Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Reading Deboer And Obergefell Through The "Moral Readings Versus Originalisms" Debate: From Constitutional "Empty Cupboards" To Evolving Understandings, Linda C. Mcclain
Reading Deboer And Obergefell Through The "Moral Readings Versus Originalisms" Debate: From Constitutional "Empty Cupboards" To Evolving Understandings, Linda C. Mcclain
Faculty Scholarship
This article assesses the debate over “moral reading” and “originalist” approaches to constitutional interpretation by evaluating the momentous constitutional controversy in the United States over access by same-sex couples to civil marriage. Justice Kennedy’s landmark opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which held that such couples have a fundamental right to marry, employed a “moral reading” in emphasizing dual forms of evolving understanding: of constitutional guarantees of equality and the “promise of liberty” and of the institution of marriage. By contrast to the dissenters, the majority rejected a static, narrow reading of the fundamental right to marry – and marriage …
Reconsidering Constitutional Protection For Health Information Privacy, Wendy K. Mariner
Reconsidering Constitutional Protection For Health Information Privacy, Wendy K. Mariner
Faculty Scholarship
What kinds of health information should be reported to government for civil purposes? Several competing trends encourage efforts to reassess the scope of constitutional protection for health information: the social and commercial value of health information; the amount of data held by third parties, from health care providers to internet servers; critiques of the third party doctrine exception to Fourth Amendment protection; and concerns about the loss of privacy. This article describes a variety of civil purposes for which health information is collected today. A close analysis of cases applying the third party doctrine, administrative search principles, and the special …
If Corporations Are People, Why Can’T They Play Tag?, Cody Jacobs
If Corporations Are People, Why Can’T They Play Tag?, Cody Jacobs
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court’s decision in Burnham v. Superior Court — despite producing a splintered vote with no opinion garnering a majority of the Court — made one thing clear: an individual defendant can be subject to personal jurisdiction simply by being served with process while he or she happens to be in a forum regardless of whether the defendant has any contacts with that forum. This method of acquiring personal jurisdiction is called transient or “tag” jurisdiction. Tag jurisdiction is older than minimum contacts jurisdiction, and used to be the primary method for determining whether an out of state defendant …