Law Commons^™

Perils Of The Reverse Silver Platter Under U.S. Border Patrol Operations, D. Anthony

University of Massachusetts Law Review

In the face of expanding U.S. Border Patrol operations across the country, that agency often acquires evidence during its searches that is unrelated to immigration or other federal crimes but may involve state crimes. States are then faced with the question of whether to accept such evidence for state prosecutions when it was lawfully obtained by federal agents consistent with federal law but in violation of the state’s own search and seizure provisions. Sometimes referred to as “reverse silver platter” evidence, states have come to widely varying conclusions as to the admissibility of federally obtained evidence that would clearly have …

Why Flexibility Matters: Inequality And Contract Pluralism, Jeremiah A. Ho

Faculty Publications

In the decade since the Great Recession, various contract scholars have observed that one reason the financial crisis was so “great” was due in part to contract law—or, more precisely, the failures of contract law for not curbing the risky lending practices in the American housing market. However, there is another reason why contracts made that recession so great: contracts furthered inequality. In recent years, when economic inequality has become a dominant national conversation topic, we can see development of that inequality in the Great Recession. And indeed, contract law was complicit. While contractual flexibility and innovation were available to …

The Problem Of Appropriations Riders: The Bipartisan Budget Bill Of 2013 As A Case Study, Irene Scharf

Faculty Publications

This article tells the story of the enactment of the bill containing Section 2013. It also provides context for Congress's widespread practice of inserting substantive provisions into appropriations bills, and argues that this practice is inappropriate and counterproductive. Enacted in haste, at the end of a lengthy and historically contentious legislative session plagued by threats of an unfunded government, Section 203 was slipped into a bill about a wholly different topic - "keeping the government open and functioning" - without input from key legislators or stakeholders. Hence, its difficulties were foreseeable.

Part II of this piece offers background about the …

Out Of Balance: Wrong Turns In Public Employee Speech Law, Michael Toth

University of Massachusetts Law Review

Although scholars offer a variety of explanations for the modern Supreme Court’s public employee speech jurisprudence, they share a common presumption. According to the standard account, the modern era of public employee free speech law began in 1968, with the Court’s adoption of a balancing test in Pickering v. Board of Education. Contrary to this view, this Article argues that Pickering balancing is better characterized as a relic from a bygone era rather than the start of a new one. Balancing was once the Court’s standard method of judging First Amendment claims. When Pickering was decided, however, balancing was under …

Do Ask And Do Tell: Rethinking The Lawyer’S Duty To Warn In Domestic Violence Cases, Margaret B. Drew, Sarah Buel

Faculty Publications

Empirical data document that while domestic violence victims face high risk of recurring abuse, batterers’ lawyers may be privy to information that could avert further harm. Attorneys owe a duty of confidentiality to their clients that can be breached only in extraordinary circumstances, such as when counsel learns her client plans to commit a crime. To resolve the tension between client confidentiality and victim safety, this Article argues that, in the context of domestic violence cases, lawyers have an affirmative duty to (1) screen battering clients who have indicated a likelihood of harming others, (2) attempt to dissuade them from …

A Matter Of Power: Structural Federalism And Separation Doctrine In The Present, Frances Howell Rudko

Faculty Publications

Public reaction to the 1823 Supreme Court decision in Green v. Biddle prompted John Marshall’s letter to Henry Clay, who had argued the case as amicus curiae for the defendant. The letter is significant because Marshall, who had been a legislator himself, candidly expresses not only his personal dissatisfaction with the congressional assault on the 1823 decision but also the constitutional basis for his opinion. The significance of Marshall’s extrajudicial opinion becomes more apparent when it is considered in the aftermath of the recent tug-of-war between Congress and the Court which culminated in the decision in City of Boerne v. …