Law Commons^™

Do We Intend To Keep Our Republic?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] Commentators recently have reminded us of a famous statement Benjamin Franklin allegedly made upon exiting Independence Hall on the final day of the 1787 Constitutional Convention. When asked whether the proposed Constitution would establish a monarchy or a republic, Franklin supposedly answered: "A republic, if you can keep it."

The anecdote, which both inspired the title of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch's recent book and was recounted by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi when she announced the impeachment inquiry into the conduct of the president, reminds us that our republican form of government is not to be taken …

State Constitutions And The Protection Of Rights, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

This article, using a recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling on partisan gerrymandering, explores how state constitutions can be significantly more protective of rights than the federal constitution.

Racism And Impeachment Power, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] “Does racism constitute a legitimate basis for removing a president? More generally, what is the scope of Congress's removal power?

”In all but the most extraordinary circumstances, the remedy for incompetent political leadership -indeed, even abhorrent political leadership lies in the next election. But the Constitution does provide Congress with tools to remove certain federal officeholders between elections.”

Constitutional Barriers To Congressional Reform, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

Americans celebrate our Constitution as a beacon that can guide us through difficult situations. And justly so. But at times, the Constitution also has stood as a barrier to necessary reform.

Sexual Misconduct And Congressional Self-Governance, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "Over the past year, a number of prominent politicians (including President Donald Trump) have been publicly accused of serious sexual misconduct and abuse of power. The question therefore has arisen: Can these politicians either be barred from taking office or removed from office on the basis of these accusations?

There is only way to remove a sitting president: impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. But the topic of impeaching and removing a president warrants its own column. This column will instead focus on what Congress may do when its members and members-elect face charges …

Norms, Law And The Impeachment Power, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt]

"Most experts believe that, while a president can be criminally prosecuted after leaving office, he cannot be prosecuted while he is president. And while the president may be sued civilly while holding office, the office confers powerful immunities and other constitutional defenses that are unavailable to ordinary civilian defendants."

Can Courts Save Us From Unconstitutional Government Conduct?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "We are living in a troubled time. Across the political spectrum, there is a great deal of concern that government officials have been derelict in honoring their oaths to support and defend the Constitution."

The Origins And Boundaries Of Executive Privilege, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "When the president or persons working with the president are under investigation . . . the doctrine of executive privilege -which entitles the president to keep confidential certain communications to and from his advisers -inevitably becomes relevant."

The Boundaries Of Partisan Gerrymandering, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] “In my most recent column, I expressed concern about the effectiveness of the constitutional decision rules that currently govern gerrymandering – the redrawing of electoral districts in a manner that favors the incumbent majority at the expense of those out of power.

Briefly, the Constitution has not been interpreted to prohibit redistricting with an eye toward advancing the interests of the political party in power. But it has been interpreted to bar legislators from redistricting on racial grounds – at least in most circumstances.

The problem is that voters from certain racial groups tend to vote overwhelmingly for …

Race, Partisan Gerrymandering And The Constitution, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] “For the most part, the Constitution speaks in generalities. The 14th Amendment, for example, instructs the states to provide all persons the "equal protection of the laws." But obviously, this cannot mean that states are always forbidden from treating a person differently than any other person. Children can, of course, be constitutionally barred from driving, notwithstanding the Equal Protection Clause. Thus, there is a need within our constitutional system to refine the Constitution's abstract provisions.”

The Trump Presidency And The Press, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "It is not difficult to understand why presidents frequently voice frustration with the press. Imagine being subjected to critical analysis 24/7 by reporters, bloggers and pundits who often lack complete and accurate information but face competitive pressure to publish quickly."

Textualism And Originalism In Constitutional Interpretation, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "In a 2016 lecture at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, Judge Neil Gorsuch warmly praised former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's approach to constitutional interpretation. Because President Trump has nominated him to serve on the Supreme Court, it is important to understand the approach Judge Gorsuch favors."

Domicile, Student Voters And The Constitution, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "The wisdom of using the Electoral College to choose our president is a hot topic. For the second time in 16 years (and the fifth time in our history), the "winner" of the national popular vote lost the presidential election in the Electoral College. To many, this "undemocratic" outcome seems wrong."

Does The Constitution Allow President To Ban Muslims?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "The president-elect has stated that he intends to protect national security by banning Muslim immigration into the United States. He also has signaled an openness to some form of Muslim registration program. Does the Constitution impose barriers to the adoption of such policies?"

Difficult Questions For The Senate Minority, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

This column is the first in a biweekly Constitutional Connections series that will examine the constitutional implications of various topics in the news. The author, John Greabe, teaches constitutional law and related subject at the University of New Hampshire School of Law. He also serves on the board of trustees of the New Hampshire Institute for Civics Education.

My Turn: 'We The People' And The Garland Nomination, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "Because I teach constitutional law, a friend recently asked me whether Judge Merrick Garland or President Obama might successfully sue to compel the Senate to take action on the nomination of Judge Garland to fill the vacancy on the United States Supreme Court.

Almost certainly not, I told him. Under settled precedent, a judge would dismiss such a case as raising a non-legal ''political" question. It would be very difficult to develop acceptable decisional standards for such a claim. Moreover, courts are reluctant to entertain lawsuits challenging mechanisms that the Senate uses to oversee the judiciary."

A New Frontier In Campaign Finance Regulation, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

In recent years, the United States Supreme Court has taken what many regard as a doctrinaire approach to campaign finance regulation. It has seized on the indisputable proposition that limits on campaign expenditures and contributions implicate important First Amendment values and, pressing the proposition to logical extremes, invalidated a number of federal and state laws that had imposed such limits.

This newspaper editorial discusses recently proposed legislation in the state of New Hampshire that would collect fees on expenditures made by individual political candidates, PACs, and Super PACS. The collected fees would be used to help the state justice department …

Pledge Your Body For Your Bread: Welfare, Drug Testing, And The Inferior Fourth Amendment, Jordan C. Budd

Law Faculty Scholarship

Proposals to subject welfare recipients to periodic drug testing have emerged over the last three years as a significant legislative trend across the United States. Since 2007, over half of the states have considered bills requiring aid recipients to submit to invasive extraction procedures as an ongoing condition of public assistance. The vast majority of the legislation imposes testing without regard to suspected drug use, reflecting the implicit assumption that the poor are inherently predisposed to culpable conduct and thus may be subject to class-based intrusions that would be inarguably impermissible if inflicted on the less destitute. These proposals are …

A Miscarriage Of Juvenile Justice: A Modern Day Parable Of The Unintended Results Of Bad Lawmaking, Amy Vorenberg

Law Faculty Scholarship

Sensationalized cases increasingly create the context for public policy discussion. Stories about violent crime are a common feature of the local evening news and their emotional nature can often create the hook politicians need to showcase their “tough on crime” agendas. Often anecdotal and lurid, stories of criminal misdeeds are widely used to convince the public of a need to create or change laws. This article demonstrates the perils of making law by extrapolating from a few random, albeit attention-grabbing, events. Specifically, the article examines the impact of a 1995 change in New Hampshire state law that lowered the age …

A Vote Cast; A Vote Counted: Quantifying Voting Rights Through Proportional Representation In Congressional Elections, Michael Mccann

Law Faculty Scholarship

The current winner-take-all or first-past-the-post system of voting promotes an inefficient market where votes are often wasted. In this system, representatives are selected from a single district in which the candidate with the plurality of votes gains victory. Candidates who appear non-generic can rarely, if ever, expect to receive the most votes in this system. This phenomenon is especially apparent when African-Americans and other minority groups seek elected office. In part because white voters constitute at least a plurality of voters in every state except Hawaii, minorities in the forty-nine other states have had historically little success in gaining election …