Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

Perceptions Of Judicial Responsibility: The Views Of The Nine United States Supreme Court Justices As They Consider Claims In Fourteenth Amendment Noncriminal Cases: A Post-Bakke Evaluation, Arthur R. Landever Dec 1978

Perceptions Of Judicial Responsibility: The Views Of The Nine United States Supreme Court Justices As They Consider Claims In Fourteenth Amendment Noncriminal Cases: A Post-Bakke Evaluation, Arthur R. Landever

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

In this article, the author sketches each Justice by examining his expressed attitudes and silent concurrences in fourteenth amendment noncriminal cases, as well as his remarks in other, non-court settings. While judicial behavioralists have employed quantitative techniques focusing upon analysis of voting records, the author believes that use of the lawyer's traditional method--case and opinion examination-is more appropriate here. Each Justice's composite should tell us not only something about the individual Justice's views, but also something about the views of key blocs on the Court. By such an effort, we learn more about the range of the possible in urging …


The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression (With Endress), Stephen W. Gard Jan 1978

The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression (With Endress), Stephen W. Gard

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

The purpose of this article is not to debate the wisdom of the use of sensitive language on the electronic media or elsewhere. The admonition that the perceived wisdom of governmental regulations should never be confused with the issue of their constitutionality remains appropriate. Nor is it our purpose to debate the substantive question of whether the Court reached the proper result in Pacifica, although we will necessarily have much to say by implication on this issue. The purpose of this article is rather to assess the impact of Pacifica on the two traditions of freedom of expression which continue …


The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress Jan 1978

The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress

Cleveland State Law Review

The United States Supreme Court, in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, had a magnificent opportunity to either begin the process of defining first amendment limitations on the scope of the authority of the FCC to regulate the content of broadcast expression, explicate a rational ground for the differential status of broadcasting, or perhaps both. The purpose of this article is not to debate the wisdom of the use of sensitive language on the electronic media or elsewhere. Nor is it our purpose to debate the substantive question of whether the Court reached the proper result in Pacifica, although we will necessarily …


State V. Roberts: A Persuasive But Unsupported Position, Robert A. Boyd Jan 1978

State V. Roberts: A Persuasive But Unsupported Position, Robert A. Boyd

Cleveland State Law Review

The Ohio Supreme Court recently held in State v. Roberts that when a witness is unavailable at the trial of a criminal defendant, the state may not introduce the witness' preliminary hearing testimony into evidence unless he had been cross-examined at the preliminary hearing. The court found that the defendant, Roberts, had been denied his right to confront an adverse witness when the trial court admitted the preliminary hearing testimony of a witness who was not present at trial, and held that mere opportunity to cross-examine at a preliminary hearing, unexercised, did not satisfy the demands of the Confrontation Clause …


The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress Jan 1978

The Impact Of Pacifica Foundation On Two Traditions Of Freedom Of Expression, Stephen W. Gard, Jeffrey Endress

Cleveland State Law Review

The United States Supreme Court, in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, had a magnificent opportunity to either begin the process of defining first amendment limitations on the scope of the authority of the FCC to regulate the content of broadcast expression, explicate a rational ground for the differential status of broadcasting, or perhaps both. The purpose of this article is not to debate the wisdom of the use of sensitive language on the electronic media or elsewhere. Nor is it our purpose to debate the substantive question of whether the Court reached the proper result in Pacifica, although we will necessarily …