Law Commons^™

Home As A Legal Concept, Benjamin Barros

ExpressO

This article, which is the first comprehensive discussion of the American legal concept of home, makes two major contributions. First, the article systematically examines how homes are treated more favorably than other types of property in a wide range of legal contexts, including criminal law and procedure, torts, privacy, landlord-tenant, debtor-creditor, family law, and income taxation. Second, the article considers the normative issue of whether this favorable treatment is justified. The article draws from material on the psychological concept of home and the cultural history of home throughout this analysis, providing insight into the interests at stake in various legal …

A Standards-Based Theory Of Judicial Review And The Rule Of Law, Sidney A. Shapiro

ExpressO

The constitutionality of legislative preclusion of judicial review has received considerable attention from constitutional and administrative law scholars. We join this debate by proposing a new approach: a standards-based theory of judicial review based on two fundamental principles. First, whenever government officials make decisions involving the application of legal standards, the rule of law – and hence the rule of law safeguards of due process and judicial review – attach. Second, with the exception of those cases in which the Constitution itself contemplates standardless official discretion, legislative delegations of authority to government actors must contain legal standards that guide and …

Race Against The Machine: An Argument For The Standardization Of Voting Technology, Jason Belmont Conn

ExpressO

In this article/note, I examine a lingering question from the court cases arising out of the 2000 election: Does Bush v. Gore and the relevant equal protection case law open the door for a legal challenge to a state’s use of different voting machines/technologies and how do racial disparities in machine error rates impact this analysis? In addition to reviewing the current literature and case law on voting machine standardization, I also present an unrecognized and undocumented connection between the “all deliberate speed” order in Brown and the Court’s discussion of voting technology in Bush v. Gore.

Bolling, Equal Protection, Due Process, And Lochnerphobia, David E. Bernstein

George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series

In Brown v. Board of Education, the United States Supreme Court invalidated state and local school segregation laws as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. That same day, in Bolling v. Sharpe, the Court held unconstitutional de jure segregation in Washington, D.C.'s public schools under the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Fifty years after it was decided, Bolling remains one of the Warren Court's most controversial decisions.

The controversy reflects the widespread belief that the outcome in Bolling reflected the Justices' political preferences and was not a sound interpretation of the Due Process Clause. The Bolling Court …

Simmons V. Greenville Hospital: An Unusually Stringent Rule Against Retroactive Legislation, Richard W. Miller

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

Applying 42 U.S.C. Section 1981 To Claims Of Consumer Discrimination, Abby Morrow Richardson

ExpressO

This Comment explores several interesting legal questions regarding the proper interpretation 42 U.S.C. Section 1981, which prohibits racial discrimination in contracting, when discrimination arises in the context of a consumer retail contract. It explores how the Fifth Circuit’s and other federal courts’ narrow interpretation of section 1981’s application in a retail setting, which allows plaintiffs to invoke the statute only when they have been prevented from completing their purchase, is contrary to the statute’s express language, Congressional intent, and to evolving concepts of contract theory, all of which encompass our society’s deep commitment to combating racial discrimination through strict enforcement …

The Chief Prosecutor, Sai Prakash

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

Since Watergate, legal scholars have participated in a larger debate about the President’s constitutional relationship to prosecutions. In particular, many legal scholars sought to debunk the received wisdom that prosecution was an executive function subject to presidential control. Revisionist scholars cited early statutes and practices meant to demonstrate that early presidents lacked control over prosecution. Among other things, scholars asserted that early presidents could not control either the federal district attorneys or the popular prosecutors who brought qui tam suits to enforce federal law. In fact, many of the revisionist claims are wrong and others are beside the point. Despite …

Pursuing Justice For The Mentally Disabled, Grant H. Morris

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

This article considers whether lawyers act as zealous advocates when they represent mentally disordered, involuntarily committed patients who wish to assert their right to refuse treatment with psychotropic medication. After discussing a study that clearly demonstrates that lawyers do not do so, the article explores the reasons for this inappropriate behavior. Michael Perlin characterizes the problem as “sanism,” which he describes as an irrational prejudice against mentally disabled persons of the same quality and character as other irrational prejudices that cause and are reflected in prevailing social attitudes of racism, sexism, homophobia, and ethnic bigotry. The article critiques Perlin’s characterization …

Dickerson V. United States: The Case That Disappointed Miranda's Critics--And Then Its Supporters, Yale Kamisar

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

It is difficult, if not impossible, to discuss Dickerson v. United States intelligently without discussing Miranda, whose constitutional status Dickerson reaffirmed (or, one might say, resuscitated). It is also difficult, if not impossible, to discuss the Dickerson case intelligently without discussing cases the Court has handed down in the five years since Dickerson was decided. The hard truth is that in those five years the reaffirmation of Miranda’s constitutional status has become less and less meaningful.

In this paper I want to focus on the Court’s characterization of statements elicited in violation of the Miranda warnings as not actually “coerced” …

Justice Douglas, Justice O'Connor, And George Orwell: Does The Constitution Compel Us To Disown Our Past, Steven D. Smith

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

Justice William O. Douglas's majority opinion in Zorach v. Clauson famously asserted that "[w]e are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being." What did Douglas mean, and was he right? More recently, in cases involving the Ten Commandments, the Pledge of Allegiance and other public expressions and symbols, the Supreme Court has said that the Constitution prohibits government from endorsing religion. Can Douglas's "Supreme Being" assertion be reconciled with the "no endorsement" prohibition? And does the more modern doctrine demand that we forget, falsify, or forswear our pervasively religious political heritage? This essay, presented as the William O. …

The Paradox Of Omnipotence: Courts, Constitutions, And Commitments, David S. Law

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

Sovereigns, like individuals, must sometimes make commitments that limit their own freedom of action in order to accomplish their goals. Social scientists have observed that constitutional arrangements can, by restricting a sovereign's power, enable the sovereign to make such commitments. This paper advances several claims about the commitment problems that sovereigns face. First, constitutions do not necessarily solve such problems but can instead aggravate them, by entrenching inalienable governmental powers and immunities. Second, sovereigns and other actors face two distinct varieties of commitment problems - undercommitment and overcommitment - between which they must steer: an actor that can bind itself …

It's Not The Thought That Counts, Deborah S. Hellman

ExpressO

The article considers a central question about discrimination – are an actor’s intentions relevant to whether an action wrongfully discriminates – and takes issue with a familiar answer to this question. If one thinks of “discrimination” in its literal sense, as simply drawing distinctions among people on the basis of possessing or lacking some trait, it becomes clear that discrimination is ubiquitous and often benign. The challenge is to distinguish when discrimination is permissible and when it is not. One common answer to this question is that it is the intentions of the actor who adopts or enacts a law, …

Reviving A Natural Right: The Freedom Of Autonomy, Michael Anthony Lawrence

ExpressO

America in the early twenty-first century is a place where oppressive state constitutional amendments discriminate against millions of gay Americans; where compassionate end-of-life choice is illegal in 49 states and where the one state where it is legal is being sued by the U.S. government; where hundreds of thousands are arrested yearly and tens of thousands are in prison for private possession or use of marijuana; where a woman’s right to maintain control over her own reproductive decisions hangs by a thread; and where religious freedom is under relentless attack.

Whatever became of the ideal that represented the very foundation …

The Crawford Issue- The Supreme Court Sharpens The Teeth Of The Confrontation Clause, Nathan Reed Haines

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Foreword: Beyond Blakely And Booker: Pondering Modern Sentencing Process, Douglas A. Berman

The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Working Paper Series

The Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Blakely v. Washington and its federal follow-up United States v. Booker are formally about the meaning and reach of the Sixth Amendment’s right to a jury trial. But these decisions implicate and reflect, both expressly and implicitly, a much broader array of constitutional provisions and principles, in particular, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments and the notice provision of the Sixth Amendment. And the future structure and operation of modern sentencing systems may greatly depend on how courts and others approach the due process provisions and principles which lurk in …

Rehnquist And Federalism: An Empirical Perspective, Ruth Colker, Kevin Scott

The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Working Paper Series

We attempt to articulate a vision of federalism, particularly the Rehnquist version of federalism. We find that there is little consistent thought on the role of the judiciary in protecting federalism. This lack of consensus makes it difficult to predict the decisions federalists might make, but we attempt to outline Chief Justice Rehnquist's contributions to understanding the role courts should play in protecting federalism. We then attempt to assess if Rehnquist adheres to his own vision of federalism. Using his votes since his elevation to Chief Justice in 1986, we test several hypotheses designed to determine if Chief Justice Rehnquist …

Reviving A Natural Right: The Freedom Of Autonomy Amendment, Michael Anthony Lawrence

ExpressO

America in the early twenty-first century is a place where oppressive state constitutional amendments discriminate against millions of gay Americans; where compassionate end-of-life choice is illegal in 49 states and where the one state where it is legal is being sued by the U.S. government; where hundreds of thousands are arrested yearly and tens of thousands are in prison for private possession or use of marijuana; where a woman’s right to maintain control over her own reproductive decisions hangs by a thread; and where religious freedom is under relentless attack.

Whatever became of the ideal that represented the very foundation …

Reviving A Natural Right: The Freedom Of Autonomy Amendment, Michael Anthony Lawrence

ExpressO

Reviving a Natural Right: The Freedom of Autonomy Amendment

Michael Anthony Lawrence

Something is wrong in twenty-first century America when it comes to recognizing certain “self-evident truths” of freedom identified in its founding document nearly 23 decades ago. In particular, the United States today fails to uphold the core principle of the Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal: that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights: that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” This description was more than just an accidental well-turned phrase – as demonstrated by the historical record, …

Copyright Law, The Production Of Creative Works And Cultural Growth In Cyberspace , Alina Ng

ExpressO

The Internet has affected information flow in copyrighted content in a profound manner. Authors and artists are enabled through the Internet to assert greater control over the flow of information in their works as these new technologies offer new and different distribution channels for content. These new technologies also allow consumers to use content in ways, which had not been anticipated by the copyright industries. This paper presents that copyright law was developed for a specific purpose, which was to encourage learning and growth. As new technologies emerge and as content industries experience changes in information flow in copyrighted works, …

Copyright Law, The Production Of Creative Works And Cultural Growth In Cyberspace , Alina Ng

ExpressO

The Internet has affected information flow in copyrighted content in a profound manner. Authors and artists are enabled through the Internet to assert greater control over the flow of information in their works as these new technologies offer new and different distribution channels for content. These new technologies also allow consumers to use content in ways, which had not been anticipated by the copyright industries. This paper presents that copyright law was developed for a specific purpose, which was to encourage learning and growth. As new technologies emerge and as content industries experience changes in information flow in copyrighted works, …

The Paradox Of Omnipotence: Courts, Constitutions, And Commitments, David S. Law

ExpressO

Sovereigns, like individuals, must sometimes make commitments that limit their own freedom of action in order to accomplish their goals. Social scientists have observed that constitutional arrangements can, by restricting a sovereign’s power, enable the sovereign to make such commitments. This essay advances several claims about the commitment problems that sovereigns face. First, constitutions do not necessarily solve such problems but can instead aggravate them, by entrenching inalienable governmental powers and immunities. Second, sovereigns and other actors face two distinct varieties of commitment problems – undercommitment and overcommitment – between which they must steer: an actor that can bind itself …

“Oh Lord, Please Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood!”: Rediscovering The Penn Central And Mathews V. Eldridge Frameworks, Gary Lawson, Katharine A. Ferguson, Guillermo Montero

ExpressO

The manuscript re-examines the origins and purposes of two of the most misunderstood constructs in modern legal doctrine: the so-called Penn-Central and Mathews v. Eldridge three-factor tests. We say “so-called,” because neither case actually invented a three-factor test. Penn Central set forth a framework involving two factors that later cases (unwisely, in our view) expanded to three, and the framework in Mathews was initially crafted by litigators in the Solicitor General’s office in order to resolve the specific issue facing the Court in that case. More significantly, neither Penn Central nor Mathews purported to set forth a methodology for deciding …

Does The Establishment Clause Require Religion To Be Confined To The Private Sphere?, Kevin Pybas

ExpressO

Through the first four decades or so of the U.S. Supreme Court’s church-state jurisprudence the Court generally sought to confine religion to the private sphere, on the grounds that the establishment clause requires such a result. While the Rehnquist Court has been more open to religion in the public sphere than previous Courts, the claim that the establishment clause requires religion to be restricted to the private sphere retains strong support among a minority of Supreme Court justices. Witness Justice Souter’s fierce objection, in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002), to the Court’s approval of the use of publicly funded tuition vouchers …

Fig Leaf Federalism And Tenth Amendment Exceptionalism, Nelson Lund

George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series

The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence of federalism is at best undergoing an unfinished transformation, and is at worst just troubled and unsatisfying. In a little-noticed dissent in Tennessee v. Lane, Justice Scalia proposed an approach that could be generalized well beyond the specific position that he took in that case. Thus generalized, this approach may be understood as an elaboration of a proposal made by Justice O’Connor in her dissenting opinion twenty years ago in Garcia v. San Antonio Metro. Transit Auth. If adopted by the Court, this synthesis of the O’Connor and Scalia suggestions could work a real transformation in …

Constitutionalism Through The Looking Glass Of Latin America, Miguel Schor

ExpressO

This Article explores the following question: why did constitutionalism in Latin America take a different path than in the United States? Constitutions were adopted throughout the New World in the wake of independence movements in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries to effectuate republican government. Yet constitutionalism in Latin America led to dictatorship whereas constitutionalism in the United States led to republican government. The conventional answer to this issue is that the constitution was entrenched in the United States because law is independent from politics, whereas constitutions were not entrenched in Latin America because politics trumped constitutions. This Article …

Reflections On The Teaching Of Constitutional Law, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Courtside, Paul M. Smith, Katherine A. Fallow, Daniel Mach, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Cleaning Up The Eighth Amendment Mess, Tom Stacy

ExpressO

This article criticizes the Court’s interpretation of the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause and proposes its own understanding. The Court’s jurisprudence is plagued by deep inconsistencies concerning the text, the Court’s own role, and a constitutional requirement of proportionate punishment.

In search of ways to redress these fundamental shortcomings, the article explores three alternative interpretations: 1) A textualist approach; 2) Justice Scalia’s understanding that the Clause forbids only punishments unacceptable for all offenses; and 3) a majoritarian approach that would consistently define cruel and unusual punishment in terms of legislative judgments and penal custom. As evidenced by the …

The Hydraulics And Politics Of Party Regulation, Michael S. Kang

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

New Light On The Decision Of 1789, Sai Prakash

ExpressO

In the Constitution’s earliest days, members of the House engaged in one of the nation’s most momentous constitutional debates. While deliberating on the Department of Foreign Affairs bill, representatives considered the mechanisms for removing executive officers. The final Act conveyed no removal authority but discussed what would happen when the president removed the Secretary of Foreign Affairs. The traditional view of the Decision, voiced by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and William Howard Taft, is that because the Act conveyed no removal authority and laid out what would happen when the president removed, the Act presumed that the president had a …