Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- William & Mary Law School (27)
- Seattle University School of Law (8)
- Selected Works (8)
- Georgia State University College of Law (6)
- American University Washington College of Law (5)
-
- Pepperdine University (5)
- Washington University in St. Louis (4)
- Barry University School of Law (3)
- Georgetown University Law Center (3)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (3)
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (2)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (2)
- Notre Dame Law School (2)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (2)
- University of Washington School of Law (2)
- University of the District of Columbia School of Law (2)
- Claremont Colleges (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- SelectedWorks (1)
- St. John's University School of Law (1)
- The University of Akron (1)
- University of Georgia School of Law (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (1)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Faculty Publications (11)
- Seattle University Law Review (8)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (5)
- Georgia State University Law Review (5)
- Pepperdine Law Review (5)
-
- Popular Media (4)
- Scholarship@WashULaw (4)
- Supreme Court Preview (4)
- Articles (3)
- Faculty Scholarship (3)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (3)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (3)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (2)
- Journal Articles (2)
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (2)
- Neal E. Devins (2)
- Washington Journal of Social & Environmental Justice (2)
- William & Mary Law Review (2)
- Akron Law Faculty Publications (1)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Articles & Chapters (1)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (1)
- CMC Senior Theses (1)
- Corey A Ciocchetti (1)
- Court Briefs (1)
- Faculty Publications By Year (1)
- Georgia Law Review (1)
- Indiana Law Journal (1)
- Journal of Legislation (1)
- Katharine Van Tassel (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 60 of 94
Full-Text Articles in Law
Court Expansion And The Restoration Of Democracy: The Case For Constitutional Hardball, Aaron Belkin
Court Expansion And The Restoration Of Democracy: The Case For Constitutional Hardball, Aaron Belkin
Pepperdine Law Review
Neither electoral politics, norms preservation, nor modest good government reform can restore the political system because they cannot mitigate the primary threat to the American democracy, Republican radicalism. Those who believe otherwise fail to appreciate how and why radicalism will continue to impede democratic restoration regardless of what happens at the ballot box, misdiagnose the underlying factors that produce and sustain GOP radicalism, and under-estimate the degree of democratic deterioration that has already taken place. Republicans do not need to prevail in every election to forestall the restoration of democracy or to prevent Democrats from governing. The only viable path …
Second Guessing Double Jeopardy: The Stare Decisis Factors As Proxy Tools For Original Correctness, Justin W. Aimonetti
Second Guessing Double Jeopardy: The Stare Decisis Factors As Proxy Tools For Original Correctness, Justin W. Aimonetti
William & Mary Law Review Online
In Gamble v. United States, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the 170-year-old dual-sovereignty doctrine. That doctrine permits both the federal and state governments—as “separate sovereigns”—to each prosecute a defendant for the same offense. Justice Thomas concurred with the majority opinion in Gamble, but wrote separately to reject the traditional stare decisis formulation. In particular, the factors the majority used to evaluate stare decisis, in his view, amount to nothing more than marbles placed subjectively on either side of the stare decisis balancing scale. He would have preferred, instead, an inquiry into whether the precedent was demonstrably erroneous as an original matter, …
Abortion Case May Not Overturn Roe, But Could Effectively Nullify It, A. Benjamin Spencer
Abortion Case May Not Overturn Roe, But Could Effectively Nullify It, A. Benjamin Spencer
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
First Amendment Lochnerism & The Origins Of The Incorporation Doctrine, James Y. Stern
First Amendment Lochnerism & The Origins Of The Incorporation Doctrine, James Y. Stern
Faculty Publications
The 20th century emergence of the incorporation doctrine is regarded as a critical development in constitutional law, but while issues related to the doctrine's justification have been studied and debated for more than fifty years, the causes and mechanics of its advent have received relatively little academic attention. This Essay, part of a symposium on Judge Jeffrey Sutton's recent book about state constitutional law, examines the doctrinal origins of incorporation, in an effort to help uncover why the incorporation doctrine emerged when it did and the way it did. It concludes that, for these purposes, incorporation is best understood as …
Black Women And Girls And The Twenty-Sixth Amendment: Constitutional Connections, Activist Intersections, And The First Wave Youth Suffrage Movement, Mae C. Quinn
Seattle University Law Review
On this 100th anniversary of the Nineteenth Amendment—and on the cusp of the fiftieth anniversary of the Twenty-sixth Amendment—this article seeks to expand the voting rights canon. It complicates our understanding of voting rights history in the United States, adding layers to the history of federal constitutional enfranchisement and encouraging a more intersectional telling of our suffrage story in the days ahead.
Thus, this work not only seeks to acknowledge the Twenty-sixth Amendment as important constitutional content, as was the goal of the article I wrote with my law student colleagues for a conference held at the University of Akron …
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 …
Tiers Of Scrutiny In A Hierarchical Judiciary, Tara Leigh Grove
Tiers Of Scrutiny In A Hierarchical Judiciary, Tara Leigh Grove
Tara L. Grove
No abstract provided.
How Constitutional Law Casebooks Perpetuate The Myth Of Judicial Supremacy, Neal Devins
How Constitutional Law Casebooks Perpetuate The Myth Of Judicial Supremacy, Neal Devins
Neal E. Devins
No abstract provided.
Better Lucky Than Good, Neal Devins
Financial Oversight And Management Board For Puerto Rico V. Aurelius Investment, Llc, Rafael Cox Alomar
Financial Oversight And Management Board For Puerto Rico V. Aurelius Investment, Llc, Rafael Cox Alomar
Court Briefs
No abstract provided.
Panel 3: Free Speech And Freedom Of Religion
Panel 3: Free Speech And Freedom Of Religion
Georgia State University Law Review
Moderator: Eric Segall
Panelists: Mike Dorf and Eugene Volokh
Panel 6: The Median Justice
Georgia State University Law Review
Moderator: Eric Segall
Panelists: Jonathan Adler, Lee Epstein, and Sasha Volokh
Panel 4: Criminal Procedure And Affirmative Action
Panel 4: Criminal Procedure And Affirmative Action
Georgia State University Law Review
Moderator: Lauren Sudeall
Panelists: Dan Epps, Gail Heriot, and Corinna Lain
Panel 2: Justice Kennedy's Prose — Style And Substance
Panel 2: Justice Kennedy's Prose — Style And Substance
Georgia State University Law Review
Moderator: Eric Segall
Panelists: Eric Berger, Michael Dorf, and Jamal Greene
Panel 5: Federalism And Separation Of Powers
Panel 5: Federalism And Separation Of Powers
Georgia State University Law Review
Moderator: Eric Segall
Panelists: Stephen Griffin, Neil Kinkopf, and Ilya Somin
Sites Of Storytelling: Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings, Patrick Barry
Sites Of Storytelling: Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings, Patrick Barry
Indiana Law Journal
Supreme Court confirmation hearings have an interesting biographical feature: before nominees even say a word, many words are said about them. This feature—which has been on prominent display in the confirmation hearings of Judge Brett Kavanaugh—is a product of how each senator on the confirmation committee is allowed to make an opening statement. Some of these statements are, as Robert Bork remembers from his own confirmation hearing, “lavish in their praise,” some are “lavish in their denunciations,” and some are “lavish in their equivocations.” The result is a disorienting kind of biography by committee, one which produces not one all-encompassing …
Teacher For The Nation, Daniel Epps
Teacher For The Nation, Daniel Epps
Scholarship@WashULaw
In these brief remarks, delivered at the Hastings Law Journal's Symposium on the Jurisprudence of Justice Kennedy, I discuss Justice Kennedy's impact on American law. I reflect on the events that led to Justice Kennedy's appointment to the Supreme Court and discuss his vision of the Justices as teachers for the nation and how that vision seems to have informed his view of judicial review.
How To Save The Supreme Court, Daniel Epps, Ganesh Sitaraman
How To Save The Supreme Court, Daniel Epps, Ganesh Sitaraman
Scholarship@WashULaw
The consequences of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation are seismic. Justice Kavanaugh, replacing Justice Anthony Kennedy, completes a new conservative majority and represents a stunning Republican victory after decades of increasingly partisan battles over control of the Court. The result is a Supreme Court whose Justices are likely to vote along party lines more consistently than ever before in American history. That development gravely threatens the Court’s legitimacy. If in the future roughly half of Americans lack confidence in the Supreme Court’s ability to render impartial justice, the Court’s power to settle important questions of law will be in …
Where The Constitution Falls Short: Confession Admissibility And Police Regulation, Courtney E. Lewis
Where The Constitution Falls Short: Confession Admissibility And Police Regulation, Courtney E. Lewis
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
A confession presented at trial is one of the most damning pieces of evidence against a criminal defendant, which means that the rules governing its admissibility are critical. At the outset of confession admissibility in the United States, the judiciary focused on a confession’s truthfulness. Culminating in the landmark case Miranda v. Arizona, judicial concern with the reliability of confessions shifted away from whether a confession was true and towards curtailing unconstitutional police misconduct. Post-hoc constitutionality review, however, is arguably inappropriate. Such review is inappropriate largely because the reviewing court must find that the confession was voluntary only by …
A Gun To Whose Head? Federalism, Localism, And The Spending Clause, Daniel S. Cohen
A Gun To Whose Head? Federalism, Localism, And The Spending Clause, Daniel S. Cohen
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
President Trump’s executive order rescinding federal funds from “sanctuary jurisdictions” has brought a critical, but overlooked, question of constitutional law to the forefront of the political debate: how does the Spending Clause apply to local governments? The purpose of the Spending Clause is to empower the federal government to bargain with the states to enact policies it cannot enact itself. This power, however, is constrained within the confines of federalism. The Supreme Court has sought to restrict the Spending Clause by crafting the Dole-NFIB framework, a test to determine whether a federal grant has compromised federalism. At its …
Reasonable Action: Reproductive Rights, The Free Exercise Clause, And Religious Freedom In The United States And The Republic Of Ireland, Liam Ray
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
This Note will argue that by denying certiorari in Stormans v. Wiesman, the Supreme Court missed an important opportunity to provide guidance to the states as to how the Free Exercise Clause applies to the kind of stocking and dispensing regulations adopted by the State of Washington. This Note will further argue from a policy perspective that the approach to these kinds of regulations adopted by the Republic of Ireland (“ROI”) presents the best approach for states to adopt because it provides a balance in terms of respecting the free exercise rights of pharmacists and pharmacy owners with …
Hearing The States, Anthony Johnstone
Hearing The States, Anthony Johnstone
Pepperdine Law Review
The 2016 Presidential and Senate elections raise the possibility that a conservative, life-tenured Supreme Court will preside for years over a politically dynamic majority. This threatens to weaken the public’s already fragile confidence in the Court. By lowering the political stakes of both national elections and its own decisions, federalism may enable the Court to defuse some of the most explosive controversies it hears. Federalism offers a second-best solution, even if neither conservatives nor liberals can impose a national political agenda. However, principled federalism arguments are tricky. They are structural, more prudential than legal or empirical. Regardless of ideology, a …
Eight Justices Are Enough: A Proposal To Improve The United States Supreme Court, Eric J. Segall
Eight Justices Are Enough: A Proposal To Improve The United States Supreme Court, Eric J. Segall
Pepperdine Law Review
Over the last twenty-five years, some of the most significant Supreme Court decisions involving issues of national significance like abortion, affirmative action, and voting rights were five-to-four decisions. In February 2016, the death of Justice Antonin Scalia turned the nine-Justice court into an eight-Justice court, comprised of four liberal and four conservative Justices, for the first time in our nation’s history. This article proposes that an evenly divided court consisting of eight Justices is the ideal Supreme Court composition. Although the other two branches of government have evolved over the years, the Supreme Court has undergone virtually no significant changes. …
Supreme Court Review: Legalistic Argle-Bargle, Molly Mcburney, Kristen Barnes, Bernadette Genetin, Wilson Huhn, William Jordan, Marge Koosed, Rich Lavoie, Brant Lee, Elizabeth Reilly, Bill Rich, Kalyani Robbins, Jeff Samuels, Tracy Thomas, Katharine Van Tassel
Supreme Court Review: Legalistic Argle-Bargle, Molly Mcburney, Kristen Barnes, Bernadette Genetin, Wilson Huhn, William Jordan, Marge Koosed, Rich Lavoie, Brant Lee, Elizabeth Reilly, Bill Rich, Kalyani Robbins, Jeff Samuels, Tracy Thomas, Katharine Van Tassel
Katharine Van Tassel
No abstract provided.
Discretionary Dockets, Randy J. Kozel, Jeffrey Pojanowski
Discretionary Dockets, Randy J. Kozel, Jeffrey Pojanowski
Randy J Kozel
The Supreme Court’s workload and its method for selecting cases have drawn increasing critical scrutiny. Similarly, and separately, recent commentary has focused on the disparate approaches the Court has taken to resolving cases on its (historically small) docket. In this Essay we draw these two lines of inquiry together to argue that the Court’s case selection should align with its approach to constitutional adjudication. In doing so, we discuss four modes of constitutional decisionmaking and then examine the interplay between those modes, the Court’s management of its docket, and its sense of institutional role. The Court, we argue, has neither …
Render Unto Caesar: How Misunderstanding A Century Of Free Exercise Jurisprudence Forged And Then Fractured The Rfra Coalition, John S. Blattner
Render Unto Caesar: How Misunderstanding A Century Of Free Exercise Jurisprudence Forged And Then Fractured The Rfra Coalition, John S. Blattner
CMC Senior Theses
This thesis provides a comprehensive history of Supreme Court Free Exercise Clause jurisprudence from 1879 until the present day. It describes how a jurisdictional approach to free exercise dominated the Court’s rulings from its first Free Exercise Clause case in 1879 until Sherbert v. Verner in 1963, and how Sherbert introduced an accommodationist precedent which was ineffectively, incompletely, and inconsistently defined by the Court. This thesis shows how proponents of accommodationism furthered a false narrative overstating the scope and consistency of Sherbert’s precedent following the Court’s repudiation of accommodationism and return to full jurisdictionalism with Employment Division v. Smith …
Construction, Originalist Interpretation And The Complete Constitution, Richard Kay
Construction, Originalist Interpretation And The Complete Constitution, Richard Kay
Richard Kay
Book Review Of Constitutional Personae, Michael N. Umberger
Book Review Of Constitutional Personae, Michael N. Umberger
Library Staff Publications
No abstract provided.
Tiers Of Scrutiny In A Hierarchical Judiciary, Tara Leigh Grove
Tiers Of Scrutiny In A Hierarchical Judiciary, Tara Leigh Grove
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Stanley V. Illinois’S Untold Story, Josh Gupta-Kagan
Stanley V. Illinois’S Untold Story, Josh Gupta-Kagan
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Stanley v. Illinois is one of the Supreme Courts more curious landmark cases. The holding is well known: the Due Process Clause both prohibits states from removing children from the care of unwed fathers simply because they are not married and requires states to provide all parents with a hearing on their fitness. By recognizing strong due process protections for parents rights, Stanley reaffirmed Lochner-era cases that had been in doubt and formed the foundation of modern constitutional family law. But Peter Stanley never raised due process arguments, so it has long been unclear how the Court reached this decision. …