Law Commons^™

Overturning Sffa V. Harvard, David Hinojosa, Chavis Jones

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

One of the first lessons law students learn is the importance of stare decisis. It not only serves as a tool to learn how to apply settled law to argument and persuasive writing, but foundationally stare decisis helps promote the public’s trust, confidence, and faith in the judicial system. Thus, when the Supreme Court issued its 6-3 opinion in 2023 in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard/University of North Carolina (“Harvard”), most onlookers viewed the decision as being the final nail in the coffin for affirmative action in higher education admissions. However, we—the authors—are among the minority.

In …

The Red Pill: Critical Race Theory, Ostrich Law, And The 14th Amendment Right To Free And Equal Thought And Dignity, Kindaka J. Sanders

St. Mary's Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Undocumented Citizens Of The United States: The Repercussions Of Denying Birth Certificates, Anna L. Lichtenberger

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

Finality Of A Conviction: A Noncitizen's Right To Procedural Due Process, Daniela Mondragon

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming

Gay Rights Versus Religious Freedom, And The Influence Of Obergefell V. Hodges On Distinguishing The Dividing Line, Kathleen Rainey Mcstravick

St. Mary's Law Journal

Obergefell v. Hodges, a United States Supreme Court case, added more fuel to the fire, leaving many to wonder how to voice religious opposition to same-sex marriages, and what are the second order effects for religious opposition in light of the new rule. The Court held the Equal Protection Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation. Obergefell, brings the conflict between freedom of religion and LGBT rights to a new level by questioning how far freedom of religion can be used to refuse anti-discrimination statutes regarding sexual …

Can Immune Parties Really Be Responsible: An Analysis Of The Current Interpretation Of The Texas Responsible Third Party Statute And Its Vulnerability To Constitutional Challenge., Justin C. Roberts, Randell Roberts

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Texas Responsible Third Party (RTP) statute was amended in 2003 to give defendants the opportunity to have the jury apportion responsibility for the plaintiff’s damages to persons who were not joined in the lawsuit. A defendant could achieve this result by designating a “responsible third party.” Plaintiffs may often join responsible third parties as additional defendants. Under such situations, all culpable parties are before the court, defending themselves, and accountable to the plaintiff for their percentage of responsibility. When the statute worked in this fashion it achieved “a carefully constructed scheme balancing the interests of both defendants and claimants.” …

A Custom Fit: Tailoring Texas Civil Jury Selection Procedures To Case Tiers., Jarod S. Gonzalez

St. Mary's Law Journal

Citizens serving on a civil jury are entrusted with making factual decisions about disputes that impact legal rights and remedies of litigants and set standards for the behavior of the public. Unfortunately, civil jury trials take place less frequently in twenty-first century Texas than in prior eras. Part of the justice system’s rejuvenation should involve a re-evaluation and improvement of the current process for selecting civil juries. Currently, the primary flaw in Texas jury selection procedures is the one-size-fits-all approach. Because some cases need twelve impartial jurors who are lay persons, and others require twelve people who are knowledgeable of …

Perry V. Schwarzenegger: Trying Same-Sex Marriage., Michael J. Ritter

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

In 2008, California voters enacted Proposition 8, carving out an exception to the State constitution’s equal protection, due process, and privacy guarantees. After litigation in state court proved ineffective, same-sex couples sought relief in federal court in the widely discussed case Perry v. Schwarzenegger. Though the trial court released its decision only three weeks ago, the case has received attention by the national media and by legal circles throughout the country. This Article addresses the progression of the case of Perry from the filing of the case to its current status before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. It offers …

Gender Segregation In The Public Schools; Opportunity, Inequality, Or Both., Bill Piatt

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Should the public schools be allowed to segregate girls from boys in the classroom? There is a history of single-sex education in this country, but there are concerns about single gender classrooms. In recent decades, researchers have begun to assert that requiring boys and girls to be taught together has a negative impact on the educational progress because of inherent differences in boy/girl learning behavior, or even in the development of their brains. Proponents of gender exclusive classrooms point out the voluntary nature of the programs, and the explicit findings of the Department of Education justifying such programs. Opponents argue …

Moving Beyond The Immutability Debate In The Fight For Equality After Proposition 8., M.K.B. Darmer, Tiffany Chang

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

On May 15, 2008, the California Supreme Court issued its historic decision regarding marriage rights for same-sex couples. In the course of its opinion, the court found that classifications based upon sexual orientation are subject to the protections of “strict scrutiny” for purposes of the state’s equal protection clause. The court also found that marriage is a fundamental right that extends to same-sex couples. On November 4, 2008, 52% of California voters voted for Proposition 8, which purported to “amend” the state constitution by adding fourteen words in a new clause following the equal protection clause: “only marriage between a …

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 …

Texas Law's Life Or Death Rule In Capital Sentencing: Scrutinizing Eight Amendment Violations And The Case Of Juan Guerrero, Jr., John Niland, Riddhi Dasgupta

St. Mary's Law Journal

The United States Supreme Court has never explained the Eighth Amendment’s impact in noncapital cases involving a mentally retarded or brain-injured defendant. The Court has not provided guidance to legislatures or lower courts concerning the acceptable balancing of aggravating and mitigating factors and the role that mitigating factors must play in the sentencing decision. A definitive gap exists between the protections afforded to a criminal defendant facing a life sentence as opposed to those confronted with the death penalty. The Court requires sentencing procedures to consider aggravating and mitigating factors, including mental retardation and brain damage, when imposing a death …

What About Our Future - The Chaos That Is The Texas School Finance System., Brian Stork

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

The current school finance system has failed to address the changing demographics of the state and has serious, long lasting negative effects on disadvantaged students by not providing better funding, services, or facilities. None of the attempts made to fix this glaring problem of inequity within the Texas school finance system has done anything besides point out these blatant flaws and patchwork approach to solving them. Judge Dietz concluded that since the current school finance system does not properly meet the general diffusion of knowledge requirement proscribed by Article VII, Section 1 of the Texas Constitution, it is inadequate and …

Mind The Gap: Expansion Of Texas Governmental Immunity Between Takings And Tort., Jadd F. Masso

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Jennings v. City of Dallas, the city’s wastewater collection division was dispatched to unstop a clogged sewer main but instead caused sewage to spew into the Jennings’ home with dramatic force, causing extensive damage. The Jennings subsequently filed suit against the city, alleging its actions constituted an unconstitutional taking, damaging, or destruction of their property for public use without adequate compensation in violation of Article I, § 17 of the Texas Constitution. The issue presented from the case was whether an individual citizen should be liable for such losses when the damage—as an incident to governmental action—in effect benefits …

Capping Your Rights: The Texas Statute Of Non-Economic Damage Caps In Medical Malpractice Cases And Its Assault On The Rights Of The Injured And The Power Of The Courts., Ruben James Reyes

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Though the Texas Legislature attempted to assure Texans’ access to quality, affordable health care, they assaulted patients’ rights and the power of the courts with a cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits. Non-economic damage caps have a major effect in medical malpractice cases on an injured victim’s constitutional rights and their rights to bring a cause of action against a negligent party. Injured medical malpractice victims may argue that non-economic damage caps directly violate equal protection because of the creation of an impermissible classification distinguishing between injured victims with calculable economic damages and injured victims with no economic …

In Re V.L.K. V. Troxel: Is The Best Interest Standard In A Motion To Modify The Sole Managing Conservator Subject To A Due Process Or Course Challenge., David F. Johnson

St. Mary's Law Journal

Texas Family Code section 156.101 is unconstitutional. In In re V.L.K, the Texas Supreme Court held that the Texas Legislature removed the injurious retention element from section 156.101 and no longer required a finding that the natural parent be injurious to the welfare of the child. The Texas Supreme Court’s ruling is contradictory to the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Troxel v. Granville. In Troxel, the Supreme Court struck down a state statute that effectively permitted any third party to file a motion to challenge custody. Under Texas law, any affected party, not limited to parties named in the …

America And The World: Human Rights At Home And Abroad., Joe W. (Chip) Pitts Iii

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Multiple provisions in the Bill of Rights appear gutted around the last year. While abroad, Mr. Pitts received an outside perspective on American news which provided him with a new outlook on current events. The United Nations Social Forum brought voices into the United Nations which are not typically heard, such as poor and vulnerable populations not represented elsewhere. Concurrently, the Johannesburg Summit addressed similar issues. However, as of late, the American government suppresses the voices of the American people. The Patriot Act includes provisions which deter dissent, freedom of speech, and assembly. This Act also purported to give the …

Dead Man Talking: Competing Narratives And Effective Representation In Capital Cases Essay., Jeffrey J. Pokorak

St. Mary's Law Journal

As Karl Hammond’s case indicates, to serve justice, balance between the Kill Story and Human Story is necessary in a capital trial. This Essay seeks, through deconstruction of Karl Hammond’s case, to identify and illustrate the values of telling these combating stories. Part III describes the Kill Story and the Human Story in Karl’s case from the record of his trial, appeals, and petitions. Part III also demonstrates how the failure to tell one side of the story in either the guilt-innocence phase or the punishment phase can have a prejudicial effect on the jury’s decision. Part IV then discusses …

The React Security Belt: Stunning Prisoners And Human Rights Groups Into Questioning Whether Its Use Is Permissible Under The United States And Texas Constitutions Comment., Shelley A. Nieto Dahlberg

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Remote Electronically Activated Control Technology (REACT) belt infringes upon criminal defendants’ and prisoners’ fundamental rights; therefore, it cannot withstand judicial scrutiny under the United States and Texas Constitutions. This Comment attempts to address and answer issues regarding the REACT belt. The belt constitutes cruel and unusual punishment with the potential to deprive prisoners of their due process rights. The belt disrupts attorney-client communication and destroys a criminal defendant’s presumption of innocence. Furthermore, other alternatives provide effective means to prevent unruly prisoners from destroying the integrity of the courts. Part II of this Comment discusses how the belt works, and …

Anti-Immigrant Backlash And The Role Of The Judiciary: A Proposal For Heightened Review Of Federal Laws Affecting Immigrants Comment., Valerie L. Barth

St. Mary's Law Journal

The hostile environment in the United States toward immigrants, as indicated by the Welfare Reform Act and Proposition 187, calls for a more meaningful judicial review of laws affecting immigrants. Although subjecting the federal government’s actions regarding immigrants to heightened review might seem to be a radical step, this Comment will explain why such a move is necessary. Part II discusses historical justifications for subjecting state and federal laws affecting immigrants to different levels of scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause. Part III presents arguments for labeling immigrants a “suspect” class. Part IV considers the constitutionality of the Welfare Reform …

Adarand Constructors, Inc. V. Pena: The Lochnerization Of Affirmative Action Recent Development., Patricia A. Carlson

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Supreme Court’s decision in Adarand will lead to the invalidation of many federal programs because the decision requires strict scrutiny for all affirmative action programs, including federal programs. The Court ignores both constitutional strictures and American history by resorting to Lochner era rulings of striking down federal socio-economic regulations. Overturning the clear precedent of Fullilove undermines stare decisis by valuing the language of the Court’s decision over its meaning.   The Court in Adarand presumes that the Constitution is color-blind. This presumption ignores the history leading up to the Reconstruction Amendments, the purpose of the Reconstruction Amendments, and the intentions …

Enhanced Punishment Under The Texas Hate Crimes Act: Politics, Panacea, Or Pathway To Hell., David Todd Smith

St. Mary's Law Journal

Nearly without exception, modern legislatures have responded to the reprehensible nature and detrimental social effects of hate crime by enacting laws specifically designed to punish the offender’s discriminatory animus. The term “hate crime” describes criminal conduct which is motivated by the offender’s bias or prejudice against another cognizable group. Although the reprehensible nature of a hate crime is often apparent from the facts of any given case, the repercussions of these offenses exceed the ignoble character of any one specific act. Texas has now joined the ranks of these jurisdictions by adopting legal provisions which authorize heightened penalties upon a …

Revisiting Standards Of Review In Civil Appeals., W. Wendell Hall

St. Mary's Law Journal

Applying and defining the accurate standard of review determines how likely an appeal will be successful. While the proper standard of review may be easy to identify, applying the standard of review to a case is often problematic. The standards define the interactions between trial and appellate courts by distributing the power of review throughout the judicial branch. The standards of review also limit a court’s authority to determine an error by a trial court, and whether the error warrants reversal. The standard sets the requirements of substantive law and provides a means for appellate judges to weigh arguments. This …

Transracial Adoption In Texas: Should The Best Interests Standard Be Color-Blind., Jo Beth Eubanks

St. Mary's Law Journal

Legislative amendments must go further than limiting race from being a primary factor in adoptions; amendments must eliminate race as an acceptable factor. Diverging opinions of “race matching” in foster care and adoption exist. Administrative policies regulating adoption hold that same-race placement, between the adoptive parent and child, is a primary consideration when awarding custody in Texas. Basing child placement on the race or ethnicity of the parties involved raises serious constitutional concerns. The best interest standard is the predominant method in determining child placement, for both custody and adoption proceedings. The premise of the best interest standard is prioritization …

Capital Punishment: A Critique Of The Political And Philosophical Thought Supporting The Justices' Positions., Samuel J.M. Donnelly

St. Mary's Law Journal

Since Gregg v. Georgia, the Supreme Court has developed what could be described as a subparadigm for capital punishment. This subparadigm is now at a point of crisis for two enduring and mutually supporting reasons. The dissents by Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall represent the convergence of the better modern thought in regard to capital punishment. Even with the retirement of both Justices, the criticism found in their dissenting opinions presents a continuing challenge to the plurality’s position. Those using the plurality’s rhetoric are now split into two groups. Justices Blackmun and Stevens regularly vote against capital punishment, while focusing …

The Political Philosophy Of Campaign Finance Reform As Articulated In The Dissents In Austin V. Michigan Chamber Of Commerce., John S. Shockley, David A. Schultz

St. Mary's Law Journal

The 1992 presidential candidacy of Jerry Brown, who called for campaign contribution limits, has reignited the issue of campaign finance reform. Indeed, the United States Supreme Court has recognized the importance of campaign finance reform as a judicial issue. The importance of this issue is marked by the Court’s continued willingness to address the regulation of campaign finance since the 1976 landmark case of Buckley v. Valeo. The case of Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce emphasized the somewhat confused nature of the Supreme Court’s campaign finance reform decisions. The Supreme Court and state legislatures will likely continue to address …

The Evolution Of Government Liability Under Section 1983., Christopher J.M. Pettit

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides in order to enforce the law, Congress shall have the power to pass enabling legislation. In the exercise of this power, Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1871, to implement the prohibition of slavery as required by the Thirteenth Amendment. Although the Thirteenth Amendment abolished the institution of slavery, discriminatory actions by private citizens remained prevalent. During the period following reconstruction, congressional legislation shifted focus from prohibiting state action to prohibiting the actions of private individuals who violated the civil liberties of others. Through the passage of the Civil Rights …

Peremptory Jury Strike In Texas After Batson And Edmondson., Alan B. Rich

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Batson v. Kentucky, the United States Supreme Court overruled that portion of Swain v. Alabama, which had imposed a “crippling burden of proof” upon a person who wished to vindicate his right of equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment in the face of a racially motivated peremptory challenge. Under Batson, a defendant can raise an inference of discrimination and prove it using only evidence adduced at his own trial. Two fundamental questions needing resolution prior to involving the Batson procedures are: (A) who has standing to bring a Batson challenge; and (B) who must be challenged before the Batson …

A Trial Court's Refusal To Question Prospective Jurors About The Specific Contents Of Pretrial Publicity Which They Had Read Or Heard Did Not Violate A Defendant's Sixth Amendment Right To An Impartial Jury, Or Fourteenth Amendment Right To Due Process., Karen A. Cusenbary

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Mu'Min v. Virginia, the United States Supreme Court held a defendant has no right to ask jurors about the potential influence of prejudicial pretrial publicity. A defendant may ask only if the jurors can remain impartial. The Court mandates that overturning a trial court’s jury selection is allowable only if manifest error renders the trial fundamentally unfair. The Court did not find that the case involved sufficient public passion to necessitate a more extensive jury examination by the trial court to include inquiries involving the effect of pretrial publicity. The ruling in Mu'Min leaves too much discretion to the …

Benign Classification Based On Race Must Be Narrowly Tailored To Achieve A Compelling Governmental Interest., Martha J. Hess

St. Mary's Law Journal

In City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., the Supreme Court held a minority business utilization plan (Richmond Plan) was violative of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. The Richmond Plan required all builders awarded city construction contracts to subcontract, at minimum, 30% of the contract value to Minority Business Enterprises. A state government enacting legislation that burdens one class of persons and benefits a similarly-situated class must provide sufficient justification for its action to survive equal protection analysis. When distinction is based on race or national origin—classes considered inherently suspect—a reviewing court subjects the governmental legislation to strict scrutiny, …