Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Originalism And History, Justice John P. Stevens (Ret.)
Originalism And History, Justice John P. Stevens (Ret.)
Georgia Law Review
The notion that a jurisprudence of "original intent" will constrain the discretion of judges who seek to impose their own policy preferences on the law has often been attributed to a speech delivered by Edwin Meese, then-Attorney General of the United States, to an American Bar Association audience on July 9, 1985. In that speech the Attorney General was particularly critical of Supreme Court opinions relying on the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as a basis for requiring the states to adhere to specific provisions of the Bill of Rights. "[N]owhere else [he said,] has the principle of …
When Silence Ought To Be Golden: Why The Supreme Court Should Uphold The Selective Silence Doctrine In The Wake Of Salinas V. Texas, Evelyn A. French
When Silence Ought To Be Golden: Why The Supreme Court Should Uphold The Selective Silence Doctrine In The Wake Of Salinas V. Texas, Evelyn A. French
Georgia Law Review
At the Supreme Court recently resolved in Salinas v. Texas, a person who voluntarily agrees to be interviewed by the police and remains silent to a particular question, but does not invoke his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, cannot rely on his Fifth Amendment right to protect his silence from being used as evidence of his guilt at trial. A question left open by the Court, however, is whether a defendant in a post-Miranda interrogation can rely on his right to remain silent by refusing to answer certain questions and not fear these refusals will be used as evidence …
Justifying A Prudential Solution To The Williamson County Ripeness Puzzle, Katherine M. Crocker
Justifying A Prudential Solution To The Williamson County Ripeness Puzzle, Katherine M. Crocker
Georgia Law Review
In the much-maligned 1985 case Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, the Supreme Court articulated a rule of "ripeness" requiring most Fifth Amendment regulatory- takings claimants to seek 'just compensation" in state court before attempting to litigate in federal court. Williamson County and its progeny have opened a Pandora's box of unforeseen complications, spawning many more questions than they purported to answer. At the forefront is what kind of requirement the rule is anyway. This Article contends that reading Williamson County as grounded in the Constitution (specifically, in Article III or the Fifth Amendment) runs …
Defeating A Wolf Clad As A Wolf: Formalism And Functionalism In Separation-Of-Powers Suits Against The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Lee A. Deneen
Georgia Law Review
In 2010, the Court decided Free Enterprise Fund, engaging in a substantially formalist analysis of the President's removal power. That same year, Congress authorized creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a federal agency with significant regulatory and enforcement power over the consumer finance industry. Within three years of that legislation, two lawsuits have challenged the CFPB's structure. This Note evaluates the arguments of the CFPB's opponents against the backdrop of Free Enterprise Fund and the Roberts Court's other formalist decisions. Although one might expect complaints against the CFPB to be lodged solely in formalist terms, the CFPB's opponents have …
Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: The Constitutionality Of Georgia's Burden Of Proof In Executing The Mentally Retarded, Veronica M. O'Grady
Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: The Constitutionality Of Georgia's Burden Of Proof In Executing The Mentally Retarded, Veronica M. O'Grady
Georgia Law Review
In 2002, the Supreme Court in Atkins v. Virginia announced that executing mentally retarded defendants violates the Constitution. Georgia's standard for determining whether a criminal defendant is mentally retarded-and therefore ineligible for the death penalty- is the highest in the nation, requiring defendants to prove mental retardation to a jury, during the guilt and innocence phase, beyond a reasonable doubt. As in the case of Warren Lee Hill, Jr., this high burden necessarily results in Georgia executing defendants who are almost certainly mentally retarded,arguably violating the Atkins directive. Though once the first state to create a ban on executing the …