Law Commons^™

Solving The Nonresident Alien Due Process Paradox In Personal Jurisdiction, Robin J. Effron

Michigan Law Review Online

Personal jurisdiction has a nonresident alien problem. Or, more accurately, personal jurisdiction has two nonresident alien problems. The first is the extent to which the specter of the nonresident alien defendant has overshadowed-if not unfairly driven-the discourse and doctrine over constitutional personal jurisdiction. The second is that the constitutional right to resist personal jurisdiction enjoyed by the nonresident alien defendant in a civil lawsuit is remarkably out of alignment with that same nonresident alien's ability to assert nearly every other constitutional right. Neither of these observations is new, although the first problem has drawn far more scholarly attention than the …

Missed Opportunities: The Unrealized Equal Protection Framework In Maher V. Roe And Harris V. Mcrae, Amelia Bailey

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

This Note focuses on two cases, Maher v. Roe and Harris v. McRae, and argues that they represent watershed moments in the reproductive rights movement because they positioned abortion as a fundamental right in name only. In both cases, the Supreme Court sanctioned severe funding restrictions and refused to grant poor women the right to state and federal assistance for elective and “nontherapeutic” abortions. “Non-therapeutic abortion” refers to those abortions performed or induced when the life of the mother is not endangered if the fetus is carried to term or when the pregnancy of the mother is not the …

Substantive Due Process For Noncitizens: Lessons From Obergefell, Anthony O'Rourke

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

The state of Texas denies birth certificates to children born in the United States—and thus citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment—if their parents are undocumented immigrants with identification provided by their home countries’ consulates. What does this have to do with same-sex marriage? In a previous article, I demonstrated that the Supreme Court’s substantive due process analysis in United States v. Windsor is particularly relevant to the state’s regulation of undocumented immigrants. This Essay builds on my earlier analysis by examining United States v. Obergefell’s applications outside the context of same-sex marriage. Obergefell’s due process holding, I argue, can …

Gideon V. Wainwright--From A 1963 Perspective, Jerold H. Israel

Articles

Gideon v. Wainwright is more than a “landmark” Supreme Court ruling in the field of constitutional criminal procedure. As evidenced by the range of celebrators of Gideon’s Fiftieth Anniversary (extending far beyond the legal academy) and Gideon’s inclusion in the basic coverage of high school government courses, Gideon today is an icon of the American justice system. I have no quarrel with that iconic status, but I certainly did not see any such potential in Gideon when I analyzed the Court’s ruling shortly after it was announced in March of 1963. I had previously agreed to write an article for …

Futility Of Exhaustion: Why Brady Claims Should Trump Federal Exhaustion Requirements, Tiffany R. Murphy

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

A defendant’s Fourteenth Amendment due process rights are violated when a state agency fails to disclose crucial exculpatory or impeachment evidence — so-called Brady violations. When this happens, the defendant should be provided the means not only to locate this evidence, but also to fully develop it in state post-conviction processes. When the state system prohibits both the means and legal mechanism to develop Brady claims, the defendant should be immune to any procedural penalties in either state or federal court. In other words, the defendant should not be required to return to state court to exhaust such a claim. …

"Off With His __": Analyzing The Sex Disparity In Chemical Castration Sentences, Zachary Edmonds Oswald

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

Societies around the world have performed castration, in its various forms, on their male and female members for thousands of years, for numerous reasons. Even within the United States, prisoners have been sentenced to castration (as a form of punishment or crime prevention) since the early twentieth century. In recent years, legislatures have perpetuated this practice but with a modern twist. Now, states use chemical injections to castrate their inmates. It turns out, however, that systemic problems plague the chemical castration sentencing regime. These problems arise from the nature of the crimes eligible for chemical castration sentences, the manner of …

Parens Patriae Run Amuck: The Child Welfare System's Disregard For The Constitutional Rights Of Non-Offending Parents, Vivek Sankaran

Articles

Over the past hundred years, a consensus has emerged recognizing a parent's ability to raise his or her child as a fundamental, sacrosanct right protected by the Constitution. Federal courts have repeatedly rejected the parens patriae summary mode of decision making that predominated juvenile courts at the turn of the twentieth century and have instead held that juvenile courts must afford basic due process to parents prior to depriving them of custodial rights to their children. This recognition has led to the strengthening of procedural protections for parents accused of child abuse or neglect in civil child protection proceedings. Yet, …

How Much Does It Matter Whether Courts Work Within The "Clearly Marked" Provisions Of The Bill Of Rights Or With The "Generalities" Of The Fourteenth Amendment?, Yale Kamisar

Articles

We know that it really mattered to Justice Hugo Black. As he made clear in his famous dissenting opinion in Adamson v. California] Black was convinced that the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to apply the complete protection of the Bill of Rights to the states.2 And, as he also made plain in his Adamson dissent, he was equally convinced that working with the "specific" or "explicit" guarantees of the first Eight Amendments would furnish Americans more protection than would applying the generalities of the Fourteenth Amendment.3

Washington V. Glucksberg Was Tragically Wrong, Erwin Chemerinsky

Michigan Law Review

Properly focused, there were two questions before the Supreme Court in Washington v. Glucksberg. First, in light of all of the other non-textual rights protected by the Supreme Court under the "liberty" of the Due Process Clause, is the right to assisted death a fundamental right? Second, if so, is the prohibition of assisted death necessary to achieve a compelling interest? Presented in this way, it is clear that the Court erred in Washington v. Glucksberg. The right of a terminally ill person to end his or her life is an essential aspect of autonomy, comparable to aspects …

Bolling Alone, Richard A. Primus

Articles

Under the doctrine of reverse incorporation, generally identified with the Supreme Court's decision in Bolling v. Sharpe, equal protection binds the federal government even though the Equal Protection Clause by its terms is addressed only to states. Since Bolling, however, the courts have almost never granted relief to litigants claiming unconstitutional racial discrimination by the federal government. Courts have periodically found unconstitutional federal discrimination on nonracial grounds such as sex and alienage, and reverse incorporation has also limited the scope of affirmative action. But in the presumed core area of preventing federal discrimination against racial minorities, Boiling has virtually no …

Miranda'S Failure To Restrain Pernicious Interrogation Practices, Welsh S. White

Michigan Law Review

As Yale Kamisar's writings on police interrogation demonstrate, our simultaneous commitments to promoting law enforcement's interest in obtaining confessions and to protecting individuals from overreaching interrogation practices have created a nearly irreconcilable tension. If the police must be granted authority to engage in effective questioning of suspects, it will obviously be difficult to insure that "the terrible engine of the criminal law . . . not . . . be used to overreach individuals who stand helpless against it." If we are committed to accommodating these conflicting interests, however, some means must be found to impose appropriate restraints on the …

Miranda Thirty-Five Years Later: A Close Look At The Majority And Dissenting Opinions In Dickerson, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Over the years, Miranda v. Arizona1 has been criticized both for going too far2 and for not going far enough.3 Nevertheless, on the basis of talks with many criminal procedure professors in the sixteen months between the time a panel of the Fourth Circuit upheld a statute (18 U.S.C. § 3501) purporting to "overrule" Miranda and a 7-2 majority of the Supreme Court overturned that ruling in the case of Dickerson v. United States,4 I am convinced that most criminal procedure professors wanted the Supreme Court to do what it did-"reaffirm" Miranda. This is not surprising. As Professor Grano once …

The Constitutional Right Of Poor People To Appeal Without Payment Of Fees: Convergence Of Due Process And Equal Protection In M.L.B. V. S.L.J, Lloyd C. Anderson

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In this Article, Professor Lloyd Anderson examines the recent decision M.L.B. v. S.L.J., in which the United States Supreme Court held that due process and equal protection converge to require that states cannot require indigent parents who seek to appeal decisions terminating their parental rights to pay court costs they cannot afford. Noting that this decision expands the constitutional right of cost-free appeal from criminal to civil cases for the first time, Professor Anderson discusses the characteristics a civil case should have in order to qualify for such a right. Professor Anderson proposes a number of other civil cases, …

Making Sausage: The Ninth Circuit's Opinion, Carl E. Schneider

Articles

As I write, the Supreme Court has just agreed to hear Compassion in Dying v. Washington and Quill v. Vacco, the two cases in which United States circuit courts of appeals held that a state may not constitutionally prohibit physicians from helping a terminally ill person who wishes to commit suicide to do so. These cases have already received lavish comment and criticism, and no doubt the Supreme Court's opinion will garner even more. Reasonably enough, most of this analysis addresses the merits of physician-assisted suicide as social policy. I, here, want to talk about how setting bioethical policy …

It Started With Quinlan: The Ever Expanding 'Right To Die', Yale Kamisar

Articles

Few rallying cries sound more straightforward than the "right to die"-but few are more fuzzy or more misunderstood. This becomes all too evident when comparing the right-to-die decision handed down by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals earlier this month and the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision in the Karen Ann Quinlan case twenty years ago. At different times, the "right to die" has embraced significantly different rights. On March 6, in Compassion in Dying v. Washington State, the Ninth Circuit held that because a Washington state statute prohibiting assisted suicide prevents physicians from providing assistance to competent, terminally …

A Child's Right To Protection From Transfer Trauma In A Contested Adoption Case, Suellyn Scarnecchia

Articles

On August 2, 1993, I arrived at the home of Jan, Robby, and Jessica DeBoer' a few hours before the transfer. At 2:00 P.M. I would carry Jessica out of her home and deliver her to the parents who had won the case,2 her biological mother and father. This task probably would have been easier had I not spent eight days in the trial court listening to the experts explain that this transfer from one set of parents to another would harm Jessica.3 It would have been easier had I not recently obtained affidavits from other experts to persuade the …

Constitutional Constraints On The Admissibility Of Grand Jury Testimony: The Unavailable Witness, Confrontation, And Due Process, Barbara L. Strack

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Defendants, however, have raised serious constitutional objections to the introduction of grand jury testimony when the witness is unavailable to testify at trial. These claims have focused on the confrontation clause of the sixth amendment and the due process clauses of the fifth and fourteenth amendments. Defendants have contended that the introduction of testimony from a grand jury proceeding which cannot be subjected to cross-examination fatally compromises the defendant's right to a fair trial. Lower courts are split over admitting grand jury testimony in these circumstances, and the Supreme Court has yet to rule on the issue. As a result, …

Constitutional And Statutory Bases Of Governors' Emergency Powers, F. David Trickey

Michigan Law Review

The primary source of executive emergency power is the state constitution, although statutes often codify the constitutional executive emergency authority and occasionally delegate additional legislative police powers to the governor. Most governors are authorized to respond to public emergencies with a variety of extraordinary emergency measures. This study of state constitutional and statutory emergency power provisions has been undertaken in an attempt to evaluate the sources and scope of governors' emergency powers, as well as the limitations upon those powers. Its primary focus will be upon the extreme breadth of executive emergency authority and, in particular, upon the power to …

The Role Of A Trial Jury In Determining The Voluntariness Of A Confession, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States has vigorously implemented the principle that criminal prosecution is an investigative, not an inquisitorial, process. Evidence of guilt must be obtained by methods free from physical or psychological coercion. Protections in the Bill of Rights against illegal search and seizure, self-incrimination, and trial without counsel have been extended to the states through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. Safeguards against the admissibility of coerced confessions into evidence have also been instituted. Because a confession practically determines the ultimate question of guilt, the critical standards for· admissibility are frequently challenged on appeal. …

The Powers Of The Michigan Civil Rights Commission, Roger C. Cramton

Michigan Law Review

The thesis of this article is that the Attorney General has misread the language and actions of the constitution-makers. The Michigan Civil Rights Commission is an important and powerful agency of government which has substantial tasks to perform. But it does not possess the exclusive powers envisioned by the Attorney General. Other governmental units-the legislature, the executive, the courts, and the local governments-may continue to play a creative and positive role in fashioning a legal order that accords to every human being in society a reasonable opportunity to realize his potentialities.

Legislative Apportionment And Representative Government: The Meaning Of Baker V. Carr, Jo Desha Lucas

Michigan Law Review

In three recent cases the Supreme Court has reopened the question of the extent to which federal courts will review the general fairness of state schemes of legislative apportionment. It is a question on which the Court has had nothing to say for over a decade, leaving the bar to patch together the current state of the law from the outcome of cases disposed of without opinion considered against a backdrop of language used in earlier decisions.

Constitutional Law - Due Process - Collection Of State Use Tax From Nonresident Vendor, Jerome M. Salle

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff, a Georgia corporation not qualified to do business in Florida, solicited orders for merchandise from Florida residents through independent brokers who forwarded the orders to plaintiff's Georgia office for acceptance. Plaintiff did not maintain any place of business in Florida nor have any regular employee or agent there. In a suit to enjoin the enforcement of a distress warrant issued upon plaintiff's failure to collect the Florida use tax, the chancellor denied relief and the Florida Supreme Court affirmed. On appeal to the United States Supreme Court, held, affirmed, one Justice dissenting. Enforcement of the statute requiring collection …

Constitutional Law - Due Process - Right Of Second Offender To Pre-Sentence Hearing Regarding Prior Conviction, John Edward Porter S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Relator was convicted of burglary in 1953 and of voluntary manslaughter in 1954. While passing sentence after the latter conviction, the court declared that it was exercising its discretion under the Habitual Criminal Act by imposing a double penalty on the relator. Neither relator nor his counsel objected to the procedure or demanded a hearing regarding the prior conviction. On petition for writ of habeas corpus, which was denied by the lower court, relator admitted the fact of his prior conviction. He asserted, however, that although the habitual criminal statute in terms contains no provision granting alleged second offenders notice …

Civil Rights - Due Process - Action For Civil Conspiracy Based On Section 1983, James B. Blanchard

Michigan Law Review

In an action for damages based on sections 1983 and 1985 of the Civil Rights Act, plaintiff alleged that a county health officer and his deputy, pursuant to a conspiracy, forcibly took plaintiff to a mental hospital and confined him there for a period of two months in willful violation of a state court order requiring plaintiff to be brought before the court for a sanity hearing. Plaintiff also alleged a false return of citation to the court by the officers and an intentional suppression of facts by the officers and the examining physician regarding plaintiff's illegal detention. Plaintiff contended …

The Supreme Court - October 1958 Term, Bernard Schwartz

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court, reads a famous passage by Bryce, "feels the touch of public opinion. Opinion is stronger in America than anywhere else in the world, and judges are only men. To yield a little may be prudent, for the tree that cannot bend to the blast may be broken."

The history of the highest Court bears constant witness to the truth of Bryce's statement. Supreme Court action which has moved too far in one direction has always ultimately provoked an equivalent reaction in the opposite direction. Even an institution as august as the high tribunal cannot escape the law …

Constitutional Law - Due Process - Retroactive Application Of Uniform Principal And Income Act, Thomas E. Kauper S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

The trustee of a trust created prior to the 1957 enactment of the Uniform Principal and Income Act petitioned for instructions as to whether a stock dividend received by it subsequent to the passage of the act should be allocated to principal or income. The Uniform Act provides a rule for the treatment of stock dividends contrary to the judicial rule previously adopted in Wisconsin, and is expressly made applicable to trusts existing on its date of enactment. The county court, finding the act could not be constitutionally applied to trusts created prior to its enactment, ordered the allocation of …

Constitutional Law - Due Process - Dismissal Of State Employees For Refusal To Answer Questions Concerning Membership In Communist Organizations, Roger W. Findley

Michigan Law Review

In companion cases state employees of Pennsylvania and New York were dismissed on grounds of "incompetency" and "doubtful trust and reliability" for refusing to answer questions by superiors concerning membership in communist organizations. Petitioner Beilan also invoked the Fifth Amendment at a hearing by a congressional investigating committee between the time he refused to answer his superior and the time he was dismissed. Appellant Lerner had invoked the Fifth Amendment when he refused to answer the questions asked by city officials. The highest courts of the states upheld the dismissals, making it clear that they were based on refusal to …

Constitutional Law - Criminal Procedure - Successive State Prosecutions For Same Activity, Robert L. Bombaugh

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner suspected of having robbed five persons on a single occasion. was indicted and tried for the robbery of three of them. His sole defense was alibi and he was acquitted when only one of the five victims identified him as the robber. Petitioner was then tried under an indictment for the robbery of a fourth victim. Petitioner interposed the same defense but was convicted at this second trial. The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed. On certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, held, affirmed, three justices dissenting. Neither the successive trials nor the failure of the court to …

Constitutional Law - Civil Rights - Recent New York City Ordinance Bans Discrimination In Certain Private Housing Facilities, W. Stanley Walch

Michigan Law Review

A recent New York City ordinance is the first anti-discrimination legislation affecting the sale and rental of privately-owned housing to minority groups. The ordinance contains three principal provisions: It (1) forbids racial or religious discrimination by private owners in the selection of tenants or buyers for any "housing accommodation which is located in a multiple dwelling," (2) bans discrimination in the selection of purchasers by a seller of ten or more contiguous housing units, and (3) prohibits the owner or lessor of housing accommodations covered by the ordinance from discriminating because of race or religion in setting the terms of …

Constitutional Law - Due Process -Knowledge Of The Law Required For Conviction Under Criminal Registration Ordinance, David C. Berg

Michigan Law Review

Defendant-appellant was charged with violation of a Los Angeles municipal ordinance which required all persons convicted of a felony in California, or of a crime committed elsewhere which would have been punishable as a felony in California, subsequent to January 1, 1921, to register with the Chief of Police upon remaining in the city longer than five days, or upon making more than five visits to the city within a thirty-day period. At the time of her arrest, appellant had been a resident of Los Angeles for seven years. Within that period she had been convicted (in Los Angeles) of …