Law Commons^™

A Look At The Constitutional Implications Of Retrospective Laws: The Case Of The False Claims Act, Monica P. Navarro

Monica P. Navarro

The retrospective effect of the False Claims Act has triggered constitutional challenges resting on the Ex Post Facto Clause of the U.S. Constitution and dividing the courts on the outcome of the constitutional question and the applicable legal framework for resolving the issue. The article reviews the False Claims Act, as well as the legal frameworks available for resolving such a constitutional challenge.

The Rise And Permanence Of Quasi-Legislative Independent Commissions, Gabriel Gillett, Steven R. Ross, Raphael A. Prober

Gabriel Gillett

This article explores Congress’s recent trend of creating quasi-legislative independent commissions to augment its own investigations, and determines what factors may enhance the chance that a commission will prove successful. Although Congress has never been the lone forum for investigations, since 2001 the legislature has been empanelling entities of outside experts to investigate the most significant economic and national security issues. This Article begins with a history of governmental investigations in America, highlighting activity by Congress, independent agencies, and presidential commissions. Next, it describes the modern political, communications, and scheduling strains on Congress that have created an opportunity for new …

The Impact Xat, Paul Boudreaux

Paul Boudreaux

Impact fees complicate the construction of new housing across the nation. Although justified as a means of forcing new development to “pay its way” for the costs of government infrastructure necessitated by the new housing, impact fees are imposed in a way that make them, in effect, a dubious population tax. Indeed, the typical impact fee does little to discourage costly suburban sprawl. This essay, using economic lessons from policies to discourage the wasteful use of resources with light bulbs, bathrooms, and buildings, suggests a new policy course. It proposes an impact xat (a cross between a tax and fee) …

The Impact Xat, Paul Boudreaux

Paul Boudreaux

Impact fees complicate the construction of new housing across the nation. Although justified as a means of forcing new development to “pay its way” for the costs of government infrastructure necessitated by the new housing, impact fees are imposed in a way that make them, in effect, a dubious population tax. Indeed, the typical impact fee does little to discourage costly suburban sprawl. This essay, using economic lessons from policies to discourage the wasteful use of resources with light bulbs, bathrooms, and buildings, suggests a new policy course. It proposes an impact xat (a cross between a tax and fee) …

The First Amendment In The Multicultural Climate Of Colleges And Universities: A Story Ending With Christian Legal Society V. Martinez, Blake M. Lawrence

Blake M Lawrence

This article argues that the “limited public forum” analysis used by the United States Supreme Court in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez correctly addresses the competing concerns of students and university administration when approaching free speech and association on college and university campuses. It extensively analyzes the creation of the “limited public forum” analysis, explains why that particular analysis is ill-equipped for limiting high-school speech, and comprehensively addresses the Christian Legal Society v. Martinez opinion. Further, weaknesses in the dicta of Christian Legal Society v. Martinez are analyzed and points made by dissenting Justices are critiqued.

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Friendly Fire Casualties Of American Civil Liberty In The War On Terror: Humanitarian Law Project V. Holder And The Erosion Of Free Speech, Alicia C. Armstrong Esq.

Alicia C Armstrong

The holding in Humanitarian Law Project (HLP) v. Holder marks a significant shift in First Amendment doctrine, unprecedented since the early twentieth century “Red Scare” cases. The HLP decision suggests that free speech principles which have been developing for over half a century—culminating in the paramount protection of “subversive advocacy”—are less deserving of adherence in the face of terrorism than in times of relative peace. Throughout the past several decades, the Court has retreated from the notion that speech which is disturbing to public opinion but benign in its capability to incite imminent lawless action deserves lower legal protection. To …

Immigrant Laws, Obstacle Preemption And The Lost Legacy Of Mcculloch, Lauren Gilbert

Lauren Gilbert

Using Congress’ perceived failure to enforce the immigration laws as a backdrop, this paper will explore how the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Chamber of Commerce v.Whiting upholding the Legal Arizona Workers Act exposes some of the tensions and contradictions in modern preemption doctrine. Examining the relationship among express, field, impossibility and obstacle preemption, I explore three emerging trends, all evident in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting. The first is an increasing reluctance of the Court to find implied obstacle preemption. The second related trend is an inclination to expand the scope of impossibility preemption beyond the physical impossibility cases. …

Bearing Injustice: Foster Care, Pregnancy Prevention, And The Law, Taylor I. Dudley

Taylor I Dudley

The State has numerous responsibilities to children and youth in and emancipating from foster care. Ensuring a foster child’s medical welfare is among the most imperative of the State’s obligations. Pregnancy prevention is a unique component of medical welfare and long-term well-being. Indeed, it stands out as a responsibility that the State must fulfill to counteract the likelihood of diminished life outcomes that so many former foster children face. However, like many problems facing foster children, pregnancy is noticed, yet unaddressed; contemplated, yet unresolved. The State’s failure to adequately address pregnancy prevention among youth in foster care is unconstitutional under …

Watching The Hen House: Judicial Review Of Judicial Rulemaking, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Courts regularly engage in rulemaking of questionable constitutionality, then exercise the exclusive jurisdiction of judicial review to rule on constitutional challenges to the rules that they themselves have promulgated, obfuscating the appearance of impartiality and accountability and preventing the unsophisticated from realizing that a benefit has been conferred on a more sophisticated faction.

Quasi-legislative judicial rulemaking that has resulted from Congressional delegations of rulemaking authority to the courts is increasingly prevalent in the past half century, the result of which is a multi-tiered system of consultation, review, and revision that depends heavily upon nonlegislative actors and a Balkanization of the …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

Counting Heads: Does The Existence Of A National Consensus Give Rise To A Substantive-Due-Process Right To A Particular Criminal Procedure?, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

Anomalousness in a state’s criminal procedure(s), standing alone, is sufficient (to constitute a violation of substantive due process and that the substantive process due to a criminal defendant in a state with an anomalous criminal procedure is the process that would be provided to a similarly situated defendant in a mainstream jurisdiction. This does not mean that the fact that a majority of jurisdictions fails to afford a particular beneficial procedure to a criminal defendant means that such procedure is not guaranteed by due process. Nor is the recognition of a right by a majority of jurisdictions dispositive of whether …

The Times They Are A-Changin’: The “Sexting” Problem And How The Intrusiveness Of A Cell Phone Search Determines The (Un)Constitutionality Of Suspicion-Based And Suspicionless Searches In The Public School Setting, Andrew T. Moore

Andrew T Moore

In the past decade cell phone use amongst teenagers has gone from luxury to perceived necessity. With the expanded abilities of modern cell phones, students are able to easily participate in social sexual behavior such as sending explicit images of themselves or others to other cell phone users, an activity known as “sexting.” While schools may want to do all they can to eradicate this behavior, school administrators must not violate the constitutional rights of their students in the process of doing so. When a school administrator comes to suspect “sexting” behavior, he or she must follow existing Fourth Amendment …

For Carrying Into Execution The Foregoing Powers: Interpretative Theories Of The Necessary And Proper Clause In Light Of United States V. Comstock, Marianella Medelius

Marianella Medelius

The Necessary and Proper Clause, also known as the Sweeping Clause, is the last of the eighteen enumerated powers granted to Congress under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. The clause provides Congress with the ability to make laws necessary and proper to carry out the exercise of its powers. Contrary to what is often believed, the New Deal’s expansion of Congressional powers was not the product of the Supreme Court directly extending the scope of the Commerce Clause. Instead, it was the Court’s liberal interpretation of the Necessary and Proper Clause that enabled the Court to uphold laws …

For Carrying Into Execution The Foregoing Powers. Interpretative Theories Of The Necessary And Proper Clause In Light Of United States V. Comstock, Marianella Medelius

Marianella Medelius

The Necessary and Proper Clause, also known as the Sweeping Clause, is the last of the eighteen enumerated powers granted to Congress under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. The clause provides Congress with the ability to make laws necessary and proper to carry out the exercise of its powers. Contrary to what is often believed, the New Deal’s expansion of Congressional powers was not the product of the Supreme Court directly extending the scope of the Commerce Clause. Instead, it was the Court’s liberal interpretation of the Necessary and Proper Clause that enabled the Court to uphold laws …

State Contractual Liabilities And The Contract Clause; What Now?, Robert J. D'Agostino

Robert J D'Agostino

No abstract provided.

Arizona’S Support Our Law Enforcement And Safe Neighborhoods Act: Its Likely Consequences On Latino Communities And What To Do About Them, Elena Llamas

elena llamas

The U.S. has seen a recent wave of legislative efforts to empower state and local law enforcement officers with anti-illegal immigration responsibilities. The purpose of this article is to suggest community policing changes that police departments could enact to best enforce these types of laws and mantain good relations with Latinos.

Giving Life To The Dead: The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act's Impact On Freedom Of Contract As A Substantive Due Process Right, Jesse D. Kershner Mr.

Jesse D Kershner Mr.

This article examines the constitutional implications of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care of 2010. Particularly, whether the substantive due process right of freedom of contract is recognized yet again as a fundamental right. This paper argues while Muller and West Coast Hotel overturned Lochner procedurally, the substance of the fundamental right concerning contracts still exists; specifically the notion that citizens have a right to be free from forced contracts.

Giving Life To The Dead: The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act's Impact On Freedom Of Contract As A Substantive Due Process Right, Jesse D. Kershner Mr.

Jesse D Kershner Mr.

This article examines the constitutional implications of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care of 2010. Particularly, whether the substantive due process right of freedom of contract is recognized yet again as a fundamental right. This paper argues while Muller and West Coast Hotel overturned Lochner procedurally, the substance of the fundamental right concerning contracts still exists; specifically the notion that citizens have a right to be free from forced contracts.

When The Emperor Has No Clothes Ii: A Proposal For A More Serious Look At “The Weight Of The Evidence”, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

While the Bail Reform Act and state statutes modeled after it command courts to consider the weight of the evidence in making pretrial release/detention decisions, as a practical matter, courts do not do so – at least not when the weight-of-the-evidence factor cuts in favor of release – and they should. In particular, courts should accord substantially more weight to the “weight of the evidence” factor in making or reviewing pretrial-detention determinations when one or more jury has already refused unanimously to convict the defendant of the crime(s) charged. Unless the prosecution has obtained significant, material new evidence between the …

When The Emperor Has No Clothes Ii: A Proposal For A More Serious Look At “The Weight Of The Evidence”, Carrie Leonetti

Carrie Leonetti

While the Bail Reform Act and state statutes modeled after it command courts to consider the weight of the evidence in making pretrial release/detention decisions, as a practical matter, courts do not do so – at least not when the weight-of-the-evidence factor cuts in favor of release – and they should. In particular, courts should accord substantially more weight to the “weight of the evidence” factor in making or reviewing pretrial-detention determinations when one or more jury has already refused unanimously to convict the defendant of the crime(s) charged. Unless the prosecution has obtained significant, material new evidence between the …