Law Commons^™

Identical Constitutional Language: What Is A State Court To Do? The Ohio Case Of State V. Robinette, Marianna Brown Bettman

Akron Law Review

We are in the era of rediscovery of state constitutional law. In Ohio, there has been an official announcement of this in the syllabus of a highly significant case, Arnold v. City of Cleveland. In Ohio, the syllabus is the law of the case. The syllabus of Arnold begins with the simple but dramatic statement, "The Ohio Constitution is a document of independent force." It goes on to state, in the remainder of the paragraph, the basic guidepost of federal/state relations in the area of individual rights: In the areas of individual rights and civil liberties, the United States Constitution, …

Youth Suffrage: In Support Of The Second Wave, Mae C. Quinn, Caridad Dominguez, Chelsey Omega, Abrafi Osei-Kofi, Carlye Owens

Akron Law Review

The 19th Amendment is talked about as central to our nation’s suffrage story, with many situating women's suffrage work within feminist theory "wave" discourse. However, with this telling, scholars and others too frequently overlook young voters and efforts relating to their election law rights. This article seeks to remedy this oversight and complicate the voting rights canon, in addition to supporting efforts of today’s youth voting rights advocates. It does so by turning our attention to youth suffrage movements, which we argue also can be examined by way of a framework of "waves." The first to offer such an historical …

Felony Disenfranchisement And The Nineteenth Amendment, Michael Gentithes

Akron Law Review

The Nineteenth Amendment and the history of the women’s suffrage movement can offer a compelling argument against felony disenfranchisement laws. These laws leave approximately six million citizens unable to vote, often for crimes wholly unrelated to the political process. They also increasingly threaten gains in female enfranchisement.

Today’s arguments in support of felony disenfranchisement laws bear striking similarities to the arguments of anti-suffragists more than a century earlier. Both suggest that a traditionally subordinated class of citizens is inherently incapable of bearing the responsibility that the right to vote entails, and that their votes are somehow less worthy than others. …

The Temperance Movement's Impact On Adoption Of Women's Suffrage, Richard H. Chused

Akron Law Review

This paper examines the nature of the Progressive Era and the Prohibition Movement and the important links between the sentiments giving rise to prohibition and those stimulating adoption of suffrage. Though each arose from a somewhat distinct array of reform impulses and overcame varying opposition groups, they were closely related in some ways, supported by overlapping groups of people, advanced by large numbers of women, and, in part, lifted to enactment by similar motivations. Indeed, without the support of many conservative citizens approving both Amendments, it is not clear what the fate of suffrage would have been after World War …

"A Woman Stumps Her State": Nellie G. Robinson And Women's Right To Hold Public Office In Ohio, Elizabeth D. Katz

Akron Law Review

In recognition of the centennial of the Nineteenth Amendment, this essay provides an introduction to a largely overlooked yet essential component of the women’s movement: the pursuit of women’s legal right to hold public office. From the mid-nineteenth century through ratification of the federal suffrage amendment in 1920, women demanded access to appointed and elected positions, ranging from notary public to mayor. Because the legal right to hold office had literal and symbolic connections to the right to vote, suffragists and antisuffragists were deeply invested in the outcome. Courts and legislatures varied in their responses, with those in the Midwest …

Suffragist Prisoners And The Importance Of Protecting Prisoner Protests, Nicole B. Godfrey

Akron Law Review

This paper examines the role that public exposure to the conditions experienced by suffragist prisoners played in the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. Using the experience of the suffragists as an example of how prisoner protest impacted democratic debate, the paper argues that robust protection of prisoners’ First Amendment rights is fundamental to the nation’s democratic values and political discourse and debate.

The paper begins with an historical overview of the arrests, convictions, and incarceration of the Silent Sentinels, women who began picketing outside the White House in 1917. Over the course of several months, local officials in the District …

Justice Scalia As Neither Friend Nor Foe To Criminal Defendants, Tung Yin

Akron Law Review

At first glance, Justice Scalia may appear to have been something of a “friend” to criminal defendants, as he authored a number of opinions ruling against law enforcement. However, his opinions reflect his fidelity to his constitutional vision of originalism rather than an intent to favor criminal defendants. Nevertheless, these cases are often offered as legitimate examples of how he did not have a purely results-oriented approach to deciding criminal procedure issues. Yet, a closer examination of Justice Scalia’s “defendant-favorable” opinions suggests that the results often have an air of unreality to them. In practice, there is no way for …

Rights Of State Prisoners - Federal Court Intervention In State Prison Administration; Jones V. Wittenberg, Ronald L. Collins

Akron Law Review

The path to federal court intervention into state prison administration has been a tortuous and rocky one.... Jones v. Wittenberg carries federal court intervention into state prison administration to new lengths. Until more basic and lasting changes are made on the part of society and the states, such intervention seems to be the best chance for ameliorating conditions in our state penal systems.

Constitutional Law - Flag Desecration Statutes - Freedom Of Expression; Parker V. Morgan, Bruce C. Heslop

Akron Law Review

Viewed in its broad perspective, Parker v. Morgan has further clarified and circumscribed the constitutional limits of the state's power to protect the American flag from public acts of desecration. In this respect it may be considered to provide further insight into the constitutional questions involved in this relatively untouched area of the law. However, until authoritative consideration has been given to the nature and source of those protective powers which are reserved to a state, Parker v. Morgan cannot be regarded to have drawn the ultimate lines of demarcation for the constitutional validity of flag desecration statutes. A meaningful …

Constitutional Law And Secured Transactions: State Action V. Private Action - Uniform Commercial Code Self-Help; Repossession Provisions - Do Not Violate Due Process Requirements; Adams V. Southern California First National Bank, David M. Hunter

Akron Law Review

Several years ago, the United States Supreme Court, in Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp.,' signaled what has been eventually interpreted in subsequent decisions as the strict measurement of creditors' rights against the requirements of due process set forth in the fourteenth amendment. What has since transpired has been an onslaught of litigation in this area of such magnitude that the due process requirements of prior notice and hearing found in Sniadach have been extended to virtually all forms of prejudgment remedies available to the aggrieved creditor. Despite all of this, the rationale of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth …

Obscenity - New First Amendment Standards; Miller V. California, Stacy E. Wolfe

Akron Law Review

It has been over fifteen years since the Supreme Court embarked on its precarious course of determining the Constitutional boundaries for control of obscenity by the state and federal governments. The Court's first attempt to define the meaning of obscenity and ultimately determine the Constitutional protection afforded this expression was in Roth v. United States. What has followed can only be characterized as a series of irreconcilable conflicts and discrepancies that have left the law in this area in total confusion. Recently, the Court in Miller v. California has again attempted to provide "concrete guidelines to isolate 'hard core' pornography …

Fifth Amendment - Due Process Clause- Sex Discrimination - Sex: A Suspect Classification; Frontiero V. Richardson, John J. Cook

Akron Law Review

Sharon A. Frontiero, a lieutenant in the United States Air Force, sought increased benefits for her husband as a "dependent" under 37 U.S.C. Sections 401, 4031 and 10 U.S.C. Sections 1072, 10762 Those statutes provide that spouses of male members of the uniformed services are always dependents for purposes of obtaining increased quarters allowances and medical and dental benefits, but that spouses of female members are not dependents unless they are, in fact, dependent for over one-half of their support.3

Equal Protection - Property Taxes As A Method Of Funding Public Education; San Antonio Independent School District V. Rodriguez, Mark K. Croft

Akron Law Review

Suit was brought in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas challenging the constitutionality of the Texas school financing system on the theory that it discriminated on a basis of wealth, permitting provision of a higher quality of education to be offered the children in property-rich school districts while residents pay a lower tax rate, thus denying equal protection of the law.' The District Court found the laws forming this system unconstitutional on this basis. Appeal brought the case to the Supreme Court in October of 1972, where it was reversed.

Obscenity - Liquor Regulations; California V. Larue, Richard Bernstein

Akron Law Review

The state has the power to regulate the distribution of liquor and enforce health and safety regulations, but the state may not broadly stifle First Amendment freedoms when doing so. "The breath of legislative abridgement must be viewed in the light of less drastic means for achieving the same basic purpose." s The Court has consistently held that only a compelling state interest in the regulation of a subject within the state's constitutional power to regulate can justify limiting First Amendment freedoms.

Search And Seizure - Warrantless Search- Allowable Extent Incident To Arrest; United States V. Robinson, John Nelson Childs

Akron Law Review

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Metropolitan Policeman Richard Jencks, on April 19, 1968, halted Willie Robinson for a "routine spot check."' While examining Robinson's driver's license, motor vehicle registration, and selective service card, Officer Jencks noticed an 11-year discrepancy between the two birthdates listed on his driver's license and his draft card. Upon a later check of police traffic records, Officer Jencks discovered that an operator's permit issued to "Willie Robinson, Jr.," born in 1927, had been revoked and that a temporary license had been issued to a "Willie Robinson," born in 1938. Four days later, the same officer observed Robinson operating …

Student Rights Under The Due Process Clause . . . Suspensions From Public Schools; Goss V. Lopez, Glenn W. Soden

Akron Law Review

IN ADDRESSING ITSELF to the constitutionality of Section 3316.66 of the Ohio Revised Code,' the United States Supreme Court in Goss v. Lopez has ruled for the first time upon the extent to which the rights of students are to be protected under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment in conjunction with any disciplinary removal from a public school. By its action the Court has tacitly undertaken to lift the cloud on student rights which has existed under the common law doctrine of in loco parentis, and interpose procedural safeguards upon any decision of school officials to deprive …

Marriage Rights; Homosexuals And Transsexuals; B. V. B.,, William D. Lentz

Akron Law Review

WHAT IS A MARRIAGE? Although there are several definitions, they all contain one common element: the union of one man and one woman. However, if a particular state had no statute which specifically required that marriage be between a man and a woman would the courts uphold a marriage between members of the same sex? The New York Supreme Court, in B. v. B., answered that question in the negative. In that case the wife brought an action for annulment on the ground that her husband was a female, and the husband attempted to amend his answer and counterclaim for …

Courts, Creditors' Rights; Debtors' Protection; Sequestration; Mitchell V. W.T. Grant Co., Sandra J. Pickut

Akron Law Review

SINCE 1969, AND TE DECISION in Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp.,' the confrontation between the creditor and the constitution has continued apace. Sniadach began an expansion of the measure of due process applicable to creditors' prejudgment remedies, and heralded a new era of protection for the property interests of vendee-debtors under the cloak of the fourteenth amendment. However, the most recent decision of the Supreme Court on summary prejudgment remedies, Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co., appears to have abruptly halted that expansion and has returned judicial thinking to a concept of due process prevalent in the pre-Sniadach era. Accordingly, …

Section 1983 - Eleventh Amendment - Executive Immunity; Scheuer V. Rhodes

Akron Law Review

0N APRIL 29, 1970, the Governor of Ohio called out elements of the Ohio National Guard in response to alleged civil disorders in the city of Kent, Ohio, and on the campus of Kent State University. In the course of the resulting confrontation between students and members of the Guard, four students were shot and killed. The personal representatives of the estates of three of the deceased students brought actions for damages under the Civil Rights Act of 18711 naming the Governor, the Adjutant General of the Ohio National Guard, various officers and members of the Guard, and the president …

Searches And Seizures - Banks And Banking - Witnesses - Right To Privacy; California Bankers Association V. Schultz, David F. Dybvig

Akron Law Review

FOLLOWING EXTENSIVE HEARINGS, Congress enacted what has become known as the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970. In California Bankers Association v. Schultz, certain parts of the Act were subjected to constitutional attack by various plaintiffs, including individual bank customers, a national bank, a bankers association, and the American Civil Liberties Union, representing itself and its bank customer members. The plaintiffs' challenges rested on the first, fourth, fifth, ninth, tenth, and fourteenth amendments.

Divorce - Pendente Lite Awards - Counsel Fees - Costs - Alimony - Effect Of Equal Rights Amendment; Wiegand V. Wiegand, Joseph M. Donley

Akron Law Review

THE PENNSYLVANIA SUPERIOR COURT, in Wiegand v. Wiegand,struck out at one of the true bastions of sex discrimination incorporated into the Anglo-American legal system. The legislated discrimination of the Pennsylvania Divorce Law was the object of the court's scrutiny. Appellee Sara Wiegand had filed a complaint in divorce a mensa et thora, a petition for alimony, and an initial petition for alimony pendente lite, counsel fees, and expenses. On August 14, 1967, the Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County, ordered appellant Myron Wiegand to pay $875 per month alimony pendente lite and $250 preliminary counsel fees. Subsequently, appellee filed additional …

Standing; Assertion Of Jus Tertii; Sex Discrimination; Equal Protection; Twenty-First Amendment; Craig V. Boren, Anthony Sadowski

Akron Law Review

"A PPELLANTS brought an action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. The complaint charged that the operation of two Oklahoma statutes, which prohibited the sale of 3.2% beer to males under the age of 21 while allowing females over the age of 18 to purchase the commodity, violated the fourteenth amendment to the Federal Constitution. The three-judge court held that the gender-based classification did not violate the equal protection clause. In Craig v. Boren, on direct appeal, the United States Supreme Court reversed, finding that the gender-based classification could …

Standing; Assertion Of Jus Tertii; Sex Discrimination; Equal Protection; Twenty-First Amendment; Craig V. Boren, Anthony Sadowski

Akron Law Review

APPELLANTS brought an action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.' The complaint charged that the operation of two Oklahoma statutes,' which prohibited the sale of 3.2% beer to males under the age of 21 while allowing females over the age of 18 to purchase the commodity, violated the fourteenth amendment to the Federal Constitution. The three-judge court held that the gender-based classification did not violate the equal protection clause.' In Craig v. Boren,' on direct appeal, the United States Supreme Court reversed, finding that the gender-based classification could not …

Municipal Zoning; Mandatory Referendum For Zoning Amendments; Lawful Delegation Of Legislative Power; Due Process; City Of Eastlake V. Forest City Enterprises, Inc., Elizabeth Reilly

Akron Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Rights Act; Section 1981; Title Vii; Reverse Discrimination; Equal Protection; Mcdonald V. Santa Fe Trail Transp. Co., Caroline Williams

Akron Law Review

No abstract provided.

Civil Rights Act; Section 1981; Title Vii; Reverse Discrimination; Equal Protection; Mcdonald V. Santa Fe Trail Transp. Co., Caroline Williams

Akron Law Review

THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT in McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co.' held that Title VIP prohibits racial discrimination by both employers and unions against white persons upon the same standards as it prohibits racial discrimination against nonwhites. The Court further held that Section 19811 is applicable to racial discrimination in private employment against white persons as well as nonwhites.

Municipal Zoning; Mandatory Referendum For Zoning Amendments; Lawful Delegation Of Legislative Power; Due Process; City Of Eastlake V. Forest City Enterprises, Inc., Elizabeth Reilly

Akron Law Review

IN City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, Inc.," the United States Supreme Court held that a mandatory referendum on all zoning changes did not violate the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. The Court decided that such referenda are not delegations of legislative power, but exercises of the people's reserved power. Therefore, they need not be accompanied by discernible standards as with delegations of power to administrative agencies.

Abortion, Parental And Spousal Consent, Requirements; Right To Privacy; Planned Parenthood Of Central Missouri V. Danforth, Sharon L. Long, Patricia Ravenscraft

Akron Law Review

TWO MISSOURI-LICENSED physicians and Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri, a nonprofit corporation, originally brought this suit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri to challenge the constitutionality of the Missouri abortion statute' (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Striking as "overbroad" only that portion of the Act which would have required physicians to attempt to save an aborted fetus' life at any stage of pregnancy, the district court upheld the sections of the statute which required that during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, a married woman seeking an abortion must have the consent of her spouse,' …

Abortion, Parental And Spousal Consent, Requirements; Right To Privacy; Planned Parenthood Of Central Missouri V. Danforth, Sharon L. Long, Patricia Ravenscraft

Akron Law Review

TWO MISSOURI-LICENSED physicians and Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri, a nonprofit corporation, originally brought this suit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri to challenge the constitutionality of the Missouri abortion statute' (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Striking as "overbroad" only that portion of the Act which would have required physicians to attempt to save an aborted fetus' life at any stage of pregnancy,2 the district court upheld the sections of the statute which required that during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, a married woman seeking an abortion must have the consent of her spouse,' …

Double Jeopardy; Juvenile Courts; Transfer To Criminal Court; Adjudicatory Proceedings; Breed V. Jones, Barry S. Mittenthal

Akron Law Review

THE FIFTH AMENDMENT prohibition against double jeopardy is designed to protect both federal and state' defendants from the embarrassment, expense and ordeal of successive criminal trials, which not only create anxiety and uncertainty in an accused, but also increase the danger that an innocent person may be convicted.' However, as a result of the "juvenile court's assumed ability to function in a unique manner"' a juvenile is not extended the protection of the panoply of constitutional rights afforded an adult in a criminal proceeding. Accordingly, the Supreme Court, in Breed v. Jones, was called upon to determine the applicability and …