Law Commons^™

Congressional Cybersecurity Oversight: Who’S Who And How It Works, Lawrence J. Trautman

Lawrence J. Trautman Sr.

Cybersecurity remains perhaps the greatest challenge to the economic and physical well being of governments, individuals, and business worldwide. During recent months the United States has witnessed many disruptive and expensive cyber breaches. No single U.S. governmental agency or congressional committee maintains primary responsibility for the numerous issues related to cybersecurity. Good oversight stands at the core of good government. Oversight is Congress’s way of making sure that the administration is carrying out federal law in the way Congress intended. So many aspects of cybersecurity have the potential for use by: terrorists; by foreign entities as a tool to conduct …

A Statute Is Worth A Thousand Words: Same Sex Marriage And Rfra, Daniel Korda

Daniel Korda

This article explores the effectiveness of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as a defense for individuals with religious objections towards servicing same sex marriages. Specifically, this article (a) evaluates if the Federal Government has a compelling interest to promote equal accommodations for same sex marriages and (b) considers if "private" individuals suing private parties for refusing to service their marriage are in fact "public" plaintiffs, as the enforcement of laws banning marital discrimination have traditionally been enforced by the State.

The Puppy Prohibition Period: The Constitutionality Of Chicago's War On Animal Mills, Christopher W. Moores

Christopher W Moores

No abstract provided.

Taxes And Takings - And First Principles, George B. Hefferan Jr

George B Hefferan Jr

Public school property taxes are a verifiable violation of the takings clauses of the state and federal constitutions.

Rights, Privileges, And The Future Of Marriage, Adam Macleod

Adam MacLeod

On the eve of its final triumph, has the cause of marriage equality fallen short? This essay discusses persistent differences in the incidents that attach to same-sex marriages versus man-woman marriages. It examines these in light of the distinction between fundamental rights and concessions of privilege in marriage law, and in common law constitutionalism generally. The Obergefell majority's premise that the marriage right is created and conferred by positive law renders the rights and duties of same-sex marriage unstable. By contrast, the rights and duties of the natural family have proven surprisingly resilient, despite their incompatibility with full marriage equality, …

The Transformation Of South African Private Law After Twenty Years Of Democracy, 14 Nw. J. Int’L Hum. Rts. (Forthcoming 2016)., Christopher J. Roederer

Christopher J. Roederer

In The Transformation of South African Private Law after Ten Years of Democracy, 37 Colum. Hum. Rts. L. Rev. 447 (2006), I evaluated the role of private law in consolidating South Africa’s constitutional democracy. There, I traced the negative effects of apartheid from public law to private law, and then to the law of delict, South Africa’s counterpart to tort law. I demonstrated that the law of delict failed to develop under apartheid and that the values animating the law of delict under apartheid were inconsistent with the values and aspirations of South Africa’s democratic transformation. By the end of …

Religious Exemptions, Marriage Equality, And The Establishment Of Religion, Nancy J. Knauer

Nancy J. Knauer

The advent of nationwide marriage equality has sparked a robust debate over the extent of religious liberties and the limits of civil rights protections. As public opinion regarding LGBT individuals and the families they form has evolved, religious beliefs that once served as the basis for law and policy have been increasing marginalized. Various efforts have been made to protect religious objectors who continue to believe that marriage is only between one man and one woman. For example, all of the states that had enacted marriage equality legislation included exceptions for clergy and religious organizations to ensure that they would …

A Quantum Congress, Jorge R. Roig

Jorge R Roig

Boilerplate Shock, Gregory Shill

Gregory Shill

No nation was spared in the recent global downturn, but several countries in the Eurozone arguably took the hardest punch, and they are still down. Doubts about the solvency of Greece, Spain, and a number of their neighbors are increasing the likelihood of a breakup of the common European currency. Observers believe a single departure and sovereign debt default might set off a “bank run” on the euro, with devastating regional and global consequences.

What mechanisms are available to address—or ideally, to prevent—such a disaster?

One unlikely candidate is boilerplate language in the contracts that govern Eurozone sovereign bonds. As …

The First Thing We Do, Jorge R. Roig

Jorge R Roig

¿Con La Misma Vara? Los Altibajos De La Igual Protección De Las Leyes En Las Opiniones Del Juez Federico Hernández Denton, Jorge R. Roig

Jorge R Roig

An Empirical Study Of Supreme Court Justice Pre-Appointment Experience, Benjamin H. Barton

College of Law Faculty Scholarship

This study compares the years of experience that preceded appointment to the Supreme Court for each Justice. The study seeks to demonstrate that the background experiences of the Roberts Court Justices are quite different from the Justices of earlier Supreme Courts and to persuade the reader that this is insalubrious.

Equal Rights And Sex Discrimination: A Second Look At Equal Protection Incorporation, Michael T. Worley

Michael T Worley

Enacting a Constitutional Amendment is difficult. Indeed, it takes a subject of major national preoccupation in order to get any Constitutional Amendment ratified. This makes it difficult for judges to balance the evolving social norms of society with a text that may not reflect the will of the people today. This is especially true with respect to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which is used for additional classifications today than when it was when enacted. Most methods today do not rely at all on the text of the Constitution to interpret the Fourteenth Amendment, for the simple …

From Weems To Graham: The Curious Evolution Of Evolving Standards Of Decency, Zachary Baron Shemtob

Zachary Shemtob

Since the 1958 case of Trop v. Dulles, the Supreme Court has held that grossly disproportionate punishments are cruel and unusual if they violate “the evolving standards of decency of a maturing society.” Traditionally, this was interpreted as prohibiting capital sentences for certain types of crimes and classes of offenders. More recently, in Graham v. Florida, the Court applied evolving standards to incarceration, banning the sentencing of juveniles who committed non-homicide crimes to life without parole.

This article breaks the Court’s understanding of evolving standards of decency into distinct periods. In each period the justices encountered a host of novel …

Animus And Marriage Equality, Susannah W. Pollvogt

Susannah W Pollvogt

Many scholars have speculated about the approach the United States Supreme Court might take in the marriage equality cases currently on its docket. One option that is underexplored is that the Court may revive and rationalize the doctrine of unconstitutional animus. Dormant since the 1996 decision in Romer v. Evans, the doctrine of unconstitutional animus has made only fleeting appearances in the Court’s equal protection jurisprudence, and when it has appeared, it has taken on a distinct incarnation in every instance. For this reason, both scholars and practitioners consider the doctrine to be ill-defined and unreliable. Nonetheless, the doctrine of …

Forgetting Romer, Susannah W. Pollvogt

Susannah W Pollvogt

No abstract provided.

Suspect Classification And Its Discontents, Susannah W. Pollvogt

Susannah W Pollvogt

Suspect classification analysis and the associated tiers of scrutiny framework are the primary doctrinal features of contemporary equal protection jurisprudence. How plaintiffs fare under these twin doctrines determines the ultimate fate of their equal protection claims. But neither doctrine finds firm footing in precedent or theory. Rather, a close examination of the United States Supreme Court’s equal protection jurisprudence reveals these doctrines as historically contingent and lacking in any principled justification. But rather than disregard the contributions of these cases altogether, this Article mines that same body of law not for the discrete doctrinal mechanisms developed in each case, but …

Educating The Underground: The Constitutionality Of Non-Residence Based Immigrant In-State Tuition Laws, Alexander F. A. Rabanal

Alexander F. A. Rabanal

No abstract provided.

United States Standards Of Review Versus The International Standard Of Proportionality: Convergence And Symmetry, Randall Kelso

Randall Kelso

Abstract: R. Randall Kelso, “United States Standards of Review versus the International Standard of Proportionality: Convergence and Symmetry.”

Part I of this article notes that rights review in the United States is based on two distinct lines of authority: tier review and reasonableness balancing review. Under tier review, courts focus on whether to adopt strict scrutiny, intermediate review, or minimum rationality review. Under reasonableness balancing review, courts balance the benefits of the government regulation against the burden on the individual, and then ask whether given the benefit the burden is “unreasonable,” “clearly excessive,” “grossly excessive,” “grossly disproportionate,” or in some …

Three-Dimensional Sovereign Immunity, Sarah L. Brinton

Sarah L Brinton

The Supreme Court has erred on sovereign immunity. The current federal immunity doctrine wrongly gives Congress the exclusive authority to waive immunity (“exclusive congressional waiver”), but the Constitution mandates that Congress share the waiver power with the Court. This Article develops the doctrine of a two-way shared waiver and then explores a third possibility: the sharing of the immunity waiver power among all three branches of government.

Regulate/Mandate: Two Perspectives, John T. Valauri

John T. Valauri

The debate and litigation over the constitutionality of the individual mandate during the past few years has revealed an utter lack of consensus on the bench and in the academy concerning the scope of and limits on the congressional commerce power. The parties here are divided into two different camps and see questions and cases from opposing perspectives which color and frame their perception and understanding of the topic. One perspective is a dynamic take on the New Deal Settlement which sees Congress as possessing essentially unlimited legislative power over commerce. The other perspective freezes doctrine in place and accepts …

Teaching U.S. V. Windsor: The Defense Of Marriage Act And Its Constitutional Implications, Corey A. Ciocchetti

Corey A Ciocchetti

Students are captivated by contemporary, high-profile Supreme Court cases. They recognize the litigants featured on the news, they debate the public policy, sociological and other real world implications of the arguments in school and their peers and parents prod them to discuss their opinions outside of class. I incorporate very recent and noteworthy Supreme Court cases in my legal studies courses with great success. My students are more engaged and prepared than when I assign a textbook chapter (students would rather track the law as it develops in real time). They tend to recall the arguments and legal theories well …

Tricky Business: A Decision-Making Framework For Legally Sound, Ethically Suspect Business Tactics, Corey A. Ciocchetti

Corey A Ciocchetti

TRICK: “a crafty or underhanded device, maneuver, stratagem, or the like, intended to deceive or cheat.” Tricks are designed to outwit others in a cunning and skillful manner. Despite well-written, philosophically sound codes of ethics and core values, businesses are not above employing tricky tactics to suit their pecuniary interests. These strategies often involve the legal system as the outwitted ask courts to vindicate their rights. However, the most successful tricks are skillfully crafted to survive legal scrutiny. This article evaluates three tricky business tactics found lawful by United States Supreme Court during its most recent term. The story begins …

Teaching The U.S. V. Arizona Immigration Law Case, Corey A. Ciocchetti

Corey A Ciocchetti

Arizona v. U.S. was one of the most anticipated decisions of the Supreme Court's October 2011 term. The case pits the state of Arizona and its immigration policy of "attrition through enforcement" against a much less aggressive federal immigration policy under President Obama.

These slides help tell the story and can be used to teach the case as well as important constitutional law issues such as: (1) enumerated powers, (2) preemption, (3) federalism, (4) state sovereignty and more.

2nd Amendment: The Right To Keep & Bear Arms -- Teaching D.C. V. Heller, Corey A. Ciocchetti

Corey A Ciocchetti

The D.C. v. Heller case is an incredible vehicle to teach about the United States Constitution. The case revolves around the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms and shines a spotlight on Originalism as a theory of Constitutional interpretation. These slides show how the case evolved from the District Court to the Supreme Court. They also teach the facts of the case and the different opinions on both sides of the debate. In the end, readers will learn a great deal about the Second Amendment and its application to federal and state/local gun control laws as well as …

Teaching The U.S. V. Windsor Same Sex Marriage/Equal Protection/Doma Case, Corey A. Ciocchetti

Corey A Ciocchetti

The same sex marriage cases are proving to be the hottest of topics during a very eventful Supreme Court term. The U.S. v. Windsor case is a fitting vehicle to cover the topic. These slides help tell the story and can be used to teach the case as well as important constitutional law issues such as: (1) equal protection, (2) federalism, (3) executive discretion to defend federal laws, (4) incorporation and more.

Article Iii: Cases & Controversies - Teaching The Already V. Nike Case, Corey A. Ciocchetti

Corey A Ciocchetti

Nike is the market leader selling athletic shoes worldwide. Already markets its products to a smaller segment of the athletic shoe market. These two companies battled at the intersection of the intellectual property, federal court jurisdiction and constitutional law. These slides help teach the Already v. Nike Supreme Court case. These slides cover issues such as Article III cases & controversies, intellectual property rights in trademarks and patents as well as mootness and standing doctrines.

Ending Judgment Arbitrage: Jurisdictional Competition And The Enforcement Of Foreign Money Judgments In The United States, Gregory Shill

Gregory Shill

Recent multi-billion-dollar damage awards issued by foreign courts against large American companies have focused attention on the once-obscure, patchwork system of enforcing foreign-country judgments in the United States. That system’s structural problems are even more serious than its critics have charged. However, the leading proposals for reform overlook the positive potential embedded in its design.

In the United States, no treaty or federal law controls the domestication of foreign judgments; the process is instead governed by state law. Although they are often conflated in practice, the procedure consists of two formally and conceptually distinct stages: foreign judgments must first be …

A Remedy To Fit The Crime: A Call For The Unreasonable Rejection Of A Parent By A Child As Tort, Bruce L. Beverly

Bruce L. Beverly

The U.S. Supreme Court has stated time and again that the privilege to raise a child as a parent sees fit is a substantive fundamental right under the Constitution. However, when faced with the situation where one parent poisons the child against the other parent, and that child then unreasonably rejects a formerly loved parent, Courts have been reluctant to enforce this fundamental right by allowing tortious recovery against the offending parent. This paper briefly examines the legal and mental health controversies surrounding parental alienation and suggests that more Courts should recognize an independent tort cause of action against an …

The Constitution, The Roberts Court & Business: The Significant Business Impact Of The Supreme Court's 2011-2012 Term, Corey A. Ciocchetti

Corey A Ciocchetti

The 2011-2012 Supreme Court term created quite the media buzz. The Affordable Care Act cases and the controversial Arizona immigration law dominated the headlines. But the term also included other fascinating yet less sensationalized cases. The Court heard its fair share of criminal law controversies involving derelict defense attorneys and prosecutors as well as civil procedure disputes involving qualified immunity for witness in grand jury proceedings and private parties assisting the government in litigation. The justices also entertained arguments on a federal law allowing United States citizens born in Jerusalem to have “Israel” stamped as their birthplace on a passport. …