Law Commons^™

Separation Of Powers And The Middle Way, Jack M. Beermann

Shorter Faculty Works

Composer Arnold Schoenberg famously once quipped that “the middle way is the one that surely does not lead to Rome.” The idea behind this thought, I gather, is that intellectual compromise does not lead to the truth. John Manning’s recently published article, Separation of Powers as Ordinary Interpretation, 124 Harv. L. Rev. 1940 (2011), proves Schoenberg’s principle wrong, at least with regard to separation of powers. In this article, Manning, the Bruce Bromley Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, persuasively demonstrates that neither extreme in current debates about separation of powers is correct, and that a true understanding …

November 9, 2011: Do Atheists Use The Word God?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Do Atheists Use the Word God?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

November 5, 2011: What Is The Origin Of The Separation Of Church And State?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “What is the Origin of the Separation of Church and State?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

November 2, 2011: The Establishment Clause In Shambles, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The Establishment Clause in Shambles“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Can A Password Stop Police From Searching Your Cell Phone Incident To Arrest?, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Fiscal Federalism In The United States, Walter Hellerstein

Presentations and Speeches

This presentation explores the fiscal powers of U.S. Federal and State governments with respect to taxation and spending.

Presidential Power And Constitutional Responsibility, Thomas P. Crocker

Faculty Publications

Some constitutional theorists defend unbounded executive power to respond to emergencies or expansive discretionary powers to complete statutory directives. Against these anti-Madisonian approaches, this Article examines how the textual assignment of republican virtues helps to constitute and constrain the president's power. The Madisonian solution for constitutional constraint both creates institutions for unenlightened statesmen and relies on virtue to make governing possible. Constitutional responsibility is a consistent textual theme found in the command to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," the responsibility to remain faithful to the office of president, and the obligation to preserve the Constitution itself. Although …

Crime-Severity Distinctions And The Fourth Amendment: Reassessing Reasonableness In A Changing World, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

A growing body of commentary calls for the Supreme Court to recalibrate its Fourth Amendment jurisprudence in response to technological and social changes that threaten the traditional balance between public safety and personal liberty. This Article joins the discussion, highlighting a largely overlooked consideration that should be included in any modernization of Fourth Amendment doctrine—crime severity.

The Supreme Court emphasizes that “reasonableness” is the “touchstone” of Fourth Amendment analysis. Yet, in evaluating contested searches and seizures, current Fourth Amendment doctrine ignores a key determinant of reasonableness, the crime under investigation. As a result, an invasive search of a suspected murderer …

Frankfurter’S Champion: Justice Powell, Monell, And The Meaning Of “Color Of Law”., David J. Achtenberg

Faculty Works

In Monroe v Pape, over an impassioned dissent by Justice Frankfurter, the Supreme Court held that Section 1983 authorized suits against state and local officials for constitutional violations even if those violations were not authorized by state or local law.  But it also held that cities and other local governmental entities could not be sued under the statute.  Monell v. Department of Social Services overruled Monroe and held that cities could be sued under the statute.  But it added an odd limitation that became known as the “Monell doctrine”: local governments could not be sued for their employees’ constitutional wrongs …

The Balanced Budget Amendment: A Threat To The Constitutional Order, Neil J. Kinkopf

Faculty Publications By Year

No abstract provided.

Notes On Borrowing And Convergence, Robert L. Tsai, Nelson Tebbe

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This is a response to Jennifer E. Laurin, "Trawling for Herring: Lessons in Doctrinal Borrowing and Convergence," 111 Colum. L. Rev. 670 (2011), which analyzes the Supreme Court's resort to tort-based concepts to limit the reach of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule. We press three points. First, there are differences between a general and specific critique of constitutional borrowing. Second, the idea of convergence as a distinct phenomenon from borrowing has explanatory potential and should be further explored. Third, to the extent convergence occurs, it matters whether concerns of judicial administration or political reconstruction are driving doctrinal changes.

Notes On Borrowing And Convergence, Robert L. Tsai, Nelson Tebbe

Faculty Scholarship

This is a response to Jennifer E. Laurin, "Trawling for Herring: Lessons in Doctrinal Borrowing and Convergence," 111 Colum. L. Rev. 670 (2011), which analyzes the Supreme Court's resort to tort-based concepts to limit the reach of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule. We press three points. First, there are differences between a general and specific critique of constitutional borrowing. Second, the idea of convergence as a distinct phenomenon from borrowing has explanatory potential and should be further explored. Third, to the extent convergence occurs, it matters whether concerns of judicial administration or political reconstruction are driving doctrinal changes.

October 29, 2011: Why Any Change In The Establishment Clause?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Why Any Change in the Establishment Clause?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

An Anthem For Ows?, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Ows, Discourse, And Narratives, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

October 22, 2011: Standing On God/Pleading With God, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Standing on God/Pleading With God“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Ows And The Constitution, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

October 19, 2011: The Religious Exemption, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The Religious Exemption“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

October 13, 2011: Are Things Getting Worse Or Better?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Are Things Getting Worse or Better?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Our Exceptional Constitution, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Taxes, Free Expression, And Adult Entertainment, Steve R. Johnson

Scholarly Publications

The interaction of morality and money produces interesting results. One manifestation is legislation in some states and proposals in others to impose higher taxes on “gentlemen’s show lounges” (OK, I mean strip clubs) and other venues of adult entertainment.

In 2010 and 2011 two state supreme courts passed on the legality of different forms of those taxes, upholding them against challenges that they infringed on free speech/free expression rights protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. This installment of the column considers those two decisions: the February 2010 Utah decision in Bushco v. Utah State Tax Commi …

October 9, 2011: Why Does There Need To Be A Ministerial Exception?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Why Does There Need to be a Ministerial Exception?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

October 6, 2011: How Does Forgiveness Of Sins Work?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “How Does Forgiveness of Sins Work?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Following You Here, There, And Everytwhere: An Investigation Of Gps Technology, Privacy, And The Fourth Amendment, Stephanie Gaylord Forbes

W&M Law Student Publications

No abstract provided.

The Judicial Power And The Inferior Federal Courts: Exploring The Constitutional Vesting Thesis, A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

Although the Constitution vests the "Judicial Power" of the United States in the Supreme Court and in any inferior courts that Congress establishes, both Congress and the Court have long propounded the traditional view that the inferior courts may be deprived cognizance of some of the cases and controversies that fall within that power. Is this view fully consonant with the history and text of Article III? One possible reading of those sources suggests that the Constitution vests the full Judicial Power of the United States in the inferior federal courts, directly extending to them jurisdiction over matters that Congress …

The Two Faces Of American Freedom: A Reply, Aziz Rana

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Unwell: Indiana V. Edwards And The Fate Of Mentally Ill Pro Se Defendants, John H. Blume, Morgan J. Clark

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Coming Off The Bench: Legal And Policy Implications Of Proposals To Allow Retired Justices To Sit By Designation On The Supreme Court, Lisa T. Mcelroy, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In the fall of 2010, Senator Patrick Leahy introduced a bill that would have overridden a New Deal-era federal statute forbidding retired Justices from serving by designation on the Supreme Court of the United States. The Leahy bill would have authorized the Court to recall willing retired Justices to substitute for recused Justices. This Article uses the Leahy bill as a springboard for considering a number of important constitutional and policy questions, including whether the possibility of 4-4 splits justifies the substitution of a retired Justice for an active one; whether permitting retired Justices to substitute for recused Justices would …

Same-Sex Marriage, Second-Class Citizenship, And Law's Social Meanings, Michael C. Dorf

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Government acts, statements, and symbols that carry the social meaning of second-class citizenship may, as a consequence of that fact, violate the Establishment Clause or the constitutional requirement of equal protection. Yet social meaning is often contested. Do laws permitting same-sex couples to form civil unions but not to enter into marriage convey the social meaning that gays and lesbians are second-class citizens? Do official displays of the Confederate battle flag unconstitutionally convey support for slavery and white supremacy? When public schools teach evolution but not creationism, do they show disrespect for creationists? Different audiences reach different conclusions about the …

Lochner V. New York (1905) And Kennedy V. Louisiana (2008): Judicial Reliance On Adversary Argument, Douglas E. Abrams

Faculty Publications

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist called Lochner v. New York (1905) “one of the most ill-starred decisions that [the Supreme Court ever rendered.” The Justices’ deliberations preceding the 5-4 decision demonstrate the courts’ reliance on advocacy in the adversary system of civil and criminal justice. The stark imbalance between the state’s “incredibly sketchy” brief and Joseph Lochner’s sterling submission may have determined Lochner’s outcome, and thus may have changed the course of constitutional history, by leading two Justices to join the majority on the central question of whether New York’s maximum-hours law for bakery workers was a reasonable public health …