Law Commons^™

Remedies Symposium: Reexamining Bivens After Ziglar V. Abbasi, Bernard W. Bell

ConLawNOW

In Ziglar v. Abbasi, the U.S. Supreme Court revisited Bivens doctrine, suggesting that courts recognize constitutional tort actions only in cases closely analogous to one of the cases comprising the 1970s/1980s era Bivens trilogy, namely Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, Davis v. Passman, and Carlson v. Green. In doing so the Court set forth several factors that might make a case distinguishable from those 1970s/1980s cases. This essay argues that the key to Ziglar v. Abbasi is not the analogical exercise the Court imposed, but the Court’s concern that Bivens actions could become a mechanism for …

Remedies Symposium: Remedies And The Government's Constitutionally Harmful Speech, Helen Norton

ConLawNOW

Although governments have engaged in expression from their inception, only recently have we begun to consider the ways in which the government’s speech sometimes threatens our constitutional rights. In my contribution to this symposium, I seek to show that although the search for constitutional remedies for the government’s harmful expression is challenging, it is far from futile. This search is also increasingly important at a time when the government’s expressive powers continue to grow—along with its willingness to use these powers for disturbing purposes and with troubling consequences.

More specifically, in certain circumstances, injunctive relief, declaratory relief, or damages can …

A Call For Consistency: State V. Caouette Is No Longer Viable In Light Of Colorado V. Connelly And State V. Eastman, Donald W. Macomber

Maine Law Review

This Article challenges the Law Court's expansive interpretation in State v. Caouette of the scope of the privilege against self-incrimination embodied in Article I, section 6 of the Maine Constitution in the context of reviewing claims of the involuntariness of a confession. The court's declaration that a reliable confession must be suppressed on state constitutional grounds based solely on a suspect's internal factors, and in the absence of any police overreaching in obtaining the confession, contradicted two centuries of constitutional jurisprudence requiring some form of government action to implicate the protections of the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of …

Acknowledgments, Andrew E. Hemby

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Issue 3: Table Of Contents

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Searching For Cliven Bundy: The Constitution And Public Lands, Ian Bartrum

Nevada Law Journal Forum

On April 5th, 2014, BLM temporarily closed over 500,000 acres of public land in Clark and Lincoln Counties in order to impound cattle grazing there in violation of a federal district court order. These cattle belonged, principally, to Cliven Bundy and his family—ranchers from Bunkerville, Nevada—who had stopped paying BLM permitting fees in the early 1990s. In anticipation of the roundup, the Bundys put out a distress call to militia-like groups around the country, and seven days later, an armed crowd confronted federal and state officers in the desert near Gold Butte. Another week later, federal authorities backed down, citing …

“Frankly Unthinkable”: The Constitutional Failings Of President Trump’S Proposed Muslim Registry, A. Reid Monroe-Sheridan

Maine Law Review

On several occasions during the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump endorsed the creation of a mandatory government registry for Muslims in the United States— not just visitors from abroad, but American citizens as well. This astonishing proposal has received little attention in legal scholarship to date, even though Trump has refused to renounce the idea following his election to the presidency. In this Article, I attempt to address President Trump’ s proposal in several ways. First, I aim to provide a thorough analysis demonstrating unequivocally that such a “ Muslim registry,” with the characteristics President Trump has endorsed, would violate …

Constitutional Law: Protecting Our Youth: A Necessary Limit On The First Amendment—State V. Muccio, Richard A. Podvin

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is It Bad Law To Believe A Politician? Campaign Speech And Discriminatory Intent, Shawn E. Fields

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Imperfect But Necessary Lawsuit: Why Suing State Judges Is Necessary To Ensure That Statutes Creating A Private Cause Of Action Are Constitutional, Stephen N. Scaife

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Action And The Constitution's Middle Band, Louis Michael Seidman

Michigan Law Review

On conventional accounts, the state action doctrine is dichotomous. When the government acts, constitutional limits take hold and the government action is invalid if those limits are exceeded. When the government fails to act, the state action doctrine leaves decisions to individuals, who are permitted to violate what would otherwise be constitutional constraints.

It turns out though that the modern state action doctrine creates three rather than two domains. There is indeed a private, inner band where there is thought to be insufficient government action to trigger constitutional constraints, but often there is also a public, outer band where there …

Teaching The Forgotten Fourteenth Amendment And The Constitution Of Memory, Mark A. Graber

Saint Louis University Law Journal

No abstract provided.