Law Commons^™

Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. White, Rosalinde Casalini

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appellate Division, First Department - People V. Boyd, Joseph M. D'Amico

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appellate Division, Fourth Department - People V. Buchanan, Jacqulyn Vann

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Vol. 4 No. 1, Fall 2012; Illinois's Drug-Induced Homicide Statute: Injecting Some Sense Into A Misinterpreted Law, Seth Mcclure

Northern Illinois Law Review Supplement

In 1988, Illinois went on the offensive in the War on Drugs by creating the Drug-Induced Homicide Statute. In essence, this statute creates increased punishment beyond normal drug trafficking penalties when a person delivers drugs to another person and, as a result of that delivery, somebody dies. For twenty years, the law remained mostly dormant, only being charged and prosecuted in a handful of cases. In a new push to fight drug-related deaths across Illinois over the last few years, prosecutors have dusted off the old law and vastly increased the number of drug-induced homicide charges. As these charges become …

Unearthing The Public Interest: Recognizing Intrastate Economic Protectionism As A Legitimate State Interest, Katharine M. Rudish

Fordham Law Review

In Oklahoma, a person must complete sixty-credit hours of undergraduate training and embalm twenty-five bodies before being legally licensed to sell caskets in the state. In Louisiana, in order to sell caskets, one must operate a fully licensed funeral establishment, defined as a place dedicated to preparing bodies for burial. In recent years, these states and others have faced legal challenges to casket sale restrictions by individuals who wish to sell caskets directly to the public, yet who are unable to do so as they are not licensed funeral directors. Courts have grappled with whether these state regulations, which in …

No Remedy For This Wrong? Analyzing The Appropriate Remedy For Violations Of California Penal Code § 834c, Jared W. Olen

Jared W. Olen

Article 36(1)(b) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations provides that a foreign national of a state-party has the right to have her consulate notified of her arrest upon detention. Many United Supreme Court and other federal courts have grappled with issues stemming from that right, including whether the treaty creates privately-enforceable rights. However, California was unique in that it enacted California Penal Code § 834c, which codifies as state law the right to consular notification.

While this codification precludes much discussion about privately-enforceable rights, the statute is, however, silent on what remedy should be applied if law enforcement violate …

Expanding Stare Decisis: The Role Of Precedent In The Unfolding Dialectic Of Brady V. Maryland, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

Does stare decisis constrain the expansion of constitutional doctrine? Does existing precedent preclude the Supreme Court from expanding a criminal defendant’s right to exculpatory evidence? While commentators frequently clash on when stare decisis should prevent the Court from overruling its own precedents, the question of when fidelity to precedent should inhibit doctrinal expansion is surprisingly under-theorized. This Article begins to fill this gap through an in-depth case study of stare decisis and the expansion of criminal due process doctrine.

This Article analyzes the longstanding constitutional dialectic between procedural and substantive schools of criminal due process. Focus is on Brady v. …

Must Substantive Due Process Land Use Claims Be So “Exhaust”Ing?, Nader James Khorassani

Fordham Law Review

When is a land use dispute a federal case? Although some perceive challenges to zoning and land use laws as local issues ripe for local resolution, some fights over land use pose constitutional questions suitable for federal adjudication. Indeed, many zoning disputes implicate substantive due process, a federally protected constitutional guarantee. A circuit split has developed regarding when plaintiffs may assert substantive due process claims in federal court. While the First and Seventh Circuits only hear such cases when the plaintiff has first brought her substantive due process claim in state court, the Second, Third, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits impose …

The Haunting Of Abigail Fisher: Race, Affirmative Action, And The Ghosts Of Legal History, Hilary A. Leewong

Hilary A Leewong

What is race in 2012, and why does it matter?

At the end of the current term, the Supreme Court will decide Fisher v. University of Texas. In doing so, the Court revisits the role of affirmative action and the meaning of race much sooner than constitutional law scholars, and likely the average college applicant, expected it would.

The Court’s last definitive take on the subject was conveyed by Justice O’Connor in 2003’s Grutter v. Bollinger. Justice O’Connor’s opinion conveyed disappointment that race-based admissions in higher education was still necessary this long after Brown v. Board of Education, heralded the …

Cascading Constitutional Deprivation: The Right To Appointed Counsel For Mandatorily Detained Immigrants Pending Removal Proceedings, Mark Noferi

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Today, an immigrant green card holder mandatorily detained pending his removal proceedings, without bail and without counsel, due to a minor crime committed perhaps long ago, faces a dire fate. If he contests his case, he may remain incarcerated in substandard conditions for months or years. While incarcerated, he will likely be unable to acquire a lawyer, access family who might assist him, obtain key evidence, or contact witnesses. In these circumstances, he will nearly inevitably lose his deportation case and be banished abroad from work, family, and friends. The immigrant's one chance to escape these cascading events is the …

Delinquent And Non-Entered Lands And Due Process, John W. Fisher Ii

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Buck V. Bell: A Constitutional Tragedy From A Lost World, Victoria Nourse

Pepperdine Law Review

The article focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell, which dealt with the forced sterilization of people deemed unfit, such as intellectually disabled or mentally retarded individuals. Topics include the enforceability of unconstitutional judicial decisions, eugenic sterilization, and the application of substantive due process.

A Fatal Loss Of Balance: Dred Scott Revisited , Daniel A. Farber

Pepperdine Law Review

This essay focuses on three aspects of the Dred Scott opinion: its effort to ensure that blacks could never be citizens, let alone equal ones; its deployment of a "limited government" argument for a narrow interpretation of Congress's enumerated power over the territories; and its path-breaking defense of property rights against government regulation. These constitutional tropes of racism, narrowing of federal power, and protection of property were to remain dominant for another seventy-five years. Apart from the failings of the opinion itself, Dred Scott also represents an extraordinary case of presidential tampering with the judicial process and a breakdown in …

Conceptualizing Constitutional Litigation As Anti-Government Expression: A Speech-Centered Theory Of Court Access, Robert L. Tsai

Robert L Tsai

This Article proposes a speech-based right of court access. First, it finds the traditional due process approach to be analytically incoherent and of limited practical value. Second, it contends that history, constitutional structure, and theory all support conceiving of the right of access as the modern analogue to the right to petition government for redress. Third, the Article explores the ways in which the civil rights plaintiff's lawsuit tracks the behavior of the traditional dissident. Fourth, by way of a case study, the essay argues that recent restrictions - notably, a congressional limitation on the amount of fees counsel for …

Defects, Due Process, And Protective Proceedings, Susan G. Haines, John J. Campbell

Marquette Elder's Advisor

This article discusses whether the requirements of due process in protective proceedings be any lower that those in criminal, juvenile, or civil commitment cases. The authors argue that the requirements should not be lower. The article discusses the application of Mathews v. Eldridge to due process analysis in guardianship and conservatorship proceedings.

Rethinking Children As Property, Kevin Noble Maillard

College of Law - Faculty Scholarship

Despite the collective view in law and social practice that it is intrinsically taboo to consider human beings as chattel, the law persists in treating children as property. Applying principles of property, this Article examines paternity disputes to explain and critique the law’s view of children as property of their parents. As evidenced in these conflicts, I demonstrate that legal paternity exposes a rhetoric of ownership, possession, and exchange. The law presumes that a child born to a married woman is fathered by her husband, even when irrefutable proof exists that another man fathered the child. Attempts by the non-marital …

Community Redevelopment, Public Use, And Eminent Domain, Patricia E. Salkin, Lora A. Lucero

Patricia E. Salkin

Published just weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court handed down their controversial decision on Kelo v. City of New London in 2005, this article, in correctly predicting the outcome of the Supreme Court opinion, explores in Section I how the concept of what constitutes a public use has evolved over the decades from traditionally accepted uses such as public roads, buildings (e.g., government buildings and schools), and utilities to urban redevelopment. It explains how the broad concepts of community redevelopment have been stretched to encompass needed economic development projects that promise jobs, tax revenue, and other public benefits similar to …

How Not To Criminalize Cyberbullying, Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky, Andrea Garcia

UF Law Faculty Publications

This essay provides a sustained constitutional critique of the growing body of laws criminalizing cyberbullying. These laws typically proceed by either modernizing existing harassment and stalking laws or crafting new criminal offenses. Both paths are beset with First Amendment perils, which this essay illustrates through 'case studies' of selected legislative efforts. Though sympathetic to the aims of these new laws, this essay contends that reflexive criminalization in response to tragic cyberbullying incidents has led law-makers to conflate cyberbullying as a social problem with cyberbullying as a criminal problem, creating pernicious consequences. The legislative zeal to eradicate cyberbullying potentially produces disproportionate …

Defending Junk-Debt-Buyer Lawsuits, Peter A. Holland

Peter A. Holland

Junk debt buyer lawsuits have overwhelmed the courts all across the United States. These lawsuits wreak havoc on consumers and their families. Often overlooked is the fact that judgments against consumers which are based on junk debt are part of a zero sum game, where every bogus judgment deprives a legitimate creditor of the chance to get paid from scarce resources. Thus, the legitimate creditor to whom money is owed is materially harmed by the junk debt buyer who extracts money based on an illegitimate claim, or who causes someone to declare bankruptcy. Providing representation to this otherwise unrepresented population …

How Not To Criminalize Cyberbullying, Lyrissa Lidsky, Andrea Pinzon Garcia

Missouri Law Review

This essay provides a sustained constitutional critique of the growing body of laws criminalizing cyberbullying. These laws typically proceed by either modernizing existing harassment and stalking laws or crafting new criminal offenses. Both paths are beset with First Amendment perils, which this essay illustrates through 'case studies' of selected legislative efforts. Though sympathetic to the aims of these new laws, this essay contends that reflexive criminalization in response to tragic cyberbullying incidents has led law-makers to conflate cyberbullying as a social problem with cyberbullying as a criminal problem, creating pernicious consequences. The legislative zeal to eradicate cyberbullying potentially produces disproportionate …

Lassiter V. Department Of Social Services: Why Is It Such A Lousy Case?, Brooke D. Coleman

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Defending Junk-Debt-Buyer Lawsuits, Peter A. Holland

Faculty Scholarship

Junk debt buyer lawsuits have overwhelmed the courts all across the United States. These lawsuits wreak havoc on consumers and their families. Often overlooked is the fact that judgments against consumers which are based on junk debt are part of a zero sum game, where every bogus judgment deprives a legitimate creditor of the chance to get paid from scarce resources. Thus, the legitimate creditor to whom money is owed is materially harmed by the junk debt buyer who extracts money based on an illegitimate claim, or who causes someone to declare bankruptcy. Providing representation to this otherwise unrepresented population …

Due Process As Separation Of Powers, Nathan S. Chapman, Michael W. Mcconnell

Scholarly Works

From its conceptual origin in Magna Charta, due process of law has required that government can deprive persons of rights only pursuant to a coordinated effort of separate institutions that make, execute, and adjudicate claims under the law. Originalist debates about whether the Fifth or Fourteenth Amendments were understood to entail modern “substantive due process” have obscured the way that many American lawyers and courts understood due process to limit the legislature from the Revolutionary era through the Civil War. They understood due process to prohibit legislatures from directly depriving persons of rights, especially vested property rights, because it was …

Mass Torts And Due Process, Sergio J. Campos

Vanderbilt Law Review

As the old saying goes, hard cases make bad law. But hard cases also reveal the limits of legal doctrine. In this Article, I turn to a class of hard cases--mass torts--to rethink the law of procedural due process under the Due Process Clause. Mass torts have long perplexed courts and scholars. They include torts caused by asbestos and other toxic chemicals, pharmaceuticals, oil spills, and other mass-produced products and services. The plaintiffs not only suffer significant injuries, but the sheer number of plaintiffs, each with claims that raise unique fact and legal issues, stretch judicial resources to the limit. …

Taking The English Right To Counsel Seriously In American Civil Gideon Litigation, Scott F. Llewellyn, Brian Hawkins

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Courts have rejected a right to counsel for indigent civil litigants under the U.S. Constitution. But in some American states, that right arguably already exists as a matter of common law, albeit derived from centuries-old English common and statutory law. This Article analyzes the viability of arguments for incorporating the old English right to counsel in the twenty-seven American states that continue to recognize old English common and statutory law as a source of binding authority. Such "originalist" arguments may be appealing to judges who are more willing to revive a historically based right than establish a new right based …

Madness Alone Punishes The Madman: The Search For Moral Dignity In The Court's Competency Doctrine As Applied In Capital Cases, J. Amy Dillard

All Faculty Scholarship

The purposes of the competency doctrine are to guarantee reliability in criminal prosecutions, to ensure that only those defendants who can appreciate punishment are subject to it, and to maintain moral dignity, both actual and apparent, in criminal proceedings. No matter his crime, the “madman” should not be forced to stand trial. Historically, courts viewed questions of competency as a binary choice, finding the defendant either competent or incompetent to stand trial. However, in Edwards v. Indiana, the Supreme Court conceded that it views competency on a spectrum and offered a new category of competency — borderline-competent. The Court held …

Confine Is Fine: Have The Non-Dangerous Mentally Ill Lost Their Right To Liberty? An Empirical Study To Unravel The Psychiatrist's Crystal Ball, Donald Stone

Donald H. Stone

This article will examine the reverse trend in civil commitment laws in the wake of recent tragedies and discuss the effect of broader civil commitment standards on the care and treatment of the mentally ill. The 2007 Virginia Tech shooting and the 2011 shooting of Congresswoman Giffords have spurred fierce debates about the dangerousness of mentally ill and serve as cautionary tale about what happens when warning signs go unnoticed and opportunities for early intervention missed. This article will explore the misconception about the role medication and inpatient civil commitments should play in prevention of dangerousness and undermine the belief …

Protecting Online Anonymity And Preserving Reputation Through Due Process, Michael Baumrind

Georgia State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Have We Come Full Circle? Judicial Sentencing Discretion Revived In Booker And Fanfan, Sandra D. Jordan

Pepperdine Law Review

The much anticipated Supreme Court decision in United States v. Booker and Fanfan has both invalidated the mandatory nature of the federal Sentencing Guidelines as well as restored judicial discretion for federal judges. With the Booker decision there is a renewed opportunity to correct some of the imbalance that came about as a result of the mandatory guidelines and the sentencing policies of the past twenty years. Booker has implications for all future sentencing as the power between the judiciary and the jury has been realigned and the power of the government has been reduced. Sentencing cannot accomplish legitimate goals …

The Confirmation Of Punitive Awards In Arbitration: Did Due Process Disappear?, Stuart M. Boyarsky

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Part I of this article provides a brief overview of the reasoning behind the limited judicial review of an arbitral award. Part II describes the state action doctrine and explains how several courts have used the doctrine in order to apply due process protection to proceedings involving private actors. In particular, this section discusses several significant decisions that involve the issue of whether a court's confirmation of an arbitrator's award of punitive damages creates state action and requires the application of constitutional protections such as due process. This Note concludes that due to a leading decision by the Eleventh Circuit, …