Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
When Do The Ends Justify The Means?: The Role Of The Necessary And Proper Clause In The Commerce Clause Analysis, David Loudon
When Do The Ends Justify The Means?: The Role Of The Necessary And Proper Clause In The Commerce Clause Analysis, David Loudon
University of Massachusetts Law Review
This Article discusses the interplay between the Necessary and Proper Clause and the Commerce Clause, particularly in light of the landmark decision of National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. First, this Article reviews the historical interaction between the two clauses, discussing the instances in which the two may have been considered together, and introducing the Supreme Court jurisprudence of each clause, setting the legal landscape for the NFIB v. Sebelius decision. Next, this Article details the three opinions from the NFIB v. Sebelius decision, Chief Justice Roberts’ holding, the joint concurrence, and Justice Ginsberg’s dissent, specifically as they …
Out Of Balance: Wrong Turns In Public Employee Speech Law, Michael Toth
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 …
What About The Victims? Domestic Violence, Hearsay, And The Confrontation Clause In The Aftermath Of Davis V. Washington, Stacey Gauthier
What About The Victims? Domestic Violence, Hearsay, And The Confrontation Clause In The Aftermath Of Davis V. Washington, Stacey Gauthier
University of Massachusetts Law Review
This article analyzes the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, admission of hearsay statements, and the effect of the Davis decision on the prosecution of domestic violence cases. Part II discusses the history of the Confrontation Clause. Part III discusses hearsay prior to Crawford. Parts IV, V, and VI discuss the landmark cases Crawford v. Washington, Commonwealth v. Gonsalves, and Davis v. Washington, respectively, with regard to whether statements made to police are admissible when the declarant is not available to testify at trial. The reasons why the Supreme Court’s extension of the Confrontation Clause is unwarranted are contained …