Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Effects Of National Security On Supreme Court Case Decisions Involving Civil Liberties, Callie Gerzanics
The Effects Of National Security On Supreme Court Case Decisions Involving Civil Liberties, Callie Gerzanics
Williams Honors College, Honors Research Projects
This research project will analyze the effects that national security laws and tensions have on civil liberties and Supreme Court case decisions. National security has been a primary objective for the United States of America for as long as wars have been fought and enemies have been made. National security continues to be a concern for the U.S. government, especially with the prominence of technology that has made the U.S. more vulnerable to breaches in security, such as cybernetic attacks. The motivations behind this project stem from a concern of how national security can influence Supreme Court decisions, police arrests, …
The Supreme Court’S Two Constitutions: A First Look At The “Reverse Polarity” Cases, Arthur D. Hellman
The Supreme Court’S Two Constitutions: A First Look At The “Reverse Polarity” Cases, Arthur D. Hellman
Articles
In the traditional approach to ideological classification, “liberal” judicial decisions are those that support civil liberties claims; “conservative” decisions are those that reject them. That view – particularly associated with the Warren Court era – is reflected in numerous academic writings and even an article by a prominent liberal judge. Today, however, there is mounting evidence that the traditional assumptions about the liberal-conservative divide are incorrect or at best incomplete. In at least some areas of constitutional law, the traditional characterizations have been reversed. Across a wide variety of constitutional issues, support for claims under the Bill of Rights or …
Landowners' Fcc Dilemma: Rereading The Supreme Court's Armstrong Opinion After The Third Circuit's Depolo Ruling, Gerald S. Dickinson
Landowners' Fcc Dilemma: Rereading The Supreme Court's Armstrong Opinion After The Third Circuit's Depolo Ruling, Gerald S. Dickinson
Articles
In Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Ctr., Inc., the Supreme Court took a turn in its refusal to provide avenues for relief to private actors against the state in federal court, finding that the Supremacy Clause does not provide for an implied right of action to sue to enjoin unconstitutional actions by state officers. Many critics of that decision, including the four dissenting Justices, question the wisdom of the ruling generally. However, from a property rights perspective, the decision sheds light on a dilemma unforeseen by many scholars and made most apparent by a recent Third Circuit decision, Jeffrey DePolo …
The Danger Zone: How The Dangerousness Standard In Civil Commitment Proceedings Harms People With Serious Mental Illness, Sara Gordon
Scholarly Works
Almost every American state allows civil commitment upon a finding that a person, as a result of mental illness, is gravely disabled and unable to meet their basic needs for food and shelter. Yet in spite of these statutes, most psychiatrists and courts will not commit an individual until they are found to pose a danger to themselves or others. All people have certain rights to be free from unwanted medical treatment, but for people with serious mental illness, those civil liberties are an abstraction, safeguarded for them by a system that is not otherwise ensuring access to shelter and …
Earl Warren, The Warren Court And Civil Liberties , Steven J. Simmons
Earl Warren, The Warren Court And Civil Liberties , Steven J. Simmons
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Victory Without Success? – The Guantanamo Litigation, Permanent Preventive Detention, And Resisting Injustice, Jules Lobel
Victory Without Success? – The Guantanamo Litigation, Permanent Preventive Detention, And Resisting Injustice, Jules Lobel
Articles
When the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) brought the first habeas cases challenging the Executive’s right to detain prisoners in a law free zone at Guantanamo in 2002, almost no legal commentator gave the plaintiffs much chance of succeeding. Yet, two years later in 2004, after losing in both the District Court and Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court in Rasul v. Bush handed CCR a resounding victory. Four years later, the Supreme Court again ruled in CCR’s favor in 2008 in Boumediene v. Bush, holding that the detainees had a constitutional right to habeas and declaring the Congressional …
Up In Smoke: Fourth Amendment Rights And The Burger Court, Gerald S. Reamey
Up In Smoke: Fourth Amendment Rights And The Burger Court, Gerald S. Reamey
Faculty Articles
When Warren Burger was appointed Chief Justice in 1969, he was expected to lead the Supreme Court away from its liberal, value-laden approach to constitutional adjudication. Indeed, a retrospective of the court’s work during the seventeen years Warren Burger served as Chief Justice reveals the expected conservative trend of the Chief Justice himself, as well as the Supreme Court generally. It does not, however, reflect wholesale rejection of the most controversial civil liberties decisions rendered by the Warren Court. It is also unclear that Chief Justice Burger was responsible for the Court’s retrenchment on civil liberties where it did occur. …