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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 10 of 10

Full-Text Articles in Law

Embracing Race-Conscious College Admissions Programs: How Fisher V. University Of Texas At Austin Redefines "Affirmative Action" As A Holistic Approach To Admissions That Ensures Equal, Not Preferential, Treatment, Nancy L. Zisk Jun 2019

Embracing Race-Conscious College Admissions Programs: How Fisher V. University Of Texas At Austin Redefines "Affirmative Action" As A Holistic Approach To Admissions That Ensures Equal, Not Preferential, Treatment, Nancy L. Zisk

Nancy L. Zisk

In Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, the United States Supreme Court affirmed well-established Supreme Court doctrine that race may be considered when a college or university decides whom to admit and whom to reject, as long as the consideration of race is part of a narrowly tailored holistic consideration of an applicant's many distinguishing features. The Court's latest decision heralds a new way of thinking about holistic race-conscious admissions programs. Rather than considering them as "affirmative action" plans that prefer any one applicant to the disadvantage of another, they should be viewed as the Court has described …


Real Bite: Legal Realism And Meaningful Rational Basis In Dog Law And Beyond, Ann L. Schiavone Sep 2016

Real Bite: Legal Realism And Meaningful Rational Basis In Dog Law And Beyond, Ann L. Schiavone

Ann Schiavone

On August 5, 2002, the City of Toledo, Ohio issued a warrant for the arrest of resident Paul Tellings on the charge of violating the limitation on harboring vicious dogs. Both the Toledo ordinance and Ohio state law in effect in 2002 labeled “pit bull” type dogs per se vicious purely based on their visual identification. Toledo’s ordinance specifically limited citizens to only one “vicious” dog per household. During a routine lead-based paint inspection in Tellings’s home, the health inspector noted three dogs that looked like pit bulls in the household, reported it to the dog warden, and set in …


Unleashing The Fourteenth Amendment, Ann L. Schiavone Dec 2015

Unleashing The Fourteenth Amendment, Ann L. Schiavone

Ann Schiavone

Do Justice Anthony Kennedy’s opinions in the gay rights cases of Romer v. Evans, Lawrence v. Texas, United States v. Windsor, and Obergefell v. Hodges have any impact on the future of Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence beyond rights for gays, lesbians, and transgender persons? We don’t know. It is possible these cases will simply remain siloed in their unique legal and cultural niche, but viewing them through the lens of 150 years of Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence suggests they may signal a shift in due process and equal protection analysis. This shift could open the doors for challenging discriminatory laws under a …


How To Choose The Least Unconstitutional Option: Lessons For The President (And Others) From The Debt Ceiling Standoff, Neil H. Buchanan, Michael C. Dorf Feb 2015

How To Choose The Least Unconstitutional Option: Lessons For The President (And Others) From The Debt Ceiling Standoff, Neil H. Buchanan, Michael C. Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

The federal statute known as the “debt ceiling” limits total borrowing by the United States. Congress has repeatedly raised the ceiling to authorize necessary borrowing, but a political standoff in 2011 nearly made it impossible to borrow funds to meet obligations that Congress had affirmed earlier that very year. Some commentators urged President Obama to ignore the debt ceiling, while others responded that such borrowing would violate the separation of powers and therefore that the president should refuse to spend appropriated funds. This Article analyzes the choice the president nearly faced in summer 2011, and which he or a successor …


Abortion Rights, Michael C. Dorf Feb 2015

Abortion Rights, Michael C. Dorf

Michael C. Dorf

No abstract provided.


Is It Admissible?: Tips For Criminal Defense Attorneys On Assessing The Admissibility Of A Criminal Defendant's Statements, Part Two, John H. Blume, Emily C. Paavola Dec 2014

Is It Admissible?: Tips For Criminal Defense Attorneys On Assessing The Admissibility Of A Criminal Defendant's Statements, Part Two, John H. Blume, Emily C. Paavola

John H. Blume

Part One of this article addressed the Fifth Amendment issues to be considered when analyzing the admissibility of a criminal defendant's out-of-court statements. Part Two discusses the Sixth Amendment, the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause and impeachment issues.


Supreme Court Section 1983 Decisions: (October 2001 Term), Martin A. Schwartz Jun 2011

Supreme Court Section 1983 Decisions: (October 2001 Term), Martin A. Schwartz

Martin A. Schwartz

No abstract provided.


From A Whimper To A Bang: The Trend Toward Finding Occurrence Based Statutes Of Limitations Governing Negligent Misdiagnosis Of Diseases With Long Latency Periods Unconstitutional, Peter Zablotsky Apr 2011

From A Whimper To A Bang: The Trend Toward Finding Occurrence Based Statutes Of Limitations Governing Negligent Misdiagnosis Of Diseases With Long Latency Periods Unconstitutional, Peter Zablotsky

Peter Zablotsky

No abstract provided.


Born In The U.S.A.? Re-Assessing Birthright Citizenship In The Wake Of 9/11, John C. Eastman Dec 2007

Born In The U.S.A.? Re-Assessing Birthright Citizenship In The Wake Of 9/11, John C. Eastman

John C. Eastman

Testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives, Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims (Sept. 29, 2005) contends that the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment has been misconstrued as mandating birthright citizenship. Rather, the clause was a codification of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which quite clearly exempted from the automatic citizenship provisions children of parents who owed allegiance to a foreign power - i.e., those who were in the U.S. only temporarily (and particularly those who were in the U.S. illegally). This was the understanding of those who drafted and those who ratified the 14th Amendment, …


Re-Evaluating The Privileges Or Immunities Clause, John C. Eastman Dec 2002

Re-Evaluating The Privileges Or Immunities Clause, John C. Eastman

John C. Eastman

In its 1999 case, Saenz v. Roe, the Supreme Court re-invigorated a long-dead clause of the Constitution, the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment. Oddly, though, the opinion was written by Justice Stevens, one of the staunchest devotees of a living Constitution rather than originalism. As odd: Justice Thomas, the most consistent originalist on the Court, was in dissent. In his view, any reinvigoration of the Privileges or Immunities Clause should displace, rather than augment, the untethered jurisprudence that expansively interpreted other clauses of the 14th Amendment to cover the neutered Privileges or Immunities Clause, and it should …