Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (21)
- Supreme Court of the United States (11)
- Courts (9)
- First Amendment (5)
- Judges (5)
-
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (4)
- Criminal Law (4)
- Criminal Procedure (4)
- Civil Procedure (3)
- Fourteenth Amendment (3)
- Jurisdiction (3)
- Labor and Employment Law (3)
- Legal History (3)
- Religion Law (3)
- Civil Law (2)
- Energy and Utilities Law (2)
- Environmental Law (2)
- Jurisprudence (2)
- Law and Society (2)
- Administrative Law (1)
- Fourth Amendment (1)
- Human Rights Law (1)
- International Law (1)
- Law and Gender (1)
- Sexuality and the Law (1)
- Tax Law (1)
Articles 31 - 48 of 48
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Unexceptionalism Of Evolving Standards, Corinna Barrett Lain
The Unexceptionalism Of Evolving Standards, Corinna Barrett Lain
Law Faculty Publications
Conventional wisdom is that outside the Eighth Amendment, the Supreme Court does not engage in the sort of explicitly majoritarian state nose-counting for which the "evolving standards of decency" doctrine is famous. Yet this impression is simply inaccurate. Across a stunning variety of civil liberties contexts, the Court routinely-and explicitly--determines constitutional protection based on whether a majority of states agree with it. This Article examines the Supreme Court's reliance on the majority position of the states to identify and apply constitutional norms, and then turns to the qualifications, explanations, and implications of state polling as a larger doctrinal phenomenon. While …
Death By A Thousand Cuts Or Hard Bargaining?: How The Supreme Court's Indecision In Wilkie V. Robbins Improperly Eviscerates The Bivens Action, Natalie Banta
Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Furman Fundamentals, Corinna Barrett Lain
Furman Fundamentals, Corinna Barrett Lain
Law Faculty Publications
For the first time in a long time, the Supreme Court's most important death penalty decisions all have gone the defendant's way. Is the Court's newfound willingness to protect capital defendants just a reflection of the times, or could it have come even without public support for those protections? At first glance, history allows for optimism. Furman v. Georgia, the 1972 landmark decision that invalidated the death penalty, provides a seemingly perfect example of the Court's ability and inclination to protect capital defendants when no one else will. Furman looks countermajoritarian, scholars have claimed it was countermajoritarian, and even …
Deciding Death, Corinna Barrett Lain
Deciding Death, Corinna Barrett Lain
Law Faculty Publications
When the Supreme Court is deciding death, how much does law matter? Scholars long have lamented the majoritarian nature of the Court's Eighth Amendment "evolving standards of decency" doctrine, but their criticism misses the mark. Majoritarian doctrine does not drive the Court's decisions in this area; majoritarian forces elsewhere do. To make my point, I first examine three sets of "evolving standards" death penalty decisions in which the Court implicitly or explicitly reversed itself, attacking the legal justification for the Court's change of position and offering an extralegal explanation for why those cases came out the way they did. I …
Retooling The Intent Requirement Under The Fourteenth Amendment, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.
Retooling The Intent Requirement Under The Fourteenth Amendment, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.
Law Faculty Publications
Racial classifications carry the largest taint and require the most justification. Strict scrutiny-the level of scrutiny with which the remainder of the article will be concerned-requires that race-based differentiation serve a compelling state interest and be narrowly tailored to serve that interest, guaranteeing that the reason for the differentiation is extremely important and that the link between the means chosen to meet the ends is extremely tight. Though strict scrutiny is difficult to survive, it is triggered only when a state actor engages in intentional or purposeful racial discrimination. Controversy surrounds whether such a trigger is necessary. However, rather than …
Countermajoritarian Hero Or Zero - Rethinking The Warren Court's Role In The Criminal Procedure Revolution, Corinna Barrett Lain
Countermajoritarian Hero Or Zero - Rethinking The Warren Court's Role In The Criminal Procedure Revolution, Corinna Barrett Lain
Law Faculty Publications
With last fall marking the fiftieth anniversary of Earl Warren's appointment as Chief Justice, enough time has passed to place the criminal procedure revolution in proper historical perspective and rethink the Court's role there as countermajoritarian hero. In the discussion that follows, I aim to do that by examining five of the revolution's most celebrated decisions: Mapp v. Ohio, Gideon v. Wainwright, Miranda v. Arizona, Katz v. United States, and Terry v. Ohio. In none of these cases, I argue, did the Supreme Court act in a manner truly deserving of its countermajoritarian image. To be clear, I do not …
Smolla Argues Before The Highest Court: Cross-Burning Case Explores Free-Speech Controversy, John G. Douglass
Smolla Argues Before The Highest Court: Cross-Burning Case Explores Free-Speech Controversy, John G. Douglass
Law Faculty Publications
A First Amendment advocate's greatest burden can be his own client. Those clients range from the offbeat to the dangerous, from pornographers to neo-Nazis. Yet in standing up for the disreputable client, the free speech advocate stands for one of more cherished freedoms: "If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 414 (1989). As one of the nation's leading First Amendment advocates, Allen Professor Rodney Smolla understands that burden …
Choosing Perspectives In Criminal Procedure, Ronald J. Bacigal
Choosing Perspectives In Criminal Procedure, Ronald J. Bacigal
Law Faculty Publications
In this Article, Professor Bacigal examines the Supreme Court's use of various perspectives in examining the reasonableness of searches and seizures. Although the Supreme Court purports to rely on a consistent method of constitutional analysis when rendering decisions on Fourth Amendment issues, the case law in this area indicates that the Court is influenced sometimes by the citizen's perspective, sometimes by the police officers' perspective, and sometimes by the perspective of the hypothesized reasonable person. After identifying the role of perspectives in a number of seminal Court decisions, Professor Bacigal discusses the benefits and limitations of the Court's reliance on …
The Breard Case And The Virtues Of Forbearance, John G. Douglass
The Breard Case And The Virtues Of Forbearance, John G. Douglass
Law Faculty Publications
At a time when the scheduled execution of Angel Francisco Breard made Virginia the focus of a groundbreaking controversy over the reach of internationallaw into the domestic criminal process of the United States, law students and faculty at the University of Richmond had the unique opportunity to consider the case along with Philippe Sands, then a Visiting Allen Chair Professor at the University.
Plain Meaning, The Tax Code, And Doctrinal Incoherence, Mary L. Heen
Plain Meaning, The Tax Code, And Doctrinal Incoherence, Mary L. Heen
Law Faculty Publications
This Article examines the Supreme Court's interpretive approach in recent tax cases. Part I of the Article sets the stage by describing the Court's interpretive approach, its focus on the relative determinacy of statutory language, and the backdrop of Chevron. Part II examines the effect of these issues on tax law, focusing on three cases that construe the same Code provision, section 104(a)(2), but apply quite different interpretive approaches. In United States v. Burke, the Court appeared to find the provision ambiguous and relied in part upon an interpretation of the statute contained in a Treasury regulation. Subsequently, in Commissioner …
The Business Of The Supreme Court Revisited, John Paul Jones
The Business Of The Supreme Court Revisited, John Paul Jones
Law Faculty Publications
Nearly seventy years after its publication, Prof. Jones revisits Felix Frankfurter and James McCauley Landis' seminal 1928 book.
Unintended Consequences: The United States Supreme Court's Mission To Restrict Remedies For State Prisoners Backfires, Andrea Lyon
Unintended Consequences: The United States Supreme Court's Mission To Restrict Remedies For State Prisoners Backfires, Andrea Lyon
Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Personal Jurisdiction And The Beetle In The Box, Wendy Collins Perdue
Personal Jurisdiction And The Beetle In The Box, Wendy Collins Perdue
Law Faculty Publications
In 1980 in World-Wide Volkswagen v. Woodson, the Supreme Court described personal jurisdiction as "an instrument of interstate federalism." Two years later in Insurance Corporation of Ireland v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee, the Court back-pedaled and explained that personal jurisdiction "represents a restriction on judicial power not as a matter of sovereignty, but as a matter of individual liberty." Then, in 1985 in Phillips Petroleum v. Shutts, the Court explained that the purpose of personal jurisdiction is "to protect a defendant from the travail of defending in a distant forum." Three years later in Van Cauwenberghe v. Biard, …
Religious Free Speech Rights Of Students In Public Schools: The Educator's Dilemma, Rosalie Levinson
Religious Free Speech Rights Of Students In Public Schools: The Educator's Dilemma, Rosalie Levinson
Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Finley V. United States: Unstringing Pendent Jurisdiction, Wendy Collins Perdue
Finley V. United States: Unstringing Pendent Jurisdiction, Wendy Collins Perdue
Law Faculty Publications
The approach adopted by the Supreme Court in Finley v. United States calls into question not only pendent-claim jurisdiction but ancillary jurisdiction as well. Particularly vulnerable to attack are those uses of ancillary jurisdiction that involve the addition of new parties such as class action, intervention, and impleader. Furthermore, the opinion may lay a foundation for attacking ancillary-claim jurisdiction involving counterclaims or cross-claims. This commentary will examine Finley and the potential impact of the opinion on the various permutations of ancillary and pendent jurisdiction.
Sin, Scandal And Substantive Due Process: Personal Jurisdiction And Pennoyer Reconsidered, Wendy Collins Perdue
Sin, Scandal And Substantive Due Process: Personal Jurisdiction And Pennoyer Reconsidered, Wendy Collins Perdue
Law Faculty Publications
Professor Perdue recounts the underlying story of the U.S. Supreme Court's seminal personal jurisdiction case, Pennoyer v. Neff.
1983-84 Current Developments In Civil Liberties, Ivan E. Bodensteiner, Rosalie Levinson
1983-84 Current Developments In Civil Liberties, Ivan E. Bodensteiner, Rosalie Levinson
Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The World As Reality, As Resource, And As Pretense, Richard Stith
The World As Reality, As Resource, And As Pretense, Richard Stith
Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.