Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (21)
- American University Washington College of Law (9)
- University of Georgia School of Law (8)
- University of San Diego (8)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (7)
-
- William & Mary Law School (4)
- Barry University School of Law (3)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (3)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (2)
- Georgetown University Law Center (2)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (2)
- BLR (1)
- Duke Law (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (1)
- Seattle University School of Law (1)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (1)
- The Peter A. Allard School of Law (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Supreme Court Case Files (20)
- All Faculty Scholarship (9)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (9)
- Scholarly Works (8)
- University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series (8)
-
- Faculty Scholarship (5)
- Faculty Articles (3)
- Faculty Publications (3)
- Articles (2)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (2)
- All Faculty Publications (1)
- Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press (1)
- Conferences and Symposia to 2010 (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Popular Media (1)
- Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers (1)
- Scholarly Articles (1)
- Seattle University Law Review Online (1)
- Working Paper Series (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 78
Full-Text Articles in Law
The New Laboratories Of Democracy, Gerald S. Dickinson
The New Laboratories Of Democracy, Gerald S. Dickinson
Articles
Nearly a century ago, Justice Louis D. Brandeis’s dissent in New State Ice Co. v. Liebman coined one of the most profound statements in American law: “It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.” Justice Brandeis reminded us of our strong tradition of federalism, where the states, exercising their sovereign power, may choose to experiment with new legislation within their separate jurisdictions without the concern that such …
Evolving Standards Of Irrelevancy?, Joanmarie Davoli
Evolving Standards Of Irrelevancy?, Joanmarie Davoli
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
International Decision Commentary: Houngue Éric Noudehouenou V. Republic Of Benin, Olabisi D. Akinkugbe
International Decision Commentary: Houngue Éric Noudehouenou V. Republic Of Benin, Olabisi D. Akinkugbe
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
The judgment in Houngue Éric Noudehouenou v. Republic of Benin adds to the growing body of human rights jurisprudence on national electoral processes in Africa’s international courts. The decision demonstrates the growing importance of Africa’s regional and sub-regional courts as an alternative venue for opposition politicians, activists, and citizens to mobilize and challenge election processes and constitutional amendment processes where the playing field in their state is uneven. In turn, it reinforces the pivotal role of the regional and sub-regional courts in consolidating democratic governance in Africa, and reveals the limits of assessing the performance of Africa’s international courts solely …
Excessive Force: Justice Requires Refining State Qualified Immunity Standards For Negligent Police Officers, Angie Weiss
Excessive Force: Justice Requires Refining State Qualified Immunity Standards For Negligent Police Officers, Angie Weiss
Seattle University Law Review Online
At the time this Note was written, there was no Washington state equivalent of the § 1983 Civil Rights Act. As plaintiffs look to the Washington state courts as an alternative to federal courts, they will find that Washington state has a different structure of qualified immunity protecting law enforcement officers from liability.
In this Note, Angie Weiss recommends changing Washington state's standard of qualified immunity. This change would ensure plaintiffs have a state court path towards justice when they seek to hold law enforcement officers accountable for harm. Weiss explains the structure and context of federal qualified immunity; compares …
Confronting Memory Loss, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman
Confronting Memory Loss, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment grants “the accused” in “all criminal prosecutions” a right “to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” A particular problem occurs when there is a gap in time between the testimony that is offered, and the cross-examination of it, as where, pursuant to a hearsay exception or exemption, evidence of a current witness’s prior statement is offered and for some intervening reason her current memory is impaired. Does this fatally affect the opportunity to “confront” the witness? The Supreme Court has, to date, left unclear the extent to which a memory-impaired witness can …
The Genius Of Hamilton And The Birth Of The Modern Theory Of The Judiciary, William M. Treanor
The Genius Of Hamilton And The Birth Of The Modern Theory Of The Judiciary, William M. Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In late May 1788, with the essays of the Federalist on the Congress (Article I) and the Executive (Article II) completed, Alexander Hamilton turned, finally, to Article III and the judiciary. The Federalist’s essays 78 to 83 – the essays on the judiciary - had limited effect on ratification. No newspaper outside New York reprinted them, and they appeared very late in the ratification process – after eight states had ratified. But, if these essays had little immediate impact – essentially limited to the ratification debates in New York and, perhaps, Virginia – they were a stunning intellectual achievement. Modern …
Qualified Immunity And Constitutional Structure, Katherine Mims Crocker
Qualified Immunity And Constitutional Structure, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Scholarship
A range of scholars has subjected qualified immunity to a wave of criticism—and for good reasons. But the Supreme Court continues to apply the doctrine in ever more aggressive ways. By advancing two claims, this Article seeks to make some sense of this conflict and to suggest some thoughts toward a resolution.
First, while the Court has offered and scholars have rejected several rationales for the doctrine, layering in an account grounded in structural constitutional concerns provides a historically richer and analytically thicker understanding of the current qualified-immunity regime. For suits against federal officials, qualified immunity acts as a “compensating …
Government Standing And The Fallacy Of Institutional Injury, Tara Leigh Grove
Government Standing And The Fallacy Of Institutional Injury, Tara Leigh Grove
Faculty Publications
A new brand of plaintiff has come to federal court. In cases involving the Affordable Care Act, the Defense of Marriage Act, and partisan gerrymandering, government institutions have brought suit to redress “institutional injuries”—that is, claims of harm to their constitutional powers or duties. Jurists and scholars are increasingly enthusiastic about these lawsuits, arguing (for example) that the Senate should have standing to protect its power to ratify treaties; that the House of Representatives may sue to preserve its role in the appropriations process; and that the President may go to court to vindicate his Article II prerogatives. This Article …
Uncovering Juror Racial Bias, Christian Sundquist
Uncovering Juror Racial Bias, Christian Sundquist
Articles
The presence of bias in the courtroom has the potential to undermine public faith in the adversarial process, distort trial outcomes, and obfuscate the search for justice. In Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado (2017), the U.S. Supreme Court held for the first time that the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments required post-verdict judicial inquiry in criminal cases where racial bias clearly served as a “significant motivating factor” in juror decision-making. Courts will nonetheless likely struggle in interpreting what constitutes a "clear statement of racial bias" and whether such bias constituted a "significant motivating factor" in a juror's verdict. This Article will examine how …
Erisa Preemption After Gobeille V. Liberty Mutual: Completing The Retrenchment Of Shaw, Edward A. Zelinsky
Erisa Preemption After Gobeille V. Liberty Mutual: Completing The Retrenchment Of Shaw, Edward A. Zelinsky
Faculty Articles
Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. is the U.S. Supreme Court’s most recent preemption decision under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). In Gobeille, the Court completed the process of reconciling the restrained approach to ERISA preemption announced in New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Insurance Co. with the Court’s literal and expansive approach adopted earlier in Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. Gobeille consummated this reconciliation by confirming the sub silentio retrenchment of Shaw and its “plain language” approach in favor of Traveler’s broader construction of ERISA preemption. …
The Enigma Of Wynne, Edward A. Zelinsky
The Enigma Of Wynne, Edward A. Zelinsky
Faculty Articles
The five-justice Wynne majority used that case to make a major statement about the dormant Commerce Clause. In many respects, Wynne is an enigma that perpetuates an inherent problem of the Courts dormant Commerce Clause doctrine: the Court declares some ill-defined taxes as unconstitutionally discriminatory because they encourage in-state investment, while other economically equivalent taxes and government programs that similarly encourage intrastate economic activity are apparently acceptable under the dormant Commerce Clause.
Wynne is thus more important than the immediate situation it addresses, and will have consequences beyond the immediate circumstances it addresses. A decision as enigmatic as it is …
The Constitutional Nature Of The United States Tax Court, Brant J. Hellwig
The Constitutional Nature Of The United States Tax Court, Brant J. Hellwig
Scholarly Articles
Is the United States Tax Court part of the Executive Branch of government? One would expect that question would be capable of being definitively answered without considerable difficulty. And as recently expressed by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, that indeed is the case. In the course of addressing a challenge to the President's ability to remove a judge of the Tax Court for cause on separation of powers grounds, the D.C. Circuit rejected the premise that the removal power implicates two branches of government: "the Tax Court exercises Executive authority as part of the Executive …
Brief Of Federal Courts Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of The Petitioner, Willaim Araiza, Howard M. Wasserman, Lawrence Sager, Stephen I. Vladeck, Ernest A. Young
Brief Of Federal Courts Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of The Petitioner, Willaim Araiza, Howard M. Wasserman, Lawrence Sager, Stephen I. Vladeck, Ernest A. Young
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Creating Kairos At The Supreme Court: Shelby County, Citizens United, Hobby Lobby, And The Judicial Construction Of Right Moments, Linda L. Berger
Creating Kairos At The Supreme Court: Shelby County, Citizens United, Hobby Lobby, And The Judicial Construction Of Right Moments, Linda L. Berger
Scholarly Works
Kairos is an ancient rhetorical concept that was long neglected by rhetorical scholars, and its significance to legal argument and persuasion has been little discussed. Through their use of two words for time, chronos and kairos, the Greeks were able to view history as a grid of connected events spread across a landscape punctuated by hills and valleys. In chronos, the timekeeper-observer constructs a linear, measurable, quantitative accounting of what happened. In kairos, the participant-teller forms a more qualitative history by shaping individual moments into crises and turning points. From a rhetorical perspective, chronos is more closely allied with the …
Inferiority Complex: Should State Courts Follow Lower Federal Court Precedent On The Meaning Of Federal Law?, Amanda Frost
Inferiority Complex: Should State Courts Follow Lower Federal Court Precedent On The Meaning Of Federal Law?, Amanda Frost
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
The conventional wisdom is that state courts need not follow lower federal court precedent when interpreting federal law. Upon closer inspection, however, the question of how state courts should treat lower federal court precedent is not so clear. Although most state courts now take the conventional approach, a few contend that they are obligated to follow the lower federal courts, and two federal courts of appeals have declared that their decisions are binding on state courts. The Constitution’s text and structure send mixed messages about the relationship between state and lower federal courts, and the Supreme Court has never squarely …
Human Rights Hero: The Supreme Court In Griswold V. Connecticut, Stephen Wermiel
Human Rights Hero: The Supreme Court In Griswold V. Connecticut, Stephen Wermiel
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
Shifting Borders And The Boundaries Of Rights: Examining The Safe Third Country Agreement Between Canada And The United States, Efrat Arbel
All Faculty Publications
This article analyzes the Canadian Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal decisions assessing the Safe Third Country Agreement between Canada and the United States (STCA). It examines how each court’s treatment of the location and operation of the Canada-US border influences the results obtained. The article suggests that both in its treatment of the STCA and in its constitutional analysis, the Federal Court decision conceives of the border as a moving barrier capable of shifting outside Canada’s formal territorial boundaries. The effect of this decision is to bring refugee claimants outside state soil within the fold of Canadian constitutional …
Modern Odysseus Or Classic Fraud - Fourteen Years In Prison For Civil Contempt Without A Jury Trial, Judicial Power Without Limitation, And An Examination Of The Failure Of Due Process, Mitchell J. Frank
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
"Bad Juror" Lists And The Prosecutor's Duty To Disclose, Ira Robbins
"Bad Juror" Lists And The Prosecutor's Duty To Disclose, Ira Robbins
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
Prosecutors sometimes use what are known as "bad juror" lists to exclude particular citizens from jury service. Not only does this practice interfere with an open and fair jury-selection process, thus implicating a defendant's right to be tried by a jury of his or her peers, but it also violates potential jurors' rights to serve in this important capacity. But who is on these lists? And is a prosecutor required to disclose the lists to defense counsel? These questions have largely gone unnoticed by legal analysts. This Article addresses the prosecutor's duty to disclose bad-juror lists. It reviews the federal …
Quasi-Preemption: Nervous Breakdown In Our Constitutional System, Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr.
Quasi-Preemption: Nervous Breakdown In Our Constitutional System, Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr.
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Solipsism: Toward A Thick Doctrine Of Article Iii Duty; Or Why The Federal Circuits’ Nonprecedential Status Rules Are (Profoundly) Unconstitutional, Penelope J. Pether
Constitutional Solipsism: Toward A Thick Doctrine Of Article Iii Duty; Or Why The Federal Circuits’ Nonprecedential Status Rules Are (Profoundly) Unconstitutional, Penelope J. Pether
Working Paper Series
Constitutional Solipsism is the fourth in a series of articles on aspects of the private judging practices which have come to characterize the U.S. state and federal courts since the late 1950s. The first, Inequitable Injunctions: The Scandal of Private Judging in the U.S. Courts, 56 STAN. L. REV. 1435 (2004) gave a critical historical account of the development of the “practices of private judging” in U.S. Courts. Take a Letter, Your Honor: Outing the Judicial Epistemology of Hart v. Massanari, 62 WASH. & LEE L. REV. 1553 (2005), analyzed the development of a distinctive U.S. theory of precedent. Sorcerers, …
The Pros And Cons Of Politically Reversible 'Semisubstantive' Constitutional Rules, Dan T. Coenen
The Pros And Cons Of Politically Reversible 'Semisubstantive' Constitutional Rules, Dan T. Coenen
Scholarly Works
Most observers of constitutional adjudication believe that it works in an all-or-nothing way. On this view, the substance of challenged rules is of decisive importance, so that political decision makers may resuscitate invalidated laws only by way of constitutional amendment. This conception of constitutional law is incomplete. In fact, courts often use so-called “semisubstantive” doctrines that focus on the processes that nonjudicial officials have used in adopting constitutionally problematic rules. When a court strikes down a rule by using a motive-centered or legislative-findings doctrine, for example, political decision makers may revive that very rule without need for a constitutional amendment. …
The Supreme Courts Municipal Bond Decision And The Market-Participant Exception To The Dormant Commerce Clause, Dan T. Coenen
The Supreme Courts Municipal Bond Decision And The Market-Participant Exception To The Dormant Commerce Clause, Dan T. Coenen
Scholarly Works
Does it violate the dormant Commerce Clause for a state to exempt interest earned on its own bonds, but no others, from income taxation? In a recent decision, the Supreme Court answered this question in the negative. Six members of the Court found the case controlled by the state-self-promotion exception to the dormancy doctrine's antidiscrimination rule. Three of those Justices, however, went further by also invoking the longstanding market-participant exception to sustain the discriminatory state tax break. This Essay challenges that alternative line of analysis. According to the author, the plurality's effort to apply the market-participant principle: (1) invites a …
The Assumptions Behind The Assumptions In The War On Terror: Risk Assessment As An Example Of Foundational Disagreement In Counterterrorism Policy, Kenneth Anderson
The Assumptions Behind The Assumptions In The War On Terror: Risk Assessment As An Example Of Foundational Disagreement In Counterterrorism Policy, Kenneth Anderson
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
This 2007 article (based around an invited conference talk at Wayne State in early 2007) addresses risk assessment and cost benefit analysis as mechanisms in counterterrorism policy. It argues that although policy is often best pursued by agreeing to set aside deep foundational differences, in order to obtain a strategic plan for an activity such as counterterrorism, foundational differences must be addressed in order that policy not merely devolve into a policy minimalism that is always and damagingly tactical, never strategic, in order to avoid domestic democratic political conflict. The article takes risk assessment in counterterrorism, using cost benefit analysis, …
Supreme Court Reversals: Exploring The Seventh Court, Stephen Wermiel
Supreme Court Reversals: Exploring The Seventh Court, Stephen Wermiel
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
Inside The Box - When Exercising Peremptory Challenges, Attorneys Should Keep In Mind The Three-Step Framework Of Batson/Wheeler, Angela J. Davis
Inside The Box - When Exercising Peremptory Challenges, Attorneys Should Keep In Mind The Three-Step Framework Of Batson/Wheeler, Angela J. Davis
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
No abstract provided.
"Sociological Legitimacy" In Supreme Court Opinions, Michael Wells
"Sociological Legitimacy" In Supreme Court Opinions, Michael Wells
Scholarly Works
Analysis of a Supreme Court opinion ordinarily begins from the premise that the opinion is a transparent window into the Court's thinking, such that the reasons offered by the Court are, or ought to be, the reasons that account for the holding. Scholars debate the strength of the Court's reasoning, question or defend the Court's candor, and propose alternative ways of justifying the ruling. This Article takes issue with the transparency premise, on both descriptive and normative grounds. Especially in controversial cases, the Court is at least as much concerned with presenting its holding in a way that will win …
The State Secrets Privilege And Separation Of Powers, Amanda Frost
The State Secrets Privilege And Separation Of Powers, Amanda Frost
Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals
Since September 11, 2001, the Bush administration has repeatedly invoked the state secrets privilege in cases challenging executive conduct in the war on terror, arguing that the very subject matter of these cases must be kept secret to protect national security. The executive's recent assertion of the privilege is unusual, in that it is seeking dismissal, pre-discovery, of all challenges to the legality of specific executive branch programs, rather than asking for limits on discovery in individual cases. This essay contends that the executive's assertion of the privilege is therefore akin to a claim that the courts lack jurisdiction to …
The Roberts Court: Year 1, Lori A. Ringhand
The Roberts Court: Year 1, Lori A. Ringhand
Scholarly Works
This paper is an empirical analysis of the Supreme Court's recently-ended 2005 term, including an examination of the issues raised by, and the ideological direction of, the decisions issued by the Court. In addition to reviewing the work of the Court as a whole, the paper also separately examines the jurisprudence of new Justices Roberts and Alito. In doing so, it raises the possibility that these justices may have more in common with each other than with the Court's more established conservative members. The paper also demonstrates that the Court, pursuant to one of Justice Roberts' frequently stated goals, was …
Kramer's Popular Constitutionalism: A Quick Normative Assessment, Sarah K. Harding
Kramer's Popular Constitutionalism: A Quick Normative Assessment, Sarah K. Harding
All Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.