Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Levine (2)
- Samuel Levine (2)
- 2008 (1)
- 4th Amendment (1)
- Accountability of lab experts (1)
-
- Agency pronouncements (1)
- Air force (1)
- Altria group inc. (1)
- Altria group inc. v. good (1)
- Banks (1)
- Baze (1)
- Baze v. Rees (1)
- Character Counts: The "Character of the Government Action" In Regulatory Takings Actions (1)
- Chevron (1)
- Cipollone v. liggett group inc. (1)
- Constitutional rights (1)
- Constitutional rule (1)
- Coungressional intent (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Cruel and unusual punishment (1)
- Cuomo v. clearing house association (1)
- DNA (1)
- Dickerson (1)
- Dickerson v. United States (1)
- Dress requirements (1)
- Effective assistance of counsel (1)
- Eighth amendment (1)
- Eliot spitzer (1)
- F.d.a. (1)
- Federal cigarette labeling act (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Federal Governmental Power: Preemption From The October 2008 Term (Twenty-First Annual Supreme Court Review & Selected Excerpts: Practicing Law Institutes Twenty-Sixth Annual Section 1983 Civil Rights Litigation Program), Eileen Kaufman
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Character Counts: The "Character Of The Government Action" In Regulatory Takings Actions, Michael Lewyn
Character Counts: The "Character Of The Government Action" In Regulatory Takings Actions, Michael Lewyn
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
The Death Of Suspicion, Fabio Arcila Jr.
The Death Of Suspicion, Fabio Arcila Jr.
Scholarly Works
This article argues that neither the presumptive warrant requirement nor the presumptive suspicion requirement are correct. Though representative of the common law, they do not reflect the totality of our historic experience, which includes civil search practices. More importantly, modern developments - such as urban life and technological advancements, the rise of the regulatory state, and security concerns post-9/11 - have sufficiently changed circumstances so that these rules are not just unworkable now, they are demonstrably wrong. Worst of all, adhering to them has prevented us from formulating a more coherent Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. A new paradigm confronts us, in …
Untold Stories Of Goldman V. Weinberger: Religious Freedom Confronts Military Uniformity, Samuel J. Levine
Untold Stories Of Goldman V. Weinberger: Religious Freedom Confronts Military Uniformity, Samuel J. Levine
Scholarly Works
In 1986, the United States Supreme Court handed down a 5-4 decision ruling that Air Force regulations prohibiting Simcha Goldman from wearing a yarmulke while in uniform did not violate Goldman’s First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion. The Court’s majority opinion, which accepted the government’s assertion that allowing Goldman to wear a yarmulke would unduly upset important military interests, drew unusually harsh responses from both dissenting justices and legal scholars. Yet, upon closer examination, perhaps what stands out most about the events surrounding the Goldman decision is the untold story of the case, which differs in significant …
Supreme Court Criminal Law Jurisprudence - October 2008 Term, Richard Klein
Supreme Court Criminal Law Jurisprudence - October 2008 Term, Richard Klein
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Miranda, Dickerson, And Jewish Legal Theory: The Constitutional Rule In A Comparative Analytical Framework, Samuel J. Levine
Miranda, Dickerson, And Jewish Legal Theory: The Constitutional Rule In A Comparative Analytical Framework, Samuel J. Levine
Scholarly Works
In this Essay, Professor Levine briefly explores Dickerson v. United States, the important 2000 decision in which a divided United States Supreme Court held that the standard established in Miranda v. Arizona continues to govern the admissibility of confessions, notwithstanding a federal statute enacted subsequent to Miranda that provided an alternative standard. Levine addresses broader theoretical implications of the approaches adopted by the majority and dissenting opinions in Dickerson. Drawing a parallel to the interpretation of the Torah in Jewish legal theory, he proposes a comparative framework for analyzing the division between the majority and dissent over the concept and …