues to dictate whether they can access cash, food, and medical assistance. What’s more, immigrants, territorial residents, and tribal members encounter deteriorated corners of the American welfare state. Nonetheless, despite repeated retrenchment efforts, this patchwork of programs has proven remarkably resilient. Yet, the ability of the United States to meet its people’s most basic needs now faces an unprecedented challenge: climate change. As extreme weather events like wildfires and hurricanes become more frequent and more intense, these climate-fueled disasters will displace and impoverish more …


Macro-Judging And Article Iii Exceptionalism, Merritt E. Mcalister Jan 2023

Macro-Judging And Article Iii Exceptionalism, Merritt E. Mcalister

UF Law Faculty Publications

Over the last half-century, the federal courts have faced down two competing crises: an increase in small, low-value litigation thought unworthy of Article III attention and an increase in the numbers and complexity of “big” cases thought worthy of those resources. The choice was what to prioritize and how, and the answer the courts gave was consistent across all levels of the federal judiciary. Using what this Article calls “macro-judging,” Article III judges entrenched their own power and autonomy to focus on the work they deemed most “worthy” of their attention, while outsourcing less “important” work to an array of …


The End Of Balancing? Text, History & Tradition In First Amendment Speech Cases After Bruen, Clay Calvert, Mary-Rose Papandrea Jan 2023

The End Of Balancing? Text, History & Tradition In First Amendment Speech Cases After Bruen, Clay Calvert, Mary-Rose Papandrea

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article examines the potential impact on First Amendment free-speech jurisprudence of the U.S. Supreme Court’s increasing reliance on text, history, and tradition in 2022 decisions such as New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. In Bruen, the Court embraced a new test for examining Second Amendment cases. It concentrates on whether there is a historical tradition of regulating the conduct in question, and it eliminates any use of constitutionally common means-end standards of review such as strict and intermediate scrutiny. Those two scrutiny standards often guide the Court’s free-speech decisions. The Bruen majority, however, asserted that its …


State Constitutional Rights, State Courts, And The Future Of Substantive Due Process Protections, Jonathan L. Marshfield Jan 2023

State Constitutional Rights, State Courts, And The Future Of Substantive Due Process Protections, Jonathan L. Marshfield

UF Law Faculty Publications

By most accounts, the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization signaled a broader stagnation (and perhaps retrenchment) of federal substantive due process protections. As a result, there is now great interest in the role that state constitutions and courts might play in protecting and expanding reproductive and privacy rights. This Article aims to place this moment in state constitutional development in broader context. It makes two core claims in this regard. First, although state courts are free to interpret state constitutions as providing broader individual rights protections than those contained in the Federal Constitution, state constitutions …


Bottom-Rung Appeals, Merritt E. Mcalister Jan 2023

Bottom-Rung Appeals, Merritt E. Mcalister

UF Law Faculty Publications

There are haves and have-nots in the federal appellate courts, and the haves get more attention. For decades the courts have used a triage regime where they distribute judicial attention selectively: some appeals receive a lot of judicial attention, some appeals receive barely any. What this work unearths is that this triage system produces demonstrably unequal results depending on the circuit handling the appeal and whether the appellant has counsel or not. Together, these two factors produce dramatic disparities: in one circuit, for example, an unrepresented appellant receives, on average, a decision less than a tenth the length of a …