Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Constitutional law

Discipline
Institution
Publication Year
Publication
Publication Type
File Type

Articles 1141 - 1170 of 3543

Full-Text Articles in Law

Section 1983 - Eleventh Amendment - Executive Immunity; Scheuer V. Rhodes Aug 2015

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 …

Go to article

Searches And Seizures - Banks And Banking - Witnesses - Right To Privacy; California Bankers Association V. Schultz, David F. Dybvig Aug 2015

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.

Go to article

Divorce - Pendente Lite Awards - Counsel Fees - Costs - Alimony - Effect Of Equal Rights Amendment; Wiegand V. Wiegand, Joseph M. Donley Aug 2015

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 …

Go to article

Standing; Assertion Of Jus Tertii; Sex Discrimination; Equal Protection; Twenty-First Amendment; Craig V. Boren, Anthony Sadowski Aug 2015

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 …

Go to article

Standing; Assertion Of Jus Tertii; Sex Discrimination; Equal Protection; Twenty-First Amendment; Craig V. Boren, Anthony Sadowski Aug 2015

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 …

Go to article

Municipal Zoning; Mandatory Referendum For Zoning Amendments; Lawful Delegation Of Legislative Power; Due Process; City Of Eastlake V. Forest City Enterprises, Inc., Elizabeth Reilly Aug 2015

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.

Go to article

Civil Rights Act; Section 1981; Title Vii; Reverse Discrimination; Equal Protection; Mcdonald V. Santa Fe Trail Transp. Co., Caroline Williams Aug 2015

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.

Go to article

Civil Rights Act; Section 1981; Title Vii; Reverse Discrimination; Equal Protection; Mcdonald V. Santa Fe Trail Transp. Co., Caroline Williams Aug 2015

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.

Go to article

Municipal Zoning; Mandatory Referendum For Zoning Amendments; Lawful Delegation Of Legislative Power; Due Process; City Of Eastlake V. Forest City Enterprises, Inc., Elizabeth Reilly Aug 2015

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.

Go to article

Abortion, Parental And Spousal Consent, Requirements; Right To Privacy; Planned Parenthood Of Central Missouri V. Danforth, Sharon L. Long, Patricia Ravenscraft Aug 2015

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,' …

Go to article

Abortion, Parental And Spousal Consent, Requirements; Right To Privacy; Planned Parenthood Of Central Missouri V. Danforth, Sharon L. Long, Patricia Ravenscraft Aug 2015

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,' …

Go to article

Double Jeopardy; Juvenile Courts; Transfer To Criminal Court; Adjudicatory Proceedings; Breed V. Jones, Barry S. Mittenthal Aug 2015

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 …

Go to article

Civil Commitment Of Mentally Ill; Right To Treatment; Parens Patriae Power; Right To Liberty; Donaldson V. O'Connor, Gary G. Cooper Aug 2015

Civil Commitment Of Mentally Ill; Right To Treatment; Parens Patriae Power; Right To Liberty; Donaldson V. O'Connor, Gary G. Cooper

Akron Law Review

THE RESPONDENT, Kenneth Donaldson, was involuntarily civilly committed! as a mental patient' in the Florida State Hospital at Chattahoochee. He remained confined for almost 15 years.' During that time he received little or no psychiatric care or treatment. His confinement was a "simple regime of enforced custodial care, not a program designed to alleviate or cure his supposed illness."' Donaldson, who was not aggressive or belligerent, repeatedly attempted to secure his release, claiming that the defendants unjustifiably continued to confine him despite attempts by responsible parties to have him released to their custody. In February, 1971, Donaldson filed suit under …

Go to article

Administrative Agencies; Subpoena Power; Relevancy; Right Of Privacy; Atchison, Topeka & Sante Fe Ry. Co. V. Lopez, David L. Hostetler Aug 2015

Administrative Agencies; Subpoena Power; Relevancy; Right Of Privacy; Atchison, Topeka & Sante Fe Ry. Co. V. Lopez, David L. Hostetler

Akron Law Review

The Kansas Supreme Court in Sante Fe has joined the majority of states in declaring that administrative "fishing expeditions" via the use of subpoena powers are now permissible. No probable cause need be shown and confidential information may be subject to subpoena if there is even a mere possibility of relevance to a matter within the scope of the agency's authority. The state's interest in preventing discrimination in employment practices has been declared a "compelling state interest" such as to override any claims to rights of privacy. Although primarily discussing only arrest and conviction records, the court in actuality upheld …

Go to article

Economic Discrimination; Denial Of Social Security Benefits Premised On Gender-Based Classification Is Unconstitutional; Violates Equal Protection; Weinberger V. Wiesenfeld, Janice M. Ahern Aug 2015

Economic Discrimination; Denial Of Social Security Benefits Premised On Gender-Based Classification Is Unconstitutional; Violates Equal Protection; Weinberger V. Wiesenfeld, Janice M. Ahern

Akron Law Review

After his wife's death, Wiesenfeld applied for social security survivor benefits for himself and his infant son. While he was able to obtain benefits for his son under 42 U.S.C. Section 402(d), he was denied benefits under Section 402(g) because those benefits were available only to widows and surviving divorced mothers. When his application was denied, Wiesenfeld brought suit in federal district court to obtain declaratory and injunctive relief,' contending that the gender-based classification of 42 U.S.C. Section 402(g) violated equal protection as found within the due process clause of the fifth amendment.' A three-judge district court panel granted relief …

Go to article

Abortion; Parental Consent; Minors' Rights To Due Process, Equal Protection And Privacy; State V. Koome, Barbara Child Aug 2015

Abortion; Parental Consent; Minors' Rights To Due Process, Equal Protection And Privacy; State V. Koome, Barbara Child

Akron Law Review

The Washington court had before it a physician appealing his conviction for performing an abortion on an unmarried 16-year-old woman, a ward of the King County Juvenile Court, which had given its consent to the abortion. However, the young woman's parents and the Catholic Children's Services, her temporary guardian, both opposed the abortion and were granted a stay of the abortion order pending review by the state supreme court. During the stay, Dr. Koome performed the abortion. The supreme court held that the Washington consent statute "too broadly encumbers the right of unmarried minor women to choose to terminate pregnancy, …

Go to article

The Hohfeldian Approach To Constitutional Cases, H. Newcomb Morse Aug 2015

The Hohfeldian Approach To Constitutional Cases, H. Newcomb Morse

Akron Law Review

INFERRED, OR AT THE MOST rebuttably presumed, is a slight acquaintanceship on the part of the reader with the work on jural opposites and jural correlatives by Professor W. Newcomb Hohfeld. The Founding Fathers, as though anticipating the coming of the Messianic logician, used all of the four Hohfeldian gravamen terms-rights, privileges, powers and immunities-in the Constitution of the United States,' and for this reason the author perceives a nexus between Hohfeldian logic and constitutional construction. The appropriate initial touchstone for contemporary use of this theory could appear to be the 1968 case of Flast v. Cohen, considering Mr. Justice …

Go to article

Separation Of Powers; Bill Of Attainder; Presidential Papers; Chief Executive's Right To Privacy; Nixon V. Administrator Of General Services, Patricia L. Spencer Aug 2015

Separation Of Powers; Bill Of Attainder; Presidential Papers; Chief Executive's Right To Privacy; Nixon V. Administrator Of General Services, Patricia L. Spencer

Akron Law Review

In addressing itself to the constitutionality of the "Presidential Recording and Materials Preservation Act," the United States Supreme Court in Nixon v. Administrator of General Services (Nixon II) ruled for the first time on the permissible extent of congressional authority to regulate the disposition of official records and papers of a former chief executive. By its action, the Court undertook to reverse two hundred years of practice by past presidents.

Go to article

Corporal Punishment In Schools; Due Process; Cruel And Unusual Punishment; Ingraham V. Wright, Mary W. Altier Aug 2015

Corporal Punishment In Schools; Due Process; Cruel And Unusual Punishment; Ingraham V. Wright, Mary W. Altier

Akron Law Review

Corporal punishment as a means of disciplining school children has been used in this country since colonial days. There have been various constitutional attacks on the practice of inflicting corporal punishment, with varying results, and the issue was finally brought before the Supreme Court in Ingraham v. Wright. The Court decided on April 19, 1977 that the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause of the eighth amendment does not apply to disciplinary corporal punishment in public schools and that the Due Process Clause of the fourteenth amendment does not require notice and hearing prior to imposition of corporal punishment, as …

Go to article

State Funding Of Nontherapeutic Abortions; Medicaid Plans; Equal Protection; Right To Choose An Abortion; Beal V. Doe, Maher V. Roe, Poelker V. Doe, Constance Leistiko Aug 2015

State Funding Of Nontherapeutic Abortions; Medicaid Plans; Equal Protection; Right To Choose An Abortion; Beal V. Doe, Maher V. Roe, Poelker V. Doe, Constance Leistiko

Akron Law Review

In Beal v. Doe the United States Supreme Court held that Title XIX of the Social Security Act permits but does not require states participating in the Medicaid program established by that Act to fund nontherapeutic abortions. In the companion cases of Maher v. Roe and Poelker v. Doe, the same majority held in Maher that the Equal Protection Clause does not require a state that funds childbirth and therapeutic abortions to also fund the costs of nontherapeutic abortions, and in Poelker, that the Constitution does not prohibit a state or city from forbidding the performance of elective …

Go to article

Sixth Amendment; Right Of Confrontation; Unavailalbe Witness; State V. Roberts, Christopher C. Manthey, Carol G. Simonetti Jul 2015

Sixth Amendment; Right Of Confrontation; Unavailalbe Witness; State V. Roberts, Christopher C. Manthey, Carol G. Simonetti

Akron Law Review

"THE SIXTH AMENDMENT to the Constitution states that "[iln all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him .... ." This seems simple and absolute, but case law has proven it to be neither; almost every phrase has been dissected and interpreted by courts and commentators. In fact, there may be more law review articles on this subject than there are cases.1 Some of the questions that could be asked are: What is meant by "all criminal prosecutions?" Does this require confrontation in preliminary hearings? Does "shall enjoy the …

Go to article

Equal Protection; Sex Discrimination; Veterans' Preference Statutes, Feeney V. Massachusetts, Eloise Taylor Jul 2015

Equal Protection; Sex Discrimination; Veterans' Preference Statutes, Feeney V. Massachusetts, Eloise Taylor

Akron Law Review

"Historically, the armed services have been predominantly male. The result has been that the operation of veterans' preferences has placed women as a class at a particular disadvantage in comparison to men when in or entering into civil service.' To nullify this stigma, the first successful challenge to veterans' preference, Feeney v. Massachusetts,' was litigated."

Go to article

Commerce Clause; Privileges And Immunities Clause; State Hiring; Discrimination Against Nonresidents; Hicklin V. Orbeck, Donna N. Kemp Jul 2015

Commerce Clause; Privileges And Immunities Clause; State Hiring; Discrimination Against Nonresidents; Hicklin V. Orbeck, Donna N. Kemp

Akron Law Review

"In Hicklin v. Orbeck, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held' that Alaska's statute entitled "Local Hire Under State Leases"' violates the Constitution due to its discriminatory effect on nonresidents. Basing its decision on the Privileges and Immunities Clause,' the Court found that there was insufficient justification for the extensive discrimination against nonresidents required by the Act because the unemployment problem to be alleviated by the legislation was not due to a great influx of nonresident jobseekers. Rather, the Court attributed the problem to the fact that a large percentage of the unemployed in Alaska lack sufficient education and job …

Go to article

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Obscenity; Pinkus V. United States, Cary Douglass Caesa Jul 2015

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Obscenity; Pinkus V. United States, Cary Douglass Caesa

Akron Law Review

“In its latest attempt to define a workable standard for obscenity rulings, the United States Supreme Court has held that children may not be included in a court's instruction as to the social group to whom the material would or would not be obscene. However, the Court held that sensitive persons and deviant groups may be included without unduly lowering the threshold of a finding of obscenity. Thus, Pinkus v. United States clarified the "community" whose judgment should define obscenity.”

Go to article

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Commerical Speech And Advertising; Metpath, Inc. V. Imperato, Sheryl S. Kantz Jul 2015

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Commerical Speech And Advertising; Metpath, Inc. V. Imperato, Sheryl S. Kantz

Akron Law Review

"The decision of Metpath, Inc. v. Imperato is indicative of the growing trend of the judiciary toward affording "commercial speech" the protective shield of the first amendment. As shown by Metpath, where the concern is advertising by a medical clinic, speech with commercial overtones is afforded protection where a public interest in the subject and content of the speech is demonstrated. However, the perimeters of such protection have not been defined by this or previous decisions."

Go to article

First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Access Of News Media To County Jail; Houchins V. Kqed, Inc., Thomas W. Renwand Jul 2015

First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Access Of News Media To County Jail; Houchins V. Kqed, Inc., Thomas W. Renwand

Akron Law Review

"Although United States history is replete with struggles over the rights and prerogatives of the press, until recently these disputes rarely made their way to the nation's highest court.' In the last several years the Supreme Court has been confronted with a number of important, complex questions dealing with the role of a free press in a free society.'"

Go to article

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Broadcasting; Obscenity; Fcc V. Pacifica Foundation, James E. Moliterno Jul 2015

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Broadcasting; Obscenity; Fcc V. Pacifica Foundation, James E. Moliterno

Akron Law Review

“ ‘I was thinking about the curse words and the swear words, the cuss L words and the words you can't say . . .the words you couldn't say on the public, ah, airwaves... the ones that will curve your spine [and] grow hair on your hands ....’ While this is the satiric opinion of George Carlin, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and a bare majority of the United States Supreme Court have embraced it as their genuine opinion.' They have decided to protect the public from the fate of hearing Carlin's social criticism regarding seven ‘dirty’ words.”

Go to article

First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Erosion Of New York Times Co. V. Sullivan; Herbert V. Lando, Edward Howlett Jul 2015

First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Erosion Of New York Times Co. V. Sullivan; Herbert V. Lando, Edward Howlett

Akron Law Review

In Herbert v. Lando the Supreme Court announced that the first amendment does not require a constitutional privilege foreclosing direct inquiry into the editorial process. While the decision may seem correct in its overturning of the absolute privilege afforded to the editorial process by the Second Circuit, nevertheless, by refusing to grant even a qualified privilege to the editorial process the Court may have upset the delicate balance between an individual's interest in his reputation and society's interest in a free flow of information recognized in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.

Go to article

Equal Protection; State Alimony Statutes; Sex Discrimination; Orr V. Orr, David A. Detec, Jane L. Thomas-Moore Jul 2015

Equal Protection; State Alimony Statutes; Sex Discrimination; Orr V. Orr, David A. Detec, Jane L. Thomas-Moore

Akron Law Review

In Orr v. Orr the United States Supreme Court held unconstitutional the Alabama alimony statutes which provided that husbands, but not wives, may be required to pay alimony upon divorce. The Court's principal reason for so holding was the statutes' violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the fourteenth amendment on the basis of sex discrimination.

Go to article

The Role Of Courts In Government Today, James L. Oakes Jul 2015

The Role Of Courts In Government Today, James L. Oakes

Akron Law Review

It is elementary constitutional law that American courts have the power of judicial review. While a case can be made (and is still sometimes made by critics of too much judicial intervention) against the courts' power to review federal actions against the Constitution or state actions contrary to the Federal Constitution or statutes, the principle of judicial review is so well ingrained in the American system that it need not be reargued here. Rather I shall examine the principal arguments counseling caution and restraint in the exercise of the power, even though some of these arguments seem to run against …

Go to article

First Prev Next Last