Law Commons^™

The Road To Abolition: How Widespread Legislative Repeal Of The Death Penalty In The States Could Catalyze A Nationwide Ban On Capital Punishment, Nicholas M. Parker

Legislation and Policy Brief

On December 17, 2007, former New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine signed into law a bill that abolished his state’s death penalty, saying he felt a “moral duty to end ‘state-endorsed killing.’” With Corzine’s signature, New Jersey became the fourteenth state to eradicate the death penalty, and the first to do so legislatively since Iowa and West Virginia legislators did away with capital punishment in 1965. The vote by New Jersey lawmakers followed close, but ultimately unsuccessful, votes on similar bills in Colorado, Maryland, Montana, Nebraska, and New Mexico earlier in 2007. And while it took more than thirty-one years for …

Circumventing The Electoral College: Why The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Survives Constitutional Scrutiny Under The Compact Clause, Michael Brody

Legislation and Policy Brief

It’s Election Night 2016. Brian Williams stands by at NBC, waiting to give the first returns of the night. “Kentucky to Christie,” Williams triumphantly announces to kick off the evening’s festivities. Kentucky turns flush red on NBC’s virtual election map. Williams continues: “Maryland to Clinton.” Now comes the hard part for Williams. Clinton won Maryland by an incredible two-to-one margin. NBC viewers intently watch the map, expecting to see the Old Line State turn blue. Instead, Maryland sits idly in its static grey color. This election has something new.

Confused NBC viewers keep watching, waiting for Williams to provide an …

The Landmark That Wasn't: A First Amendment Play In Five Acts Case Study And Commentaries, Stephen Wermiel

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

What follows is an original case study of our First Amendment law of free expression and how it is created by the Supreme Court. Drawing heavily on heretofore unpublished internal papers from the chambers of Justice William Brennan and other Justices, this Article reveals how the 1964 landmark decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan was once in serious jeopardy of being overruled. In the course of this discussion, and in their examination of the evolution of the Court’s decision in Dun & Bradstreet v. Greenmoss Builders (1985), the authors describe and analyze: (1) how and to what extent …

Should Public Buildings Be Used For Worship, Stephen Wermiel

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.

What Is The Meaning Of Like: The First Amendment Implications Of Social-Media Expression, Ira Robbins

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

Everywhere the Internet goes, new legal problems are sure to follow. As social media expands and infiltrates our daily lives, society must grapple with how to extend the law to modern situations. This problem becomes increasingly pressing as more and more of our social interactions take place online. For example, Facebook has become a colossal gathering place for friends, families, co-workers, frenemies, and others to disseminate their ideas and share information. Sometimes Facebook replaces old institutions; other times it augments them. Where once a neighbor would show allegiance to a political candidate by staking a sign on the front lawn, …

The Secret "Kill List" And The President, Kenneth Anderson

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of Scholars' Briefs: A Response To Richard Fallon, Amanda Frost

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

In a thoughtful and provocative essay, Richard Fallon criticizes law professors for lightly signing onto 'scholars’ briefs,' that is, amicus briefs filed on behalf of a group of law professors claiming expertise in the subject area. Fallon argues that law professors are constrained by the moral and ethical obligations of their profession from joining scholars’ briefs without first satisfying standards similar to those governing the production of scholarship, and thus he believes that law professors should abstain from adding their names to such briefs more often than they do now.

This response begins by describing the benefits of scholars’ briefs …