Law Commons^™

Beyond Liberalism And Its Critics: An Essay In Constitutional Theory, Marcus Faro De Castro

Dalhousie Law Journal

Contemporary legal culture spends a great deal of energy in generating arguments about constitutional law. Typically, such arguments concern the determination of the content of constitutional clauses which define the meaning and extension of governmental powers, individual rights and civil liberties, the allocations of power among different departments of government, or among local and supra-local spheres of government, and so forth.

No Harm, No Foul: Pornography (Violent And Otherwise), Victoria M. Mather

Faculty Articles

At the heart of the entire pornography debate is the lack of understanding or agreement of what is regulated. Society does not agree about what pornography means, what is hardcore or softcore, what is obscene, or what is "adult." The disagreement tends to derive from two very different viewpoints—the liberal view, and the feminist view. On the liberal side of the debate, pornography should be protected speech but on the feminist side, society should take into account the feminist perspective and the harmful effects of these graphic depictions.

Applying the Miller-Roth test, liberals believe that pornography is protected speech until …

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. …

Who's In Charge Of U.S. Indian Policy?: Congress And The Supreme Court At Loggerheads Over American Indian Religious Freedom, David E. Wilkins

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

The federal government's three branches—executive, legislative, judicial, and that unwieldy mass known simply as "the bureaucracy" have, during the last half-decade—1987-1991—produced a dizzying crop of laws, policies, proclamations, regulations, and court decisions which have served simultaneously to 1) reaffirm tribal sovereignty; 2) permit and encourage greater state interference within Indian Country; 3) enhance federal legislative authority over tribes; and 4) deny constitutional free-exercise protections both to individual Indians and to tribes.

On the legislative side, Congress has established the experimental Tribal Self-Governance Demonstration Project which is a major step towards restoring the tribal right of self-determination, and is discussing the …