Law Commons^™

The Constitutionality Of The Federal Sentencing Reform Act After Mistretta V. United States, Charles R. Eskridge Iii

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Defenseless Self-Defense: An Essay On Goldberg And Zipursky's Civil Recourse Defended, Alan Calnan

Alan Calnan

In a recent symposium published by the Indiana Law Journal, Professors John C.P. Goldberg and Benjamin C. Zipursky offer a spirited defense of their theory of civil recourse, which sees the tort system exclusively as a means of empowering victims of wrongs. This essay assails that defense, finding it curiously defenseless in three related respects. First, civil recourse’s key tenets are particularly vulnerable to criticism because they are quietly reductive, inscrutably vague, and highly unstable. Second, even in its most coherent form, civil recourse theory literally lacks any meaningful explanation of the defensive rights at play within the tort system. …

Expanding Stare Decisis: The Role Of Precedent In The Unfolding Dialectic Of Brady V. Maryland, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

Does stare decisis constrain the expansion of constitutional doctrine? Does existing precedent preclude the Supreme Court from expanding a criminal defendant’s right to exculpatory evidence? While commentators frequently clash on when stare decisis should prevent the Court from overruling its own precedents, the question of when fidelity to precedent should inhibit doctrinal expansion is surprisingly under-theorized. This Article begins to fill this gap through an in-depth case study of stare decisis and the expansion of criminal due process doctrine.

This Article analyzes the longstanding constitutional dialectic between procedural and substantive schools of criminal due process. Focus is on Brady v. …

Originalism And Loving V. Virginia, Steven G. Calabresi, Andrea Matthews

Faculty Working Papers

This article makes an originalist argument in defense of the Supreme Court's holding in Loving v. Virginia that antimiscegenation laws are unconstitutional. This article builds on past work by Professor Michael McConnell defending Brown v. Board of Education on originalist grounds and by Professor Calabresi defending strict scrutiny for gender classifications on originalist grounds. Professor Calabresi's work in this area was defended and praise recently by Slate magazine online. The article shows that Loving v. Virginia is defensible using the public meaning originalism advocated for by Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. This article shows that the issue in Loving …

Can Immune Parties Really Be Responsible: An Analysis Of The Current Interpretation Of The Texas Responsible Third Party Statute And Its Vulnerability To Constitutional Challenge., Justin C. Roberts, Randell Roberts

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Texas Responsible Third Party (RTP) statute was amended in 2003 to give defendants the opportunity to have the jury apportion responsibility for the plaintiff’s damages to persons who were not joined in the lawsuit. A defendant could achieve this result by designating a “responsible third party.” Plaintiffs may often join responsible third parties as additional defendants. Under such situations, all culpable parties are before the court, defending themselves, and accountable to the plaintiff for their percentage of responsibility. When the statute worked in this fashion it achieved “a carefully constructed scheme balancing the interests of both defendants and claimants.” …

The Meaning Of Mcintyre, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

When certiorari was granted in J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro, 131 S. Ct. 2780 (2011), many hoped that the Supreme Court would provide much-needed clarification to the area of personal jurisdiction. It didn’t. The Court failed to generate a majority opinion, splitting into Justice Kennedy’s four-Justice plurality, Justice Breyer’s two-Justice concurrence, and Justice Ginsburg’s three-Justice dissent.

This essay – for the Southwestern Journal of International Law’s 2012 symposium “Our Courts and the World: Transnational Litigation and Procedure” – examines how state and federal courts have been using the McIntyre decision. Some lower court opinions have mistakenly interpreted McIntyre as …

30 = 20: ‘Understanding’ Maximum Sentence Enhancements, Frank R. Herrmann S.J.

Frank R. Herrmann, S.J.

In this article, Professor Herrmann argues that the due process protections of a criminal trial should apply to aggravating factors that under current “maximum-enhancing statutes” allow judges to impose lengthier punishments in the sentencing phase. Part I considers the Supreme Court's rationale for refusing to apply full due process safeguards to all types of sentencing schemes. This background will reveal the unique quality of maximum-enhancing statutes and establish why the due process protections of a criminal trial should apply to sentencing under maximum-enhancing statutes. Part I, therefore, undertakes to explain courts' rationales to deny criminal defendants full criminal due process …

Fundamental Norms, International Law, And The Extraterritorial Constitution, Jules Lobel

Articles

The Supreme Court, in Boumediene v. Bush, decisively rejected the Bush Administration's argument that the Constitution does not apply to aliens detained by the United States government abroad. However, the functional, practicality focused test articulated in Boumediene to determine when the constitution applies extraterritorially is in considerable tension with the fundamental norms jurisprudence that underlies and pervades the Court’s opinion. This Article seeks to reintegrate Boumediene's fundamental norms jurisprudence into its functional test, arguing that the functional test for extraterritorial application of habeas rights should be informed by fundamental norms of international law. The Article argues that utilizing international law’s …

What If Slaughter-House Had Been Decided Differently?, Kermit Roosevelt Iii

All Faculty Scholarship

In The Slaugherhouse Cases, the Supreme Court gutted the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Though academics continue to argue that Slaughterhouse was wrongly decided and should be overruled, the practical consequences of doing so might not be enormous. The constitutional rights the dissenters found in the Privileges or Immunities Clause are part of our current law anyway, through the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. But this does not mean that Slaughterhouse cost us nothing. This article explores how our law might be different had Slaughterhouse been decided differently. Rather than taking up the role that Privileges …

The Constitutionality Of Collateral Post-Conviction Claims Of Actual Innocence Comment., Craig M. Jacobs

St. Mary's Law Journal

The notion that the state can punish innocent people disrupts public confidence in the usefulness of the criminal justice system. If, by legislative design, the criminal justice system is not concerned with or is accepting of situations where innocent people are punished by the state, should courts take immediate action? Once criminal defendants exhaust the appellate process, Supreme Court Justices have stated, federal courts should not hear claims of actual innocence. Such statements are supported by the federal habeas corpus statute as amended by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). AEDPA requires federal habeas courts to …

Congress's Consistent Intent To Utilize Military Commissions In The War Against Al-Qaeda And Its Adoption Of Commission Rules That Fully Comply With Due Process., Michael T. Mccaul, Ronald J. Sievert

St. Mary's Law Journal

Congress responded to the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001 by passing the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). In the following years Congress augmented that authority with the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA of 2006) and the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (MCA of 2009). In passing these acts, Congress responded to the Supreme Court’s decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which found that President Bush’s attempt to establish military commissions required Congressional authorization. When drafting both MCAs, Congress recognized numerous evidentiary and trial procedures from federal civilian court were inappropriate for trying unlawful combatants. By these …

Home Sweet Homestead - Not If You Are Subject To A Mandatory Homeowners' Association., Bridget M. Fuselier

St. Mary's Law Journal

Changes must be made to current Texas laws to strike a proper balance between the homeowners’ rights and the homeowners association’s (HOA) rights. The Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Inwood North Homeowners’ Ass’n v. Harris allows liens to attach to what would otherwise be considered homestead-protected property. Although the promise in Inwood was set forth in writing, touched and concerned the land, was intended to run with the land, and was properly recorded, that did not create a contractual lien. The court, however, incorrectly combined the concepts of liens and covenants. Furthermore, the court seemed to ignore the important and …

Procedural And Judicial Limitations On Voir Dire - Constitutional Implications And Preservation Of Error In Civil Cases., R. Brent Cooper, Diana L. Faust

St. Mary's Law Journal

The right to a trial by jury is meaningless without an effective voir dire. Recurring tort reform, rapid technological advancements, immediate access to media coverage of incidents that give rise to litigation have greatly expanded. Consequentially, courts are faced with the prospect that potential jurors’ opinions and attitudes have been tainted. In addition to these issues, trial courts display significant interest in promptly expediting the advancement of their dockets. Voir dire is an essential element of trial strategy. Voir dire allows counsel to establish rapport with potential jurors, introduce them to the issues and facts of the case, and identify …

Should Texas's Former Ban On Obscene-Device Promotion Pass Constitutional Muster Under A Murky Lawrence Comment., Laura M. Clark

St. Mary's Law Journal

When the Fifth Circuit freed Texans to promote and distribute sexual devices without criminal penalties, it created a split with the Eleventh Circuit’s decision to uphold Alabama’s ban. Both courts based their rulings on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which invalidated Texas’s statute banning homosexual sodomy. In upholding Alabama’s sex-toy statute in 2007, the Eleventh Circuit found no fundamental right to sexual privacy under Lawrence and held public morality was a sufficiently rational basis for the statute. The court distinguished Lawrence, which dealt with prohibition of private conduct, rather than public commercial activity. The Fifth Circuit …

Guarding The Guardians: Judges' Rights And Virginia's Judicial Inquiry And Review Commission, Jeffrey D. Mcmahan Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process Traditionalism, Cass R. Sunstein

Michigan Law Review

In important cases, the Supreme Court has limited the scope of "substantive due process" by reference to tradition, but it has yet to explain why it has done so. Due process traditionalism might be defended in several distinctive ways. The most ambitious defense draws on a set of ideas associated with Edmund Burke and Friedrich Hayek, who suggested that traditions have special credentials by virtue of their acceptance by many minds. But this defense runs into three problems. Those who have participated in a tradition may not have accepted any relevant proposition; they might suffer from a systematic bias; and …

De-Moralized: Glucksberg In The Malaise, Steven D. Smith

Michigan Law Review

Ten years down the road, what is the enduring significance of the "assisted suicide" cases, Washington v. Glucksberg and Vacco v. Quill? The cases reflect an unusually earnest, but nonetheless unsuccessful, attempt by the Supreme Court to grapple with a profound moral issue. So, why was the Court unable to provide a more satisfying justification for its conclusions? This Article, written for a symposium on the tenth anniversary of Glucksberg,, discusses that question. Part I examines some of the flaws in reasoning in the Glucksberg and Quill opinions and suggests that these flaws stem from the opinion writers' …

Burkean Minimalism, Cass R. Sunstein

Michigan Law Review

Burkean minimalism has long played an important role in constitutional law. Like other judicial minimalists, Burkeans believe in rulings that are at once narrow and theoretically unambitious; what Burkeans add is an insistence on respect for traditional practices and an intense distrust of those who would renovate social practices by reference to moral or political reasoning of their own. An understanding of the uses and limits of Burkean minimalism helps to illuminate a number of current debates, including those involving substantive due process, the Establishment Clause, and the power of the president to protect national security. Burkean minimalists oppose, and …

Restructuring The Debate Over Fetal Homicide Laws, Carolyn B. Ramsey

Publications

The worst problems with the fetal homicide laws that have proliferated around the nation are quite different than the existing scholarship suggests. Critics often argue that the statutes, which criminalize the killing of a fetus by a third party other than an abortion provider, undermine a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy. This concern is overstated. Although supported by anti-abortionists, many of the fetal homicide laws embody the perspective of the so-called "abortion grays," who eschew the absolutism of the doctrinaire pro-choice and anti-abortion camps. This Article explores how a contextual view of life-taking allows us to reconcile legal abortion …

U.S. Supreme Court Tort Reform: Limiting State Power To Articulate And Develop Its Own Tort Law–Defamation, Preemption, And Punitive Damages, Thomas C. Galligan

ExpressO

U.S. Supreme Court Tort Reform: Limiting State Power to Articulate and Develop Its Own Tort Law–Defamation, Preemption, and Punitive Damages analyzes and critiques the three primary areas in which the U.S. Supreme Court has found federal constitutional limits on a state’s power to articulate, develop, and apply its common law of torts. It is the first piece to consider all three areas together as an emerging body of jurisprudence which Professor Galligan calls U.S. Supreme Court tort reform. After setting forth a modest model of adjudication, the article applies that model to each of the three areas: defamation and related …

Justice Scalia's Constitution--And Ours, Kermit Roosevelt Iii

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Taking Miranda's Pulse, William T. Pizzi, Morris B. Hoffman

Publications

No abstract provided.

Ubi Jus, Ibi Remedium: The Fundamental Right To A Remedy Under Due Process, Tracy A. Thomas

San Diego Law Review

This essay is part of the 2003 Remedies Forum symposium comprised of international remedies scholars addressing the topic of equitable relief in the fifty years since Brown v. Board of Education. It may be true as other scholars have argued that since the time of Brown, institutional defendants have won at the expense of plaintiffs. Defendants have learned that delay and defiance work. The U.S. Supreme Court has adopted a standard for ordering equitable relief that significantly defers to defendant wrongdoers at the plaintiffs' expense. Epithets of activist courts and judicial legislation have colored the existing scholarship and portrayed remedial …

Procedural Justice, Lawrence B. Solum

ExpressO

The real work of procedure is to guide conduct. It is sometimes said that the regulation of primary conduct is the work of the general and abstract norms of substantive law—clauses of the constitution, statutes, regulations, and common law rules of tort, property, and contract. But substance cannot effectively guide primary conduct without the aid of procedure. This is true because of three problems: (1) the problem of imperfect knowledge of law and fact, (2) the problem of incomplete specification of legal norms, and (3) the problem of partiality. The solution to these problems is particularization by a system of …

Procedural Justice, Lawrence B. Solum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article begins in part I, Introduction, with two observations. First, the function of procedure is to particularize general substantive norms so that they can guide action. Second, the hard problem of procedural justice corresponds to the following question: How can we regard ourselves as obligated by legitimate authority to comply with a judgment that we believe (or even know) to be in error with respect to the substantive merits?

The theory of procedural justice is developed in several stages, beginning with some preliminary questions and problems. The first question--what is procedure?--is the most difficult and requires an extensive …

Taas And Gi Forum V. Texas Education Agency: A Critical Analysis And Proposal For Redressing Problems With The Standardized Testing In Texas., Blakely Latham Fernandez

St. Mary's Law Journal

Texas’s use of the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) test as an accountability program has had numerous negative and far-reaching effects on minorities. Today, students in Texas public schools first take the TAAS test in the third grade. Students continue to take a form of the TAAS test each year, with the exit-level assessment initially given in the eleventh grade. Students must pass all four sections–Mathematics, English, Science, and Social Studies–in order to graduate and receive their high school diploma. Although devised to effectively motivate students, schools, and teachers with the goal of enhancing educational standards, the TAAS test …

Formalism And Realism In Commerce Clause Jurisprudence, Barry Cushman

Journal Articles

This Article attempts a reconceptualization of developments in Commerce Clause jurisprudence between the Civil War and World War II by identifying ways in which that jurisprudence was structurally related to and accordingly deeply influenced by the categories of substantive due process and dormant Commerce Clause doctrine. Antecedent dormant Commerce Clause jurisprudence set the terms within which Commerce Clause doctrine was worked out; coordinate developments in substantive due process doctrine set limits upon the scope of Commerce Clause formulations and thus played a critical and underappreciated role in maintaining the federal equilibrium. The subsequent erosion of those due process limitations vastly …

From Enemies Of The Crown To Regional Telephone Companies: Bills Of Attainder Reappraised, Michael L. Landsman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Understanding Mahon In Historical Context, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Despite its enormous influence on constitutional law, Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon is just such an opinion; the primary purpose of the author’s article Jam for Justice Holmes: Reassessing the Significance of Mahon is to clarify Holmes's intent by placing the opinion in historical context and in the context of Holmes's other opinions. While other scholars have also sought to place Mahon in context, his account differs in large part because of its recognition, as part of the background of Mahon, of a separate line of cases involving businesses affected with a public interest.

The author argues that at …

Making Sausage: The Ninth Circuit's Opinion, Carl E. Schneider

Articles

As I write, the Supreme Court has just agreed to hear Compassion in Dying v. Washington and Quill v. Vacco, the two cases in which United States circuit courts of appeals held that a state may not constitutionally prohibit physicians from helping a terminally ill person who wishes to commit suicide to do so. These cases have already received lavish comment and criticism, and no doubt the Supreme Court's opinion will garner even more. Reasonably enough, most of this analysis addresses the merits of physician-assisted suicide as social policy. I, here, want to talk about how setting bioethical policy …