Law Commons^™

Brief Of Reporter And Advisers To Restatement (Third) Restitution And Unjust Enrichment, As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Doug Rendleman, Douglas Laycock

Scholarly Articles

Restitution may be a casualty in a collision with the constitutional law of standing. Article III is traditionally said to require an “injury in fact” for standing to be a plaintiff in federal court. Edwards, who alleges that First American paid a bribe or kickback in violation of the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, seeks to recover the statutory penalty. Defendant argues that even if it violated the Act, Edwards suffered no “injury in fact.” Our amicus brief in support of Edwards alerts the Supreme Court to the many restitutionary claims either for a wrongdoer’s profits or to set …

An Anthem For Ows?, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Ows, Discourse, And Narratives, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Ows And The Constitution, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Our Exceptional Constitution, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Trans-Border Exclusion And Execution, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Teaching Values, Teaching Stereotypes: Sex Ed And Indoctrination In Public Schools, Jennifer S. Hendricks

College of Law Faculty Scholarship

Many sex education curricula currently used in public schools indoctrinate students in gender stereotypes. As expressed in the title of one article: “If You Don’t Aim to Please, Don’t Dress to Tease,” and Other Public School Sex Education Lessons Subsidized by You, the Federal Taxpayer (Jennifer L. Greenblatt, 14 TEX. J. ON C.L. & C.R. 1 (2008)). Other lessons pertain not only to responsibility for sexual activity but to lifelong approaches to family life and individual achievement. One lesson, for example, instructs students that, in marriage, men need sex from their wives and women need financial support from their husbands. …

Body And Soul: Equality, Pregnancy, And The Unitary Right To Abortion, Jennifer S. Hendricks

College of Law Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores equality-based arguments for abortion rights, revealing both their necessity and their pitfalls. It first uses the narrowness of the “health exception” to abortion regulations to show why equality arguments are needed—because our legal tradition's conception of liberty is based on male experience, and we have no theory of basic human rights grounded in women's reproductive experiences. Next, however, the Article shows that equality arguments, although necessary, can undermine women's reproductive freedom because they require that pregnancy and abortion be analogized to male experiences. The result is that equality arguments focus on either the bodily or the social …

Book Review: Saving Law Reviews From Political Scientists, Benjamin H. Barton

College of Law Faculty Scholarship

This essay reviews Robert J. Spitzer, Saving the Constitution from Lawyers: How Legal Training and Law Reviews Distort Constitutional Meaning, and argues that it fails on two fronts. First, I offer a defense of lawyers, law professors, and law reviews. Second, I show that Spitzer's own book proves that peer-reviewed political science scholarship suffers from at least as many faults and foibles as law review scholarship.

For example, in each of his three examples of wayward theorizing Spitzer insists that his reading of the Constitution and its history is so clearly correct that his opponents' scholarship is not only wrong …

Schneckloth V. Bustamonte: History’S Unspoken Fourth Amendment Anomaly, Brian Gallini

School of Law Faculty Publications and Presentations

The officer walking the beat has numerous tools at her disposal to effectuate a warrantless search, the most popular of which is the consent search. Academics, courts, and the public appear skeptical of current consent search practices; so, how did we get here? Step back to 1969 when President Nixon appointed Warren Burger to replace Earl Warren as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. At that time, many believed Burger’s “law and order” background foretold Miranda’s overruling. That never happened; a handful of commentators and historians therefore view the Burger Court’s criminal procedure decisions as anticlimactic. That view overlooks the …

Does Legalzoom Have First Amendment Rights? Some Thoughts About Freedom Of Speech And The Unauthorized Practice Of Law, Catherine J. Lanctot

Working Paper Series

At a time of economic dislocation in the legal profession, it is likely that bar regulators will turn their attention to pursuing lay entities that appear to be engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. One prominent target of these efforts is LegalZoom, an online document preparer that has come under increasing pressure from the organized bar for its marketing and sale of basic legal documents. As regulatory pressure against LegalZoom and similar companies continues to mount, it is worth considering whether there may be unanticipated consequences from pursuing these unauthorized practice claims. In several well-known instances, lay people have …

Religious Truth, Pluralism, And Secularization: The Shaking Foundations Of American Religious Liberty, Daniel O. Conkle

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In this Essay, I recount John Locke’s 1689 Letter Concerning Toleration and explain how religious liberty continues to rest on Lockean and related justifications. These various justifications depend in part on religious-moral reasoning (both Christian and non-Christian) and in part on political-pragmatic considerations. I then discuss recent and ongoing developments in the American religious landscape, including a radical increase in religious diversity, the modernization of traditional faiths, the individualization or "spiritualization" of religion, and the increasing secularization of individual belief structures. I suggest that these developments, over time, may seriously threaten the underlying religious-moral and political-pragmatic foundations of religious liberty …

Framing The Fourth, Tracey Maclin

Faculty Scholarship

History is again an important element of the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment analysis. In Wyoming v. Houghton, Justice Scalia’s opinion for the Court announced that a historical inquiry is the starting point for every Fourth Amendment case. William Cuddihy’s book on the origins and original meaning of the Fourth Amendment will undoubtedly assist the Justices (and everyone else) in understanding the history of search and seizure law.

Cuddihy’s historical analysis is unprecedented. As Justice O’Connor has described it, Cuddihy’s work is “one of the most exhaustive analyses of the original meaning of the Fourth Amendment ever undertaken.” Cuddihy reviewed thousands …

An Article I Theory Of The Inherent Powers Of The Federal Courts, Benjamin H. Barton

College of Law Faculty Scholarship

A proper understanding of the nature of the inherent powers begins with separating whether the judiciary has any constitutional power to overrule Congress from the judiciary’s power to act in the absence of congressional action, i.e. in the interstices of federal statutes and rules. Separating out these two very different types of powers helps clarify that the inherent powers of federal courts are actually both broader and shallower than have been previously thought: Congress has near plenary authority in this area, but the courts have a great deal of leeway to act when Congress has not.

An examination of the …

The Tea Party And The Constitution, Christopher W. Schmidt

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article considers the Tea Party as a constitutional movement. I explore the Tea Party’s ambitious effort to transform the role of the Constitution in American life, examining both the substance of the Tea Party’s constitutional claims and the tactics movement leaders have embraced for advancing these claims. No major social movement in modern American history has so explicitly tied its reform agenda to the Constitution. From the time when the Tea Party burst onto the American political scene in early 2009, its supporters claimed in no uncertain terms that much recent federal government action overstepped constitutionally defined limitations. A …

Elizabeth Cady Stanton And The Notion Of A Legal Class Of Gender, Tracy A. Thomas

Akron Law Faculty Publications

In the mid-nineteenth century, Elizabeth Cady Stanton used narratives of women and their involvement with the law of domestic relations to collectivize women. This recognition of a gender class was the first step towards women’s transformation of the law. Stanton’s stories of working-class women, immigrants, Mormon polygamist wives, and privileged white women revealed common realities among women in an effort to form a collective conscious. The parable-like stories were designed to inspire a collective consciousness among women, one capable of arousing them to social and political action. For to Stanton’s consternation, women showed a lack of appreciation of their own …

Law, History, And Feminism, Tracy A. Thomas

Akron Law Faculty Publications

This is the introduction to the book, Feminist Legal History. This edited collection offers new visions of American legal history that reveal women’s engagement with the law over the past two centuries. It integrates the stories of women into the dominant history of the law in what has been called “engendering legal history,” (Batlan 2005) and then seeks to reconstruct the assumed contours of history. The introduction provides the context necessary to appreciate the diverse essays in the book. It starts with an overview of the existing state of women’s legal history, tracing the core events over the past two …

The Individual Mandate, Sovereignty, And The Ends Of Good Government: A Reply To Professor Randy Barnett, Patrick Mckinley Brennan

Working Paper Series

Randy Barnett has recently argued that the individual mandate is unconstitutional because it is an improper regulation under the Necessary and Proper Clause (in conjunction with the Commerce Clause) because it improperly "commandeers" the people and thereby violates their sovereignty. In this paper, I counter that the argument from sovereignty is unavailing because it is, among other defects, hopelessly ambiguous. The variety of historically attested meanings of "sovereignty" renders the concept useless for purposes of answering questions of comparative authority, including the authority of the Congress to mandate that individuals purchase health insurance from a private market. There is no …

Same-Sex Marriage And The New Judicial Federalism: Why State Courts Should Not Consider Out-Of-State Backlash, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Progressive Constitutionalism, Originalism, And The Significance Of Landmark Decisions In Evaluating Constitutional Theory, William P. Marshall

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Resolving The Qualified Immunity Dilemma: Constitutional Tort Claims For Nominal Damages, James E. Pfander

Faculty Working Papers

Scholars have criticized the Court's qualified immunity decision in Pearson v. Callahan on the ground that it may lead to stagnation in the judicial elaboration of constitutional norms. Under current law, officers sued in their personal capacity for constitutional torts enjoy qualified immunity from liability unless the plaintiff can persuade the court that the conduct in question violated clearly established law. Pearson permits the lower courts to dismiss on the basis of legal uncertainty; it no longer requires the courts to address the merits of the constitutional question. This essay suggests that constitutional tort claimants should be permitted to avoid …

Exceptions: The Criminal Law's Illogical Approach To Hiv-Related Aggravated Assaults, Ari Ezra Waldman

Articles & Chapters

This Article identifies logical and due process errors in HIV-related aggravated assault cases, which usually involve an HIV-positive individual having unprotected sex without disclosing his or her HIV status. While this behavior should not be encouraged, this Article suggests that punishing this conduct through a charge of aggravated assault - which requires a showing that the defendant’s actions were a means likely to cause grievous bodily harm or death - is fraught with fallacies in reasoning and runs afoul of due process. Specifically, some courts use the "rule of thumb" that HIV can possibly be transmitted through bodily fluids as …

The Fifth Freedom: The Constitutional Duty To Provide Public Education, Areto A. Imoukuede

Journal Publications

This Article explains why there is a fundamental duty for the government to provide public education under the U.S. Constitution. Numerous scholars and public officials have written on the need to overrule San Antonio v. Rodriguez or adopt alternative approaches to recognizing a right to public education either judicially or by way of constitutional amendment. This Article identifies a consistent and systemic reluctance by the Court to meaningfully enforce positive rights, which are the duties that the government owes to the people. In doing so, it explores the consistent recognition throughout American history that education is a fundamental duty of …

Doma And Diffusion Theory: Ending Animus Legislation Through A Rational Basis Approach, David J. Herzig

Law Faculty Publications

Same-sex couple rights are the topic of much discussion and debate. There are court challenges to the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) as well as proposed marriage statutes. The message and the structure for the recognition of same-sex rights need to be modified. This Article proposes applying, for the first time in the area, modern sociology theory, specifically Diffusion Theory, to change how the message is delivered. Using Diffusion Theory to change the message frame will change judicial decisions. By using the backdrop of the Florida adoption statute, a comparison between the successful challenges to the Florida …

The Dark Side Of The Force: The Legacy Of Justice Holmes For First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman

All Faculty Scholarship

Modern First Amendment jurisprudence is deeply paradoxical. On one hand, freedom of speech is said to promote fundamental values such as individual self-fulfillment, democratic deliberation, and the search for truth. At the same time, however, many leading decisions protect speech that appears to undermine these values by attacking the dignity and personality of others or their status as full and equal members of the community. In this Article, I explore where this Jekyll-and-Hyde quality of First Amendment jurisprudence comes from. I argue that the American free speech tradition consists of two very different strands: a liberal humanist view that emphasizes …

Popular Constitutionalism On The Right: Lessons From The Tea Party, Christopher W. Schmidt

All Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, I consider the lessons that the Tea Party offers for scholars of popular constitutionalism. Specifically, I argue that the experience of the Tea Party should spark a reconsideration of some assumptions that tend to drive much of the interest in popular constitutionalism. Some who have embraced popular constitutionalism seem to assume that popular constitutional mobilization is a vehicle particularly well suited for advancing progressive constitutional claims. Alternately, some have assumed that popular constitutionalism has no particular ideological or partisan valence - that it is basically a neutral vehicle for advancing constitution claims of all kinds. But the …

The Macondo Well Blowout: Taking The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Seriously, John J. Costonis

Journal Articles

Choice of law issues in marine pollution events engage federal admiralty/general maritime law, federal environmental legislation and the reserved powers of the states to protect their natural resources and economic welfare. Admiralty and general maritime law enjoyed center stage throughout the first two thirds of the last century. Federal marine pollution statutes were few and weak, and state initiatives were typically deemed preempted in all but the so-called “marine but local” cases. The equilibrium began to shift in favor of state police powers and federal environmental values in the mid-1960’s in consequence of the Supreme Court’s solicitude for the former, …

Mcdonald V. Chicago, Self-Defense, The Right To Bear Arms, And The Future, Richard Aynes

Akron Law Faculty Publications

This article examines the opinion of the Court in McDonald v. Chicago and its implications for the future. The author participated as a party-amicus in the case and an article he authored in 1993 was cited by the Court.

Using a concept that others have applied in other situations, this paper suggests that Chicago was a “outlier” and that this case simply involved reigning in a maverick outlier. While the paper finds Justice Thomas’s concurring opinion (with the exception of dicta on the establishment clause) being the most faithful to the meaning, intention, and public understanding of the 14th Amendment, …

Constantly Approximating Popular Sovereignty: Seven Fundamental Principles Of Constitutional Law, Wilson Huhn

Akron Law Faculty Publications

The concept of “popular sovereignty” is not a simple, singular, unified concept; instead, as it has developed in the United States, popular sovereignty embraces the following seven fundamental principles:

1. The Rule of Law. The people are sovereign and their will is expressed through law.

2. Limited Government. The people are sovereign, not the government. By adopting the Constitution the people created the government, imposed limits upon its power, and divided that power among different levels and branches.

3. Inalienable Rights. Every individual person is sovereign in the sense that he or she retains certain inalienable rights, which the government …

Pearson V. Callahan And Qualified Immunity: Impact On First Amendment Law, David L. Hudson Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

An essay on Pearson v. Callahan and its impact on First Amendment Law.