Law Commons^™

Constitutional Constraints On Initiative And Referendum, David J. Jordan

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Note examines possible constitutional constraints on initiative and referendum. Part II briefly discusses typical initiative and referendum procedures and contrasts these with representative legislative processes. Part III examines the constitutional significance of the differences highlighted in Part II. Finally, Part IV concludes that because of the peculiar political dynamics of initiative and referendum, which diminish normal safeguards of minority interests, courts may appropriately apply heightened due process and equal protection standards when reviewing direct legislation.

"Doing Business": Defining State Control Over Foreign Corporations, William A. Holby

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Note will attempt to analyze the present status of the term "doing business" or the substitute terminology used to define that level of activity sufficient to subject a foreign corporation to state control in a particular context.' After defining the degree of activity necessary to permit the state to exercise control in each context, this Note will analyze the accuracy and utility of using terminology such as "doing business" in describing whether corporate activity within a state is sufficient to permit state exercise of legislative or judicial jurisdiction. This Note concludes by pro-posing that use of such ambiguous language …

Police Use Of Trickery As An Interrogation Technique, James G. Thomas

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Note maintains that trickery can be effectively curtailed despite the failure of Miranda to do so. This Note argues that trickery in the interrogation room is a violation of fourteenth amendment substantive due process. The Supreme Court has recently stated, in very unambiguous terms, that due process requirements exist independently of the fifth amendment Miranda requirements in the interrogation context." This Note therefore proposes an objective due process standard that would prohibit trickery. The violation of this due process standard would require the exclusion at trial of confessions induced by trickery. Because the exclusionary rule is not a sufficient …

Emerging Standards In Supreme Court Double Jeopardy Analysis, Clifford R. Ennico

Vanderbilt Law Review

The purposes of this Recent Development are as follows: to identify and evaluate recent modifications in the Court's double jeopardy analysis, to propose that the Court's 1977 Term double jeopardy standards dilute the double jeopardy protection previously afforded to criminal defendants, and to suggest that the Court should permit a broader scope of appellate review in double jeopardy cases.

The Applicability Of Shaffer To The Quasi-In-Rem Attachment Of Foreigners' Assets, Steven H. Becker

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Note proposes to examine the nature of United States contacts availed of by foreign defendants, and to determine the impact of Shaffer on the potential assertion of quasi-in-rem jurisdiction based on those contacts. It is instructive to consider quasi-in-rem jurisdiction's relation to four possible scenarios involving a foreign defendant: (1) the foreign defendant who owns real estate in this country; or (2) maintains deposits in United States banks; or (3) invests in securities that are registered locally; or (4) extends credit to United States companies or individuals on a regular basis. This Note ultimately concludes that in light of …

The Due Process Mandate And The Constitutionality Of Admiralty Arrests And Attachments Pursuant To Supplemental Rules B And C, Jon L. Goodman

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

In the past decade, the area of procedural due process, including traditional doctrines of in rem and quasi in rem jurisdiction, has undergone a constitutional facelift. As a result, two of admiralty's most extraordinary features--maritime attachment and garnishment and actions in rem--have been questioned from a constitutional standpoint.

The United States Supreme Court inaugurated the new era with its decision in Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp. In that case, the Court first began changing its procedural due process philosophy by broadening its conception of constitutionally protected forms of property. Having narrowly addressed itself to the question of what constitute constitutionally …