Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Book reviews (1)
- Civil rights violations (1)
- Conservatism (1)
- Constitutional violations (1)
- Criminal justice (1)
-
- Defendants (1)
- False speech (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Flaws (1)
- Freedom of speech (1)
- Law reform (1)
- Lawyers (1)
- Legal systems (1)
- Legitimacy (1)
- Original public meaning (1)
- Originalism (1)
- Postconviction challenges (1)
- Precedent (1)
- Presumptions (1)
- Procedural adequacy doctrine (1)
- Right to effective counsel (1)
- Scalia (Antonin) (1)
- Speech (1)
- Stare decisis (1)
- State courts (1)
- Tanner lectures (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Tragedy Of Justice Scalia, Mitchell N. Berman
The Tragedy Of Justice Scalia, Mitchell N. Berman
Michigan Law Review
Review of A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law by Antonin Scalia .
Precedent And Speech, Randy J. Kozel
Precedent And Speech, Randy J. Kozel
Michigan Law Review
The U.S. Supreme Court has shown a notable willingness to reconsider its First Amendment precedents. In recent years, the Court has departed from its prior statements regarding the constitutional value of false speech. It has revamped its process for identifying categorical exceptions to First Amendment protection. It has changed its positions on corporate electioneering and aggregate campaign contributions. In short, it has revised the ground rules of expressive freedom in ways large and small. The Court generally describes its past decisions as enjoying a presumption of validity through the doctrine of stare decisis. This Article contends that within the context …
Federal Review Of State Criminal Convictions: A Structural Approach To Adequacy Doctrine, Eve Brensike Primus
Federal Review Of State Criminal Convictions: A Structural Approach To Adequacy Doctrine, Eve Brensike Primus
Michigan Law Review
Modern state postconviction review systems feature procedural labyrinths so complicated and confusing that indigent defendants have no realistic prospect of complying with the rules. When defendants predictably fail to navigate these mazes, state and federal courts deem their claims procedurally defaulted and refuse to consider those claims on their merits. As a result, systemic violations of criminal procedure rights—like the right to effective counsel—persist without judicial correction.
But the law contains a tool that, if properly adapted, could bring these systemic problems to the attention of federal courts: procedural adequacy. Procedural adequacy doctrine gives federal courts the power to ignore …