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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Expanding Stare Decisis: The Role Of Precedent In The Unfolding Dialectic Of Brady V. Maryland, Colin Starger Oct 2012

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. …


Originalism And Loving V. Virginia, Steven G. Calabresi, Andrea Matthews Jan 2012

Originalism And Loving V. Virginia, Steven G. Calabresi, Andrea Matthews

Faculty Working Papers

This article makes an originalist argument in defense of the Supreme Court's holding in Loving v. Virginia that antimiscegenation laws are unconstitutional. This article builds on past work by Professor Michael McConnell defending Brown v. Board of Education on originalist grounds and by Professor Calabresi defending strict scrutiny for gender classifications on originalist grounds. Professor Calabresi's work in this area was defended and praise recently by Slate magazine online. The article shows that Loving v. Virginia is defensible using the public meaning originalism advocated for by Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. This article shows that the issue in Loving …


Can Immune Parties Really Be Responsible: An Analysis Of The Current Interpretation Of The Texas Responsible Third Party Statute And Its Vulnerability To Constitutional Challenge., Justin C. Roberts, Randell Roberts Jan 2012

Can Immune Parties Really Be Responsible: An Analysis Of The Current Interpretation Of The Texas Responsible Third Party Statute And Its Vulnerability To Constitutional Challenge., Justin C. Roberts, Randell Roberts

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Texas Responsible Third Party (RTP) statute was amended in 2003 to give defendants the opportunity to have the jury apportion responsibility for the plaintiff’s damages to persons who were not joined in the lawsuit. A defendant could achieve this result by designating a “responsible third party.” Plaintiffs may often join responsible third parties as additional defendants. Under such situations, all culpable parties are before the court, defending themselves, and accountable to the plaintiff for their percentage of responsibility. When the statute worked in this fashion it achieved “a carefully constructed scheme balancing the interests of both defendants and claimants.” …