Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 14th Amendment (1)
- Appointed counsel (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Constitutionality (1)
- Criminal justice (1)
-
- Criminal rights (1)
- Cronic (1)
- Dobbs v. Jackson (1)
- Due Process Clause (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Gideon v. wainwright (1)
- Immunities (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Justice Thomas (1)
- Legal (1)
- McDonald v. Chicago (1)
- Precedent (1)
- Privileges (1)
- Privileges or Immunities Clause (1)
- Public defender (1)
- Reconstruction Amendments (1)
- Rights (1)
- Sixth amendment (1)
- Slaughter-House Cases (1)
- Slaughterhouse (1)
- Stare decisis (1)
- Strickland v. washington (1)
- Substantive due process (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Underfund (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Unconstitutionality Of Underfunded Public Defender Systems, Braden Daniels
The Unconstitutionality Of Underfunded Public Defender Systems, Braden Daniels
Senior Honors Theses
When a defendant is ineffectively represented by a public defender due to an underfunded public defender system, a defendant whose public defender provides him only cursory representation is entitled to a new trial only if blatantly innocent. The U.S. Supreme Court should follow its precedent and declare systemically underfunded public defender systems unconstitutional, with cases meriting reversal when the underfunding is to blame for unreasonable attorney errors, regardless of prejudice. This stems logically from the Court’s holdings in Gideon v. Wainwright, Strickland v. Washington, and United States v. Cronic. Many have argued for the reversal or modification …
Slaughtering Slaughter-House: An Assessment Of 14th Amendment Privileges Or Immunities Jurisprudence, Caleb Webb
Slaughtering Slaughter-House: An Assessment Of 14th Amendment Privileges Or Immunities Jurisprudence, Caleb Webb
Senior Honors Theses
In 1872, the Supreme Court decided the Slaughter-House Cases, which applied a narrow interpretation of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment that effectually eroded the clause from the Constitution. Following Slaughter-House, the Supreme Court compensated by utilizing elastic interpretations of the Due Process Clause in its substantive due process jurisprudence to cover the rights that would have otherwise been protected by the Privileges or Immunities Clause. In more recent years, the Court has heard arguments favoring alternative interpretations of the Privileges or Immunities Clause but has yet to evaluate them thoroughly. By applying the …