Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Procedure Of Election Law In Federal Courts, Joshua A. Douglas
The Procedure Of Election Law In Federal Courts, Joshua A. Douglas
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
Election law scholars have paid scant attention to the different procedures by which courts decide election law cases. Further, there has been little exploration of the reasons why certain processes exist, and there is even less discussion of which procedures are best for election law cases. One commentator has advocated for state legislatures to define clearly certain procedural matters for election contests, including: “(1) who can be a contestant; (2) what standard of evidence to require; and (3) how to expedite contests.” But there are more fundamental and foundational questions: What goals are we trying to achieve in enacting special …
Performing Discretion Or Performing Discrimination: An Analysis Of Race And Ritual In Batson Decisions In Capital Jury Selection, Melynda J. Price
Performing Discretion Or Performing Discrimination: An Analysis Of Race And Ritual In Batson Decisions In Capital Jury Selection, Melynda J. Price
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
Research shows the mere presence of Blacks on capital juries--on the rare occasions they are seated--can mean the difference between life and death. Peremptory challenges are the primary method to remove these pivotal participants. Batson v. Kentucky developed hearings as an immediate remedy for the unconstitutional removal of jurors through racially motivated peremptory challenges. These proceedings have become rituals that sanction continued bias in the jury selection process and ultimately affect the outcome of capital trials. This Article deconstructs the role of the Batson ritual in legitimating the removal of African American jurors. These perfunctory hearings fail to meaningfully interrogate …
Clear Notice For Conditions On Spending, Unclear Implications For States In Federal Healthcare Programs, Nicole Huberfeld
Clear Notice For Conditions On Spending, Unclear Implications For States In Federal Healthcare Programs, Nicole Huberfeld
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
This Article explores Arlington Central School District Board of Education v. Murphy, a decision rendered by the first Roberts Court that may become a benchmark for Spending Clause jurisprudence. The majority in Arlington, led by Justice Alito, adopted the standard for constitutional conditions on spending that had been the dissenting view for years during the Rehnquist Court. More specifically, under the Pennhurst and Dole regime, the Court required Congress to provide "adequate" notice of conditions on spending, which seemed to be sufficient for the clear statement rule the Court (through Justice O'Connor) was seeking to institute. Arlington refashioned …
Resorting To External Norms And Principles In Constitutional Decision-Making, Alvin L. Goldman
Resorting To External Norms And Principles In Constitutional Decision-Making, Alvin L. Goldman
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
Given the very significant role of constitutional law in the American political system and the fact that Supreme Court Justices are appointed through a political process, it is understandable that the appropriate judicial approach to resolving constitutional issues often is the subject of political commentary. Unfortunately, discourse by politicians concerning this issue seldom rises to the deserved level of wisdom. One of President George W. Bush's public mantras is illustrative of political commentary respecting federal judicial appointments: "I'm going to put strict constructionists on the bench." On its face, and as understood by politically naive audiences, the statement appears to …
Modifying The Kentucky Rules Of Evidence—A Separation Of Powers Issue, Robert G. Lawson
Modifying The Kentucky Rules Of Evidence—A Separation Of Powers Issue, Robert G. Lawson
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
How do you modify laws that simultaneously exist as statutes and rules of court? For reasons that are described elsewhere and need not be repeated here, the Kentucky Rules of Evidence (K.R.E.) came into existence through concurrent enactment by the General Assembly and Kentucky Supreme Court and thus are endowed with all the attributes of both statutes and rules of court. So, how do you change them when the inevitable need to do so arises, a question made both interesting and difficult by the fact that there is no institutional mechanism for concurrent lawmaking by the General Assembly and supreme …
Interpretation Of The Kentucky Rules Of Evidence—What Happened To The Common Law?, Robert G. Lawson
Interpretation Of The Kentucky Rules Of Evidence—What Happened To The Common Law?, Robert G. Lawson
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
The Kentucky Rules of Evidence, which became effective on July 1, 1992, dramatically transformed the method by which lawyers and judges address evidence issues. Before the adoption of the Rules, the law of evidence consisted mostly of a vast collection of common law rulings, accumulated over two centuries and inaccessible to lawyers and judges for all practical purposes. In addressing an evidence issue, participants had to first deal with the problem of "finding" the law-distilling from a morass of conflicting common law precedents the ones applicable to the issue at hand, a task regularly producing contention rather than agreement and, …