Law Commons^™

The Five Days In June When Values Died In American Law, Bruce Ledewitz

Akron Law Review

During a five day period in June, 1992, every Justice on the United States Supreme Court joined one or the other of two opinions that denied the objectivity of values—either Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion in Lee v. Weisman or Justice Scalia’s dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Both of these opinions expressed the view that normative judgments are merely human constructions. This moment represents symbolically the death of values in American law. The arrival of nihilism at the heart of American law is a world-changing event for law that must be acknowledged.

The death of values was announced by …

Legal Problems Involved In The Administration Of The A.D.C. Program In Ohio, C. David Hensal

Akron Law Review

The code provisions and their supplemental rules and regulations do not answer the question of whether an individual has a "right" to welfare benefits. There has been little litigation over the point; consequently, there has been little judicial analysis of the relative rights and duties of the parties involved. Too much is left to the inexpert good intentions of the agency administrator. However, some reasonably well-defined problems have begun to emerge. Certain justiciable issues are being delineated with more and more clarity. The purpose of this Comment is to examine some of these problem areas and to offer some analysis …

Employment Equality In A Color-Blind Society, Earl M. Curry Jr.

Akron Law Review

The purposes of this article are first, to look at the rights of Negroes, under law, to bring economic pressure to bear for employment equality, including the demand for a quota, and secondly to see how that law is satisfying today's social needs. To achieve this latter purpose, perhaps we must ask whether our society can afford to be legally color-blind? We shall look first to the private self-help devices that have been used by minorities, and then to one area of governmental intervention that has dealt directly with minority employment and the use of quotas or goals to achieve …

The "Compulsory School Attendance" Case: Wisconsin V. Yoder, Michael Buchicchio

Akron Law Review

It is an important constitutional doctrine that a law generally constitutional "on its face," may be unconstitutional "as applied" in specific instances. The Amish case marks the first occasion that the Court has clearly articulated that exception in favor of a minority religious group. It would appear that compulsory education laws are-"on their face"--within a state's constitutional powers, but under the facts of this case, the First Amendment requires that the Amish be exempt.

Ethics: Informal Opinion 1151 - Lawyers And The Title "Doctor", Milard King Roper Jr.

Akron Law Review

The legal profession is the only professional group in the United States that has ever prohibited its practicing members with doctorates from using the title "Doctor." Now, with D.R. 2-102(F) of the Code and its interpretation in Informal Opinion 1151, lawyers have been given the opportunity to take advantage of the recognition of their education as being on a par with other doctoral training.

The Right Of The Physically And Mentally Handicapped: Amendments Necessary To Guarantee Protection Through The Civil Rights Act Of 1964, Patrick T. Ryan

Akron Law Review

SINGLE STROKES of the government's pen can seldom alone accomplish social goals. To insure vitality, legislation requires review, revision and amendment. Though worthy of praise for initial and continuing contributions towards social betterment, the Civil Rights Act of 19641 falls into this classification. Its scope is too narrow because it fails to include a significant group of persons sorely in need of its protection. This legislation needs the depth evoked by its title rather than the limitations of its present language. Amendment is required to protect the rights of the physically and mentally handicapped.

The Role Of Courts In Government Today, James L. Oakes

Akron Law Review

It is elementary constitutional law that American courts have the power of judicial review. While a case can be made (and is still sometimes made by critics of too much judicial intervention) against the courts' power to review federal actions against the Constitution or state actions contrary to the Federal Constitution or statutes, the principle of judicial review is so well ingrained in the American system that it need not be reargued here. Rather I shall examine the principal arguments counseling caution and restraint in the exercise of the power, even though some of these arguments seem to run against …

Domestic Relations: Legal Responses To Wife Beating: Theory And Practice In Ohio, Nancy Grim

Akron Law Review

Legislation, like Ohio's Domestic Violence Act, has been heralded by battered women's advocates. Much discussion about the limitations of traditional remedies and institutional obstacles preceded the passage of such statutes; but it takes more than words in a statute to effect change. Statutory language can be interpreted in various ways and must withstand constitutional scrutiny. Every aspect of institutional involvement can promote or hinder the purposes of the Act. This comment examines Ohio's Domestic Violence Act in light of actual practice and interpretations. It is hoped that an analysis of the legal operation of the Act as well as extra-legal …

Minimum Competency Testing - Redundancy Or Necessity? An Analysis Of The Educational And Legal Issues, Dianne L. Goss

Akron Law Review

This article will discuss the pros and cons of the movement, first from an educational viewpoint, then from a legal perspective, touching on some current state plans and programs and offering suggestions and conclusions.

Can We Afford Liberty?, Arthur J. Goldberg

Akron Law Review

I would like to venture the suggestion, however, that the real gravamen of Chief Justice Burger's address has been overlooked. In a very real sense, the Chief Justice is raising the question of whether, in light of the serious nature of crime in America, we can afford liberty and decisions of the Supreme Court, largely during the Warren era, which enforced the Bill of Rights in the case of those charged with crime.

I therefore propose in this address to discuss the question of whether we can afford liberty under present circumstances.

Imposing Punitive Damage Liabiliity On The Intoxicated Driver, Martin A. Kotler

Akron Law Review

It is important to keep in mind throughout this discussion that awareness and acknowledgement of the existence of a problem, even a very serious problem, should not make us overreact and thereby accept an unworkable solution in our zeal to do something. The imposition of punitive damages is, for the most part, just such an unworkable solution. More specifically, I will attempt to demonstrate that, with the possible exception of the case of the recidivist, non-alcoholic defendant, the imposition of punitive damages simply cannot be justified. That being the case, we must look elsewhere for a solution to an admittedly …

National Gay Task Force V. Board Of Education Of Oklahoma City, Susan Fitch

Akron Law Review

The National Gay Task Force (NGTF) looked to the courts for relief in challenging an Oklahoma statute which attempted to regulate teachers' speech. National Gay Task Force v. Board of Education of Oklahoma City marks the first time since the beginning of the gay rights movement that the United States Supreme Court has granted certiorari to a case which had homosexuality as its central issue. The result in National Gay Task Force has left both the challengers and the defenders of the Oklahoma statute claiming victory.

The NGTF claims that although the portion of the statute which prohibits teachers from …

Legal Agreement, Andrew Tutt

Akron Law Review

This Article grapples with the question of what it means to agree about what the law is. First, it shows that the question of what it means to “agree about the law” invites us to consider many different kinds of agreement and disagreement we might have about what the law is. Second, it shows that without selecting one of these kinds of agreement, we cannot speak intelligibly about whether we agree or disagree. Third, it explains that this failure to choose is a source of much confusion and apparent disagreement between competing philosophers and philosophies of law. Fourth, it argues …

The Unconstitutionality Of Ohio's House Bill 125: The Heartbeat Bill, Jessica L. Knopp

Akron Law Review

This Comment analyzes the constitutionality of Ohio’s controversial H.B. 125 under the Fourteenth and First Amendments to the United States Constitution in the context of current United States Supreme Court precedent. Part II outlines Ohio’s current abortion laws, describes Ohio’s role in creating anti-abortion legislation and case law, provides a context of other abortion bills occurring nationwide, and explains H.B. 125. Part III analyzes how H.B. 125 is unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment in its current form, analyzes its constitutionality if the bill was modified to be a consent-only bill, and analyzes its unconstitutionality under the Establishment Clause of the …

Judging In A Vacuum, Or, Once More, Without Feeling: How Justice Scalia's Jurisprudential Approach Repeats Errors Made In Plessy V. Ferguson, Chris Edelson

Akron Law Review

James Fleming argues that “[Justice Clarence] Thomas’s concurrence in Adarand and dissent in Grutter reflect the Plessy worldview.” I argue in Part V of this article that Justice Antonin Scalia follows the Plessy approach in several of his dissenting opinions. One of this article’s goals is to explain these incongruencies—how can it be that each of these Justices believes he is true to the legacy of Brown, but is inadvertently adopting the reasoning used by the majority in Plessy? The key to resolving this paradox depends on identifying precisely how Plessy went wrong in its reasoning and how Brown corrected …