Law Commons^™

Congressional Factfinding And The Scope Of Judicial Review: A Preliminary Analysis, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

"Project Exile" And The Allocation Of Federal Law Enforcement Authority, Daniel Richman

Faculty Scholarship

With each report of violent crime statistics (whether rising or falling) or of the latest firearms outrage, we hear the antiphony of the gun control debate. Advocates of increased federal regulation decry the inadequacies of a regime that permits relatively free access to firearms and argue that the availability of guns is itself a spur to more deadly violence. Advocates of minimal regulation, for their part, condemn measures that, they say, will primarily penalize law-abiding citizens, and instead call for more vigorous enforcement of existing laws, targeting "criminals," not their weapons. When the antiphony intrudes on funerals, the effect can …

Mark Tushnet: The Right Questions, Philip C. Bobbitt

Faculty Scholarship

It is the most grotesque of ironies that much of twentieth-century jurisprudence has been an effort to make law into a science. This effort amounts to a reversal of a far earlier appropriation. It was the observation of regularities in gravity and the movement of the planets that reformed science and gave credence to the locution, 'the laws of nature.' Nature was "lawful" because it appeared to follow undeviatingly a certain regimen, which is to say that any deviations observed were held to be clues as to the true content of the laws that were being followed. Mathematics was the …

Avoiding Constitutional Questions As A Three-Branch Problem, William K. Kelley

Journal Articles

This article criticizes the cardinal rule of statutory construction known as the avoidance canon - that statutes must be interpreted to avoid raising serious constitutional questions - as failing to respect the proper constitutional roles of both Congress and the Executive. It argues that the avoidance canon in practice cannot be grounded in legislative supremacy, which is the common justification for it offered by the Supreme Court, because it assumes without foundation that Congress would always prefer not to come close to the constitutional line in enacting statutes. Instead, the avoidance canon creates pressure for courts to adopt statutory meanings …

The South Won't Rise Again But It's Time To Study The Defunct Confederacy's Constitution, Ralph Michael Stein

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The premise of this essay is not to espouse that the Southern ideological and constitutional theorists were correct. I propose, however, that an understanding of the historical basis of constitutional law, and a recognition of evolving doctrinal issues of Federalism, will enhance law school curriculum. Presentation of these topics dictates the introduction of the Confederate Constitution into the curriculum of required courses and electives. This effort, I propose, would be a prudent step, to be amply repaid in terms of higher understanding and scholarly benefit.

The Supreme Court 2000 Term--Leading Cases, Good News Club V. Milford Central School, 121 S. Ct. 2093 (2001), Emily Gold Waldman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

After the Supreme Court held in Widmar v. Vincent that state universities could not constitutionally deny religious groups access to facilities generally available to student groups, a number of school districts authored access policies that were designed to create “limited public forums.” These policies delineated the categories of activities for which school property could be used, and indicated that religious activities were not among them. In Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District, however, the Supreme Court struck a blow to the notion that school districts could employ the limited public forum approach to exclude religious activities from …

Federalism And International Human Rights In The New Constitutional Order, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This Essay examines the contours of what I have elsewhere called the new constitutional order with respect to international human rights and federalism. The background is my suggestion that the U.S. political-constitutional system is on the verge of moving into a new constitutional regime, following the end of the New Deal-Great Society constitutional regime. The Supreme Court's innovations in the law of federalism in connection with Congress's exercise of its powers over domestic affairs has provoked speculation about the implications of those innovations for the national government's power with respect to foreign affairs. Most of the speculation has been that …

"Shut Up He Explained", Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Part I of this Commentary examines the conversational model of politics. I argue that the virtues Bennett finds in the conversational model exist only when, and to the extent that, participants in civil and political society can engage in undominated conversation. The requirement that conversation be undominated generates a substantial set of social prerequisites, mostly dealing with equality. And yet, determining what social arrangements actually satisfy those prerequisites is itself a matter of constitutional controversy. Resolving such controversies through politics is no solution, because the political arena is where we seek to ensure that nondomination prevails in civil society, and, …

Are We Buyers Or Hosts? A Memetic Approach To The First Amendment, Jeffrey E. Stake

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The First Amendment is often analyzed using the metaphor of the marketplace of ideas. Making use of memetic analysis, this article suggests that ideas should not be treated as inert products that we choose but as living things that sometimes exert some influence over their environment. Some of the ideas are more adept at surviving than others, and the ones that survive will not necessarily be good for humans. To account for the ability of some memes to replicate dangerously, the First Amendment should be read to allow governments to punish a speaker who advocates or threatens physical injury (other …

The Electoral College, The Right To Vote, And Our Federalism: A Comment On A Lasting Institution, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel E. Charles

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The Electoral College has been subject to a constant barrage of criticism. This raises an obvious question: how has the College managed to survive despite its lack of popularity, its opacity and its generally controversial nature?

Commentators look to the wisdom and staying power of the founding generation as well as to the force of history and tradition. In this Article, we look carefully at a third possibility. That is, we look to the foundation of our political structure and the nature of our democratic commitments.

In this vein, we are particularly intrigued by the question of electoral legitimacy. To …

Challenges To Racial Redistricting In The New Millennium: Hunt V. Cromartie As A Case Study, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel E. Charles

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The Calm After The Storm: First Amendment Cases In The Supreme Court's 2000-2001 Term, Joel Gora

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Storm Arrives: The First Amendment Cases In The Supreme Court's 1999-2000 Term, Joel Gora

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

'Bush' V. 'Gore': What Was The Supreme Court Thinking?, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

One of the most astonishing episodes in American political history ended last month with perhaps the most imperial decision ever by the United States Supreme Court. In one stroke, the Court exercised power that belonged to Congress, the legislature of Florida, Florida's courts and administrators, and, most importantly, the people of the state.

Defending Congress, Seth P. Waxman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Every year the Solicitor General must decide, one case at a time, what the interests of the United States are with respect to several thousand different cases in the federal and state courts. Should the United States appeal, or seek rehearing, or petition for certiorari, or file a brief amicus curiae, or intervene? What issues should the United States raise, and what arguments should it make? How should the law be interpreted or the doctrine applied? The goal is for the United States to speak with one voice - a voice that reflects the interests of all three branches of …

Free Exercise Rights Of Capital Jurors, Brian Galle

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court has said that the Constitution permits trial judges to exclude from the pool of potential capital trial jurors any persons whose views on the death penalty would likely substantially impair their ability to reach an impartial verdict. This Note argues that the Court's analysis to date is incomplete, in that it omits close evaluation of potential conflicts between such exclusions and the Free Exercise Clause. The Note argues further that a court should apply strict scrutiny to any state action, such as exclusion for cause, that burdens the use of religious beliefs in the mental processes of …

Reconstructing The Rule Of Law, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The action taken in Bush v. Gore by the five conservative Justices on the United States Supreme Court, Bugliosi argued, was not just wrong as a matter of law, but criminal: It was a malem in se, fully intended, premeditated theft of a national election for the Presidency of the United States. Now, as Balkan and Levinson would argue, this seventh, "prosecutorial" response -- that the Court's action was not just wrong but criminal -- is also not available to a devotee of either radical or moderate indeterminacy. Even assuming both criminal intent and severe harm-a wrongful, specific intent to …

The Original Meaning Of The Commerce Clause, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The U& Supreme Court, in recent cases; has attempted to define limits on the Congress's power to regulate commerce among the several states. While Justice Thomas has maintained that the original meaning of "commerce" was limited to the "trade and exchange" of goods and transportation for this purpose, some have argued that he is mistaken and that "commerce" originally included any "gainful activity." Having examined every appearance of the word "commerce"in the records of the Constitutional Convention, the ratification debates and the Federalist Papers, Professor Barnett finds no surviving example of this term being used in this broader sense. In …

Constitution-Talk And Justice-Talk, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Inside the courts, one might distinguish between constitution-talk and justice-talk on the ground that the former, but not the latter, results in enforceable legal judgments. So, inside the courts, we might interpret the Constitution with justice in mind, but what we do is produce legally enforceable judgments. Outside the courts, however, it might seem that all we do is interpret and talk. It is not immediately obvious that cloaking justice-talk as constitution-talk outside the courts has much rhetorical force. As I will argue, the fact that invoking the Constitution outside the courts, in the course of discussing justice, does have …

Comparing Judicial Selection Systems, Lee Epstein, Jack Knight, Olga Shvetsova

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

'Appropriate' Means-Ends Constraints On Section 5 Powers, Evan H. Caminker

Articles

With the narrowing of Congress' Article I power to regulate interstate commerce and to authorize private suits against states, Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment provides Congress with an increasingly important alternative source of power to regulate and police state conduct. However, in City of Boerne v. Flores and subsequent cases, the Supreme Court has tightened the doctrinal test for prophylactic legislation based on Section Five. The Court has clarified Section Five's legitimate ends by holding that Congress may enforce Fourteenth Amendment rights only as they are defined by the federal judiciary, and the Court has constrained Section Five's permissible …

A Constitutional Confluence: American ‘State Action’ Law And The Application Of South Africa’S Socioeconomic Rights Guarantees To Private Actors, Stephen Ellmann

Articles & Chapters

As constitutional protection of human rights expands around the world, the question of whether constitutional rights should protect people not only against state action but also against the conduct of private actors is once again timely. Few nations have so broadly, or so ambiguously, endorsed the application of constitutional guarantees to constrain private conduct (known outside the United States as "horizontality") as South Africa. The constitution approved in 1996 applies fully and without qualification to all "organs of state," and this term is defined in section 239 in potentially very broad terms, notably embracing "any other functionary or institution ... …

Constitutional Risks To Equal Protection In The Criminal Justice System, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This Note has examined the consequences of a shift in the equal protection context - a move from a traditional particularized harm perspective to a constitutional risk perspective focused on systemic harms. It has also acknowledged the significant remedial difficulties associated with constitutional risk, but by focusing on discretion as the source of most equal protection risks, this Note has proposed a moderate doctrinal change: discretionary safeguards. To be sure, this Note leaves the project substantially incomplete. Constitutional risk's focus on statistical evidence requires careful discussion of the pitfalls judges face in this area and of how they can develop …

Legislative Constitutional Interpretation, Neal K. Katyal

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This is an Essay about "the how" of constitutional interpretation. Much attention has been devoted to the question of how the Constitution is interpreted in courts. Rather little attention has been devoted to the question of how the Constitution is interpreted elsewhere in the government. The Constitution tells us that Congress, the President, and state legislators and courts must adhere to its terms, but it does not tell us how much interpretive power each actor should have, nor does it prescribe rules for each actor to use when interpreting the text. I argue that constitutional interpretation by Congress is, and …

Evaluating Congressional Constitutional Interpretation: Some Criteria And Two Informal Case Studies, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

I begin this Essay by identifying some problems with conducting an empirical inquiry into Congress's performance in constitutional matters. I argue that there is actually only a small set of issues for which we have a reasonably clean record to evaluate. With the problems I have identified in the background, I then examine some aspects of Congress's performance in the impeachment of President William J. Clinton and, more briefly, some aspects of its response to a presidential military initiative taken without formal prior congressional endorsement. I conclude that Congress's performance in the impeachment, however flawed, was reasonably good, and that …

Why Doesn't She Leave? The Collision Of First Amendment Rights And Effective Court Remedies For Victims Of Domestic Violence, Laurie S. Kohn

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Despite the persistence of the question, social science literature is replete with reasons why a victim does not or cannot leave a battering relationship. Commonly cited explanations include lack of financial resources; fear of physical retribution; lack of access to information about options for escape; enduring love for the batterer and belief he will change; learned helplessness; and depression. This Article, however, focuses on a pervasive and previously unexamined reason: the victim's fear that the batterer will publicize truthful confidential information that will hurt her. If the victim were to seek the court's protection, most state courts have the authority …

The Bakaly Debacle: The Role Of The Press In High-Profile Criminal Investigations, Julie R. O'Sullivan

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Others have examined why prosecutors or law enforcement agents may be inclined to "leak" information regarding ongoing criminal investigations, documented the rules that govern federal prosecutors' interaction with the press in such circumstances, outlined the difficulties encountered in enforcing those rules, and critiqued the performance of Mr. Starr's office in this regard. In other words, the dynamic as it flows from governmental actors to the press has been scrutinized. I would like to suggest that a more searching examination be conducted of the press's role, and perhaps its responsibilities, in this context. Because I am neither a journalist nor a …

Subconstitutional Constitutional Law: Supplement, Sham, Or Substitute?, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this brief Comment I make two points. First, the subconstitutional doctrines appear to have the advantage of allowing elected lawmakers to pursue whatever course they wish, as long as they satisfy the requirements of these subconstitutional doctrines. In practice, however, what appears to be a provisional invalidation based on subconstitutional law turns out to be - and, indeed, might be expected at the moment of decision to be - a final, unrevisable decision. Further, courts might strategically deploy these sub constitutional doctrines to avoid the sting of the charge that they are foreclosing legislative choice while effectively doing so. …

Open Access And The First Amendment: A Critique Of Comcast Cablevision Of Broward County, Inc. V. Broward County, David Wolitz

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

To what extent does the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment bar the adoption of “open access” regulations? Open access (or “net neutrality”) refers to a policy that would require broadband Internet providers, such as cable and phone companies, to allow competitive Internet Service Providers (ISPs) onto their broadband lines at nondiscriminatory rates. A federal district court in Florida recently held Broward County’s open access ordinance unconstitutional on the grounds that it would force speech – in the form of Internet content – on to the local cable company. If the district court’s analysis is correct, then open access …