Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Freeze-Frames And Blanket Bans: The Unconstitutionality Of Prisons’ Denial Of Gender Confirmation Surgery To Transgender Inmates, Aranda Stathers
Freeze-Frames And Blanket Bans: The Unconstitutionality Of Prisons’ Denial Of Gender Confirmation Surgery To Transgender Inmates, Aranda Stathers
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
It is long established that the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against imposing cruel and unusual punishments requires prisons to adequately address their inmates’ medical needs. Inmates identifying with the LGBTQ+ community are not exempt from this constitutional mandate. Trans inmates with gender dysphoria require specific treatment, including, but not limited to, gender confirmation surgery. While courts acknowledge that prisons owe a duty to provide some transition-related care, the extent of that duty remains contested. With no guidance from Congress or the Supreme Court, the constitutionality of prisons’ denial of gender confirmation surgery is in the hands of the circuit courts, which …
Dangerous And Unusual: How An Expanding National Firearms Act Will Spell Its Own Demise, Oliver Krawczyk
Dangerous And Unusual: How An Expanding National Firearms Act Will Spell Its Own Demise, Oliver Krawczyk
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
The National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) is the strictest federal gun control law currently in effect. It criminalizes the mere possession and transfer of specifically enumerated categories of firearms deemed to be especially dangerous and unusual, such as machine guns and silencers. Commensurate with this viewpoint, the NFA imposes on violators harsh felony penalties, from lengthy prison sentences to six-figure fines. However, the NFA permits lawful civilian ownership of these firearms under a taxation and registration scheme administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). In its 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller decision, the United …
Where The Constitution Falls Short: Confession Admissibility And Police Regulation, Courtney E. Lewis
Where The Constitution Falls Short: Confession Admissibility And Police Regulation, Courtney E. Lewis
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
A confession presented at trial is one of the most damning pieces of evidence against a criminal defendant, which means that the rules governing its admissibility are critical. At the outset of confession admissibility in the United States, the judiciary focused on a confession’s truthfulness. Culminating in the landmark case Miranda v. Arizona, judicial concern with the reliability of confessions shifted away from whether a confession was true and towards curtailing unconstitutional police misconduct. Post-hoc constitutionality review, however, is arguably inappropriate. Such review is inappropriate largely because the reviewing court must find that the confession was voluntary only by …
A Gun To Whose Head? Federalism, Localism, And The Spending Clause, Daniel S. Cohen
A Gun To Whose Head? Federalism, Localism, And The Spending Clause, Daniel S. Cohen
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
President Trump’s executive order rescinding federal funds from “sanctuary jurisdictions” has brought a critical, but overlooked, question of constitutional law to the forefront of the political debate: how does the Spending Clause apply to local governments? The purpose of the Spending Clause is to empower the federal government to bargain with the states to enact policies it cannot enact itself. This power, however, is constrained within the confines of federalism. The Supreme Court has sought to restrict the Spending Clause by crafting the Dole-NFIB framework, a test to determine whether a federal grant has compromised federalism. At its …