Law Commons^™

The Puzzling Resistance To Judicial Review Of The Legislative Process, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov

Dr. Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov

Should courts have the power to examine the legislature’s enactment process and strike down statutes enacted contrary to procedural lawmaking requirements? This idea remains highly controversial. While substantive judicial review is well-established and often taken for granted, many judges and scholars see judicial review of the legislative process as utterly objectionable. This Article challenges that prevalent position and establishes the case for judicial review of the legislative process. The Article contends that, ironically, some of the major arguments for substantive judicial review in constitutional theory, and even the arguments in Marbury v. Madison itself, are actually more persuasive when applied …

Constituent Authority, Richard Kay

Richard Kay

The force of a constitution, like the force of all enacted law, derives, in significant part, from the circumstances of its enactment. Legal and political theory have long recognized the logical necessity of a “constituent power.” That recognition, however, tells us little about what is necessary for the successful enactment of an enduring constitution. Long term acceptance of a constitution requires a continuing regard for the process that brought it into being. There must be, that is, recognition of the “constituent authority” of the constitution-makers. This paper is a consideration of the idea of “constituent authority” drawing on a comparison …

The Tea Party And The Constitution, Christopher W. Schmidt

Christopher W. Schmidt

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 …

Don’T’ Know Much About History: Constitutional Text, Practice, And Presidential Power, David A. Schultz

David A Schultz

Assertions of presidential supremacy and power in affairs often invoke history, including events during the administration of George Washington, to defend their assertions. This article raises some questions regarding what we can learn from history for constitutional argument. It concedes generally that historical facts can support or buttress constitution argument, but more specifically it contends that acts undertaken by George Washington are problematic assertions for presidential power, especially those that assert “supremacist” or broad if not exclusive claims for presidential foreign policy authority. To do that, this article first describes how history is employed as constitutional argument for presidential power. …

Models Of Subnational Constitutionalism, Jonathan Marshfield

Jonathan Marshfield

The Rise And Fall Of The Miranda Warnings In Popular Culture, Ronald L. Steiner

Ronald L. Steiner

The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2000 decision in Dickerson v. United States was probably the first criminal procedure decision celebrated with an editorial in Broadcasting & Cable magazine. Noting that Chief Justice William Rehnquist opinion relied on the warnings’ well-established place in popular culture, the editorial acknowledged that, “[n]ext to the pledge of allegiance, the Miranda rights may be the most familiar common litany of the baby-boomer generation, thanks to TV.” Professors Richard Leo and George Thomas have similarly observed “suspects are likely to have heard Miranda so many times on television that the Miranda warnings may have a familiar, …

Money And Rights, Deborah Hellman

Deborah Hellman

This article looks at when constitutionally protected rights are interpreted by courts to include a concomitant right to spend money to effectuate the underlying right and when they are not. It concludes that there are two strands in our constitutional law: the Integral Strand, in which a right includes the right to spend money and the Blocked Strand, in which it does not.

Rethinking Proportionality Under The Cruel And Unusual Punishments Clause, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

Although a century has passed since the Supreme Court started reviewing criminal punishments for excessiveness under the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, this area of doctrine remains highly problematic. The Court has never answered the claim that proportionality review is illegitimate in light of the Eighth Amendment’s original meaning. The Court has also adopted an ever-shifting definition of excessiveness, making the very concept of proportionality incoherent. Finally, the Court’s method of measuring proportionality is unreliable and selfcontradictory. As a result, a controlling plurality of the Court has insisted that proportionality review be limited to a narrow class of cases. This …

Due Process In Civil Commitments, Alexander Tsesis

Alexander Tsesis

In one of its most controversial decisions to date, United States v. Comstock, the Roberts Court upheld a federal civil commitment statute requiring only an intermediate burden of proof. The statute provided for the postsentencing confinement of anyone proven by “clear and convincing evidence” to be mentally ill and dangerous. The law relied on a judicial standard established more than thirty years before. The majority in Comstock missed the opportunity to reassess the precedent in light of recent psychiatric studies indicating that the ambiguity of available diagnostic tools can lead to erroneous insanity assessments and mistaken evaluations about patients’ likelihood …

First Amendment Investigations And The Inescapable Pragmatism Of The Common Law Of Free Speech, Lawrence Rosenthal

Lawrence Rosenthal

Scholars have struggled to explain our sprawling First Amendment doctrine – once described by Justice Stevens as “an elaborate mosaic of specific judicial decisions, characteristic of the common law process of case-by-case adjudication.” The position that has gained the most traction in recent scholarship has stressed the primacy of governmental motive – this school of thought argues that the degree of scrutiny to be afforded a challenged regulation is based on an assessment of the likelihood that the regulation reflects a governmental motive to burden disfavored speech or speakers.

This article offers a challenge to the purposivist account. It begins, …

Material Witness Detentions After Al-Kidd, Wesley M. Oliver

Wesley M Oliver

The Supreme Court’s decision in Ashcroft v. al-Kidd was a tempest in a teapot. The Court concluded only that a witness was no less susceptible to arrest under the Federal Material Witness Statute if the government was interested in prosecuting the witness himself. Unremarkably under the holding, it is no more difficult to detain an al-Qaeda member who witnessed a crime than it is to detain an innocent bystander who witnessed a crime. The fact that a criminal suspect can be held, however, raises concerns beyond the scope of the narrow question before the Court. If the government’s real interest …

Prosecution Without Representation, Douglas L. Colbert

Douglas L. Colbert

Nearly 50 years after the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Gideon v. Wainwright established indigent defendants' constitutional right to counsel, poor people throughout the country still remain without a lawyer when first appearing before a judicial officer who determines pretrial liberty or bail. Absent counsel, low-income defendants unable to afford bail remain in jail for periods ranging from 3-70 days until assigned counsel appears in-court. Examining Walter Rothgery's wrongful prosecution, the article includes a national survey that informs readers about the limited right to counsel at the initial appearance and the extent of delay in each of the 50 states. …

Teaching Controversial Topics, Beth A. Burkstrand-Reid

Beth A. Burkstrand-Reid

At the 2009 Future of Family Law Education conference at the William Mitchell School of Law, the authors participated in a panel discussing strategies for teaching controversial topics, which focused on teaching reproductive rights and related gender issues. This essay collects some of the strategies discussed at the conference. First we address what constitutes a “controversial” legal topic, outlining the several different ways in which a topic might be or become controversial within the context of a particular class. Next, we discuss the importance of laying the groundwork, throughout the semester, for the anticipated—and unanticipated— discussions surrounding controversial topics and …

The More Things Change...: Abortion Politics And The Regulation Of Assisted Reproductive Technology, Beth A. Burkstrand-Reid

Beth A. Burkstrand-Reid

Abortion and assisted reproductive technology (“ART”) may seem paradoxical in reproductive health: a woman seeks to terminate a pregnancy in the first, while a woman goes through herculean attempts to attain one in the latter. In fact, they share fundamental concerns: women’s health and autonomy. Both include medical procedures, with potential health risks and benefits, and both help a woman choose whether and when to become a mother. Abortion and ART share another commonality: when these issues enter public and political discourse, consideration of women’s health often recedes into the background.

Constitutional Threats In The E-Commerce Jungle: First Amendment And Dormant Commerce Clause Limits On Amazon Laws And Use Tax Reporting Statutes, Scott W. Gaylord

Scott W. Gaylord

Internet sales continue to increase as consumers take advantage of the convenience and price competition that e-commerce provides. Yet, as North Carolina and other

states have learned, frequently the “lower” prices available online result from the fact that many internet retailers, such as Amazon, do not collect sales tax on such purchases. In fact, under United States Supreme Court precedent, North Carolina and other states cannot require internet retailers such as Amazon that lack any physical presence in a state to collect sales tax.

But what many consumers do not know (or choose to ignore) is that they still owe …

Somebody's Watching Me: Protecting Patient Privacy In De-Identified Prescription Health Information, Christopher R. Smith

Christopher R Smith

Increasingly, legal scholars, state legislatures and the federal courts are examining patient privacy concerns that arise in the context of the dissemination, distribution and use of patient prescription information. However, less attention has been paid to the sharing of de-identified or encrypted patient prescription information versus identifiable patient prescription information. Though many patients may not realize it, identifiable, de-identified and encrypted patient prescription information is being used for a host of purposes other than insurance reimbursement and treatment, most notably for pharmaceutical marketing purposes. Existing state and federal laws and ethical guidelines provide some protection for the privacy of patient …

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

Steven J. Heyman

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 …

Kennedy, Kennedy, And The Eighth Amendment: "Still In Search Of A Unifying Principle"?, Susan Raeker-Jordan

Susan Raeker-Jordan

Thurgood Marshall: The Writer, Anna P. Hemingway, Starla J. Williams, Jennifer M. Lear, Ann E. Fruth

Anna P. Hemingway

“Command And Coercion”: Clerical Immunity, Scandal, And The Sex Abuse Crisis In The Roman Catholic Church, John F. Wirenius

John F. Wirenius

The sex abuse crisis in the Catholic Church has occasioned much scandal, but also much confusion, as trusted institutions and individuals seem to be willfully thwarting criminal investigation and prosecution of terrible crimes. This Article looks at the historical and theological underpinnings of the belief in clerical immunity from secular law, its role in the response to allegations of sexual abuse by clergy, and at the modern effort to engraft clerical immunity into the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause under the “Church Autonomy” doctrine.

When Originalism Attacks: How Justice Scalia's Resort To Original Expected Application In Crawford V. Washington Came Back To Bite Him In Michigan V. Bryant (Forthcoming In 59 Drake L Rev ___ (Symposium Issue)(Summer 2011)), Brendan T. Beery

Brendan T Beery

Rational Treaties: Article Ii, Congressional-Executive Agreements, And International Bargaining, John C. Yoo

John C Yoo

This paper examines the continuing difference between the Constitution’s Article II treaty, and the congressional-executive agreement’s statutory process, to make international agreements. Rather than approach the problem from a textual or historical perspective, it employs a rational choice model of dispute resolution between nation-states in conditions of weak to little enforcement by supranational institutions. It argues that the choice of a treaty or congressional-executive agreement can make an important difference in overcoming various difficulties in bargaining that arise from imperfect information and commitment problems.

Negotiating Federalism, Erin Ryan

Erin Ryan