Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Speech (4)
- Supreme Court (4)
- First Amendment (3)
- Politics (3)
- California (2)
-
- Campaign (2)
- Constitution (2)
- Election (2)
- Finance (2)
- Immigration (2)
- President (2)
- Trump (2)
- United States (2)
- Vote (2)
- Voting (2)
- 2016 presidential election (1)
- Buckley (1)
- Burroughs (1)
- California Supreme Court (1)
- Campaign Finance (1)
- Campaigns (1)
- Candidates (1)
- Citizens (1)
- Citizens United (1)
- Citizenship and Immigration Services (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Contributions (1)
- Conviction (1)
- Corporations (1)
- Corruption (1)
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Legislating Morality: Moral Theory And Turpitudinous Crimes In Immigration Jurisprudence, Abel Rodríguez, Jennifer A. Bulcock
Legislating Morality: Moral Theory And Turpitudinous Crimes In Immigration Jurisprudence, Abel Rodríguez, Jennifer A. Bulcock
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Congress could have framed the country’s immigration policies in any number of ways. In significant part, it opted to frame them in moral terms. The crime involving moral turpitude is among the most pervasive and pernicious classifications in immigration law. In the Immigration and Nationality Act, it is virtually ubiquitous, appearing everywhere from the deportability and mandatory detention grounds to the inadmissibility and naturalization grounds. In effect, it acts as a gatekeeper for those who wish to enter and remain in the country, obtain lawful permanent residence, travel abroad after admission, or become United States citizens. With limited exceptions, noncitizens …
Immigration Politics: Shifting Norms, Policies And Practices, Felicia Escobar, Annie Lai, Hiroshi Motomura, Karen Tumlin, Kathleen Kim
Immigration Politics: Shifting Norms, Policies And Practices, Felicia Escobar, Annie Lai, Hiroshi Motomura, Karen Tumlin, Kathleen Kim
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Weed Whacking Through The Tenth Amendment: Navigating A Trump Administration Threat To Withhold Funding From Marijuana-Friendly States, Arlen Gharibian
Weed Whacking Through The Tenth Amendment: Navigating A Trump Administration Threat To Withhold Funding From Marijuana-Friendly States, Arlen Gharibian
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
The Trump administration has taken a firm stance against marijuana legalization at the state level. While an official federal policy is still pending, this Article focuses on whether the Trump administration’s threats to preventCalifornia from pursuing its duly enacted marijuana legalization law violates the Tenth Amendment. This Article then addresses how the federal government could achieve its goal while remaining within the bounds of the Constitution.
Guilty Until Proven Innocent: California's Prop. 50 Turns The Concept Of Due Process On Its Head, Brantley I. Pepperman
Guilty Until Proven Innocent: California's Prop. 50 Turns The Concept Of Due Process On Its Head, Brantley I. Pepperman
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
For decades, “good governance” has been little more than a talking point for politicians on the road to reelection or a promotion to higher office. In 2014, the California Legislature attempted to give teeth to the idea, successfully spearheading an amendment to the California Constitution approved by voters in 2016. But despite its efforts to “drain the swamp,” the Legislature gave itself a powerful tool, the authority to suspend or expel legislators without pay, that presents more problems than solutions. This article explores the implications of that amendment, including the extent to which it, as codified, comports with procedural due …
Foreword: Criminal Procedure In Winter, Daniel Epps
Foreword: Criminal Procedure In Winter, Daniel Epps
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Bank Of America V. City Of Miami: Standing And Causation Under The Fair Housing Act, Alan M. White
Bank Of America V. City Of Miami: Standing And Causation Under The Fair Housing Act, Alan M. White
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.
Politics At Work After Citizens United, Ruben J. Garcia
Politics At Work After Citizens United, Ruben J. Garcia
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
There are seismic changes going on in the political system. The United States Supreme Court has constitutionalized the concentration of political power in the “one percent” in several recent decisions, including Citizens United v. FEC. At the same time, unions are representing a shrinking share of the workforce, and their political power is also being diminished. In order for unions to recalibrate the balance of political power at all, they must collaborate with grassroots community groups, as they have done in several recent campaigns. There are, however, various legal structures that make coordination between unions and nonunion groups difficult, …
Balancing Disclosure And Privacy Interests In Campaign Finance, Sarah Harding
Balancing Disclosure And Privacy Interests In Campaign Finance, Sarah Harding
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
The law of campaign finance pits two important First Amendment interests against each other: disclosure and privacy. The Supreme Court has recognized the need to balance these two interests to allow for effective elections and to safeguard individual rights. However, through the years the Court has failed to balance these interests equally, resulting in vacillating decisions that unfairly sacrifice one for the other. From Burroughs v. United States in 1934 to Citizens United v. FEC in 2010, the Court has failed to provide a workable roadmap for legislatures in the creation of campaign finance disclosure laws and for lower courts …
The Falcon Cannot Hear The Falconer: How California's Initiative Process Is Creating An Untenable Constitution, Rudy Klapper
The Falcon Cannot Hear The Falconer: How California's Initiative Process Is Creating An Untenable Constitution, Rudy Klapper
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Californians have always cherished the idea that ultimate political power lies in the people, an idea best represented by the state’s hugely influential initiative process. Today, however, that initiative power threatens to spiral out of control, thanks in large part to the California Supreme Court’s inability to construe appropriate limits on it. This has created an unbalanced government where the rights of minorities are easily circumscribed and the financial and political infrastructure of the state is in danger of buckling under the combined weight of dozens of initiatives. This Article argues that the judiciary’s haphazard interpretation of various rules and …
"The Only Thing We Have To Fear Is Fear Itself": The Constitutional Infirmities With Felon Disenfranchisement And Citing Fear As The Rationale For Depriving Felons Of Their Right To Vote, Erika Stern
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Felon disenfranchisement, a mechanism by which felons and former felons are deprived of their right to vote, is a widespread practice that has been challenged on many grounds. However, felon disenfranchisement has not yet been properly challenged under the First Amendment. This Article argues that states implicate felons’ First Amendment rights through felon disenfranchisement without citing adequate or compelling rationales to justify this severe intrusion. In fact, at least one rationale, a rationale based on the fear of the way felons might vote, is itself inconsistent with First Amendment principles. Disenfranchising felons based on a fear of the way that …
When Rhetoric Obscures Reality: The Definition Of Corruption And Its Shortcomings, Jessica Medina
When Rhetoric Obscures Reality: The Definition Of Corruption And Its Shortcomings, Jessica Medina
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Due to public scorn after the unraveling of the Watergate scandal, the Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of the Federal Election Campaign Act’s restrictions on political contributions and expenditures. Buckley v. Valeo established that no legitimate government interest existed to justify restrictions on campaign expenditures, and only the prevention of corruption or the appearance of corruption could justify restrictions on campaign contributions. Since then, the Court has struggled to articulate a definition of corruption that balances First Amendment protections with the potential for improper influence. This Article argues that the Court’s current definition of corruption is too narrow, and proposes …