Law Commons^™

Playing Forty Questions: Responding To Justice Roberts' Concerns In Caperton And Some Tentative Answers About Operationalizing Judicial Recusal And Due Process, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

The Chief Justice of the United States would probably have excelled as a negative debater in high school forensics competitions. Good negative debaters are, as my high school English teacher put it, “great point-pickers” in that they frequently challenge affirmative proposals with a series of “what if?” or “how about?” or “what would you do if?” questions designed to leave the affirmative resolution bleeding to death of a thousand cuts. Less charitable observers might call it nit-picking. After reading Chief Justice Roberts's dissenting opinion in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., one can easily imagine him as a high school …

The Right Of Defendant-Owners Under Zero-Tolerance Anti-Doping Horse Racing Regulations As Explained In Pierce V. Texas Racing Commission, Donald Smith

Kentucky Journal of Equine, Agriculture, & Natural Resources Law

No abstract provided.

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 …

Due Process And Targeted Killing Of Terrorists, Richard Murphy, Afsheen John Radsan

Faculty Scholarship

"Targeted killing" is extra-judicial, premeditated killing by a state of a specifically identified person not in its custody. States have used this tool, secretly or not, throughout history. In recent years, targeted killing has generated new controversy as two states in particular-Israel and the United States-have struggled against opponents embedded in civilian populations. As a matter of express policy, Israel engages in targeted killing of persons it deems members of terrorist organizations involved in attacks on Israel. The United States, less expressly, has adopted a similar policy against al Qaeda-particularly in the border areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the …

Help Wanted: Seeking One Good Appellate Brief That Forces The Arkansas Supreme Court To Clarify Its Criminal Discovery Jurisprudence, Brian Gallini

Brian Gallini