Law Commons^™

The Hollowness Of The Harm Principle, Steven D. Smith

Steven D. Smith

Among the various instruments in the toolbox of liberalism, the so-called “harm principle,” presented as the central thesis of John Stuart Mill’s classic On Liberty, has been one of the most popular. The harm principle has been widely embraced and invoked in both academic and popular debate about a variety of issues ranging from obscenity to drug regulation to abortion to same-sex marriage, and its influence is discernible in legal arguments and judicial opinions as well. Despite the principle’s apparent irresistibility, this essay argues that the principle is hollow. It is an empty vessel, alluring but without any inherent legal …

The Tenuous Case For Conscience, Steven D. Smith

Steven D. Smith

If there is any single theme that has provided the foundation of modern liberalism and has infused our more specific constitutional commitments to freedom of religion and freedom of speech, that theme is probably “freedom of conscience.” But some observers also perceive a progressive cheapening of conscience– even a sort of degradation. Such criticisms suggest the need for a contemporary rethinking of conscience. When we reverently invoke “conscience,” do we have any idea what we are talking about? Or are we just exploiting a venerable theme for rhetorical purposes without any clear sense of what “conscience” is or why it …

Holmes And Dissent, Allen P. Mendenhall

Allen Mendenhall

Holmes saw the dissent as a mechanism to advance and preserve arguments and as a pageant for wordplay. Dissents, for Holmes, occupied an interstitial space between law and non-law. The thought and theory of pragmatism allowed him to recreate the dissent as a stage for performative text, a place where signs and syntax could mimic the environment of the particular time and place and in so doing become, or strive to become, law. Holmes’s dissents were sites of aesthetic adaptation. The language of his dissents was acrobatic. It acted and reacted and called attention to itself. The more provocative and …

The Birthright Citizenship Controversy: A Study Of Conservative Substance And Rhetoric, Allen R. Kamp

Allen R. Kamp

This essay is a critique of the conservative rhetoric used in their attack on birthright citizenship—as granted by Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” The rhetoric of that attack violates the traditional canons of conservative argumentation and interpretation, such as original intent and plain meaning. As such, their arguments call into question the seriousness of their allegiance to these canons.

Cosmopolitanism And Constitutional Self-Government, Vlad F. Perju

Vlad Perju

This paper, which was selected for presentation at the 2010 Yale/Stanford Junior Faculty Forum, articulates the theoretical steps by which self-government in a free community of equals leads constitutional analysis outside the boundaries of that political community. Openness to the experiences in self-government of other peoples is commonly assumed to undermine political legitimacy by loosing citizens’ control over their political fate. But is it possible that such openness might in fact render that control more effective? Could it actually enhance political and constitutional legitimacy? This paper articulates and defends the following claims: 1) The legitimacy of a political order is …

In Defense Of Judicial Prudence, Nicholas Buccola, Aila Wallace

Nicholas Buccola

This essay has two basic aims. First, we want to show that the three major theories of judicial review – majoritarianism, perfectionism, and originalism – have at their core commitments to “cardinal virtues” – temperance, justice, fortitude. In the first part of the essay, we describe each of the cardinal virtues in conjunction with a description of each judicial philosophy and demonstrate how each virtue fits at the center of each philosophy. Second, we want to show how a full appreciation of the cardinal virtues should lead us to endorse “prudentialism” as the best approach to judicial review in the …

The Twentieth Century, Daniel R. Coquillette

Daniel R. Coquillette

All self-respecting legal history is supposed to end by the twentieth century. As we approach our own lives, experience and training—and those events that we have actually witnessed—we allegedly lose that "objectivity" which makes the "science" of history itself possible. Certainly, there is no point in burdening the reader with the "original" materials, including cases and statutes, that make up the bulk of any legal education. But there are good reasons to reflect on our own legal century from an "historical perspective."

Innocent Until Presumed Guilty: Verdicts, Habeas Corpus Law, And Newly Discovered Evidence, Richard A. Burton Jr

Richard A Burton Jr

It may seem uncontroversial that our law should prevent the execution of an innocent person. There are ‘constitutional safeguards’ in place that maintain this principle, but these safeguards apply to pre-convicted persons – those presumed innocent – through the avoidance of wrongful conviction. Once the conviction is handed down, the safeguards fundamentally change. This is equally true for the most troubling cases in which newly discovered evidence demonstrably proves the factual innocence of a defendant but is discovered post-conviction. Despite the available evidence, such persons do not enjoy constitutional safeguards that prohibit their execution based on their factual innocence. In …

Towards Classical Legal Positivism, Dan Priel

Dan Priel

Open almost any textbook or jurisprudence and you will find it beginning with a discussion of natural law and legal positivism. What sets them apart, we are told, is a difference on the conceptual question of the relationship between law and morality. Natural lawyers believe that law or legality are necessarily connected to morality, whereas legal positivists deny that. In this essay I challenge this fundamental understanding of the debate. The difference between legal positivism and natural law has to do with a way inquiries about law should be conducted: natural lawyers seek to understand law by relating it to …

Popular Originalism? The Tea Party And Constitutional Theory, Rebecca Zietlow

Rebecca E Zietlow

The United States Constitution is currently the subject of a heated political debate. Tea Party activists have invoked the constitution as the foundation of their conservative political philosophy. These activists are engaged in “popular originalism,” using popular constitutionalism, constitutional interpretation outside of the courts, to invoke originalism as constitutional method. The Tea Party movement thus provides an excellent heuristic to explore the relationship between originalism and popular constitutionalism, two prominent trends in constitutional theory. Both originalists and popular constitutionalists study legal history to illuminate constitutional meaning, but the two schools of thought draw diverging lessons from that history. Originalists look …

Using John Dewey's Pragmatist Epistemology To Teach Legal Analysis And Communication, David T. Ritchie

David T. Ritchie

In this article I discuss the epistemology of the American pragmatist philosopher John Dewey, who maintained that there is a “common pattern or structure” of human reasoning. According to Dewey, we naturally employ pragmatic problem-solving. In his epistemological works Dewey frequently discussed legal reasoning as a paradigm example of this sort of problem-solving. I develop and explain Dewey’s pragmatist epistemology, and then relate it to how novices can benefit from understanding his account. I end the article by explaining how I use this account of human reasoning in my law school classes.

Popular Originalism? The Tea Party And Constitutional Theory, Rebecca Zietlow

Rebecca E Zietlow

The United States Constitution is currently the subject of a heated political debate. Tea Party activists have invoked the constitution as the foundation of their conservative political philosophy. These activists are engaged in “popular originalism,” using popular constitutionalism, constitutional interpretation outside of the courts, to invoke originalism as constitutional method. The Tea Party movement thus provides an excellent heuristic to explore the relationship between originalism and popular constitutionalism, two prominent trends in constitutional theory. Both originalists and popular constitutionalists study legal history to illuminate constitutional meaning, but the two schools of thought draw diverging lessons from that history. Originalists look …

How Do Roles Generate Reasons? On The Methods Of Legal Ethics, Stephen Galoob

Stephen Galoob

Debates about legal ethics should be oriented around the generative problem, which asks two fundamental questions. First, how does the lawyer’s role generate normatively compelling reasons for action? Second, what kinds of reasons can this role generate?

Every substantive theory of legal ethics is based on a solution to the generative problem. On the generative problem method, we should evaluate these theories based on their implicit solutions to the generative problem. None of the main theories of legal ethics is based on a solution to the generative problem that is both structurally valid and empirically verified.

The generative problem method …

Originalism And The Aristotelian Tradition: Virtue’S Home In Originalism, Lee Strang

Lee J Strang

A concept fundamental to philosophy—virtue—is, with a few notable exceptions, absent from scholarship on constitutional interpretation generally, and originalism in particular. Furthermore, common perceptions of both virtue ethics and originalism have prevented exploration of how incorporating virtue ethics’ insights may make originalism a better theory of constitutional interpretation. This Article fills that void by explaining the many ways in which concepts from virtue ethics are compatible with an originalist theory of constitutional interpretation. More importantly, I show that originalism is more normatively attractive and descriptively accurate when it takes on board virtue ethics’ insights.

Originalism must articulate virtue’s role in …

Does Three Do The Trick In The Ninth? The Liberal Ninth Circuit – Myth Or Fact: How The Three Judge Panel, And A System Of Published And Unpublished Opinions Interact With Political Appointments In The Ninth Circuit, Rachel N. Agress

Rachel N. Agress

This article examines the persistent view that the Ninth Circuit is “overly liberal,” and attempts to evaluate this outlook in light of data collected regarding two variables. The first variable is the composition of individual political orientations of judges on the Ninth Circuit as compared to the political composition of other circuit courts. To achieve this comparison, this paper looks at political appointments and classified judges as “liberal” or “conservative,” based on political appointment by a Democratic or Republican president. Further, this article delineates the current percentage of “liberal” versus “conservative” judges in each circuit, comparing the average circuit court …

Who Are Refugees?, Matthew Lister

Matthew J. Lister

Hundreds of millions of people around the world are unable to meet their needs on their own, and do not receive adequate protection or support from their home states. These people, if they are to be provided for, need assistance from the international community. If we are to meet our duties to these people, we must have ways of knowing who should be eligible for different forms of relief. One prominent proposal from scholars and activists has been to classify all who are unable to meet their basic needs on their own as "refugees," and to extend to them the …

The Costs Of Legal Change, Michael P. Van Alstine

Michael P. Van Alstine

No abstract provided.

The Death Of Good Faith In Treaty Jurisprudence And A Call For Resurrection, Michael P. Van Alstine

Michael P. Van Alstine

This article addresses the absence of the venerable doctrine of good faith interpretation, as well as its companion “liberal interpretation canon,” from modern Supreme Court treaty jurisprudence. Although scholarly accounts suggest that the spirit is still alive, the article demonstrates that the doctrine was silently interred by the Supreme Court early in the last century. From all appearances, the disappearance of good faith from treaty jurisprudence was not by design. Nonetheless, the article demonstrates that even such an unintended drift can have serious negative consequences. In the context of treaty jurisprudence, the consequence of the departure of good faith interpretation …

One Hundred Years Of Harmful Error: The Historical Jurisprudence Of Medical Malpractice, Theodore Silver

Theodore Silver

In this Article, Professor Silver examines the origins of present-day malpractice law. He begins by noting that negligence and medical malpractice as the common law now knows them made their debut in the nineteenth century although their roots lie deep in the turf of trespass and assumpsit. He argues, however, that toward the turn of the century several episodes of linguistic laziness purported to produce a separation between negligence and medical malpractice so that the two fields are conventionally thought to rest on separate doctrinal foundations. According to Professor Silver, historically based scrutiny of medical malpractice and its ties to …

Supreme Court Criminal Law Jurisprudence: Fair Trials, Cruel Punishment, And Ethical Lawyering—October 2009 Term, Richard Klein

Richard Daniel Klein

No abstract provided.

Review Essay: The Challenges Of Religous Neutrality, Samuel J. Levine

Samuel J. Levine

Levine begins this review essay by noting that at the outset of his discussion, Gedicks notes the difficulty one faces in critically engaging Supreme Court decisions in the area of church and state law. Gedicks goes on to premise his analysis on the identification of “competing rhetorical discourses of church-state relations,” through which he attempts to “organize virtually all of religion clause doctrine.” Gedicks applies this phenomenon, which he terms “discourse,” to church and state law. Thus, in The Rhetoric of Church and State: A Critical Analysis of Religion Clause Jurisprudence, Professor Gedicks succeeds in his goal of providing a …

Law, Ethics, And Religion In The Public Square: Principles Of Restraint And Withdrawal, Samuel J. Levine

Samuel J. Levine

In recent years, scholars have begun to recognize and discuss the profound questions that arise in attempting to determine the place of religion in the law and the legal profession. This discussion has emerged on at least two separate yet related levels. On one level, scholars have debated the place of religion in various segments of the public sphere, including law and politics. On a second level, lawyers have expressed the aim to place their professional values and obligations in the context of their overriding religious obligations. This article explores, from both an ethical and jurisprudential perspective, the question of …

Face-Recognition Surveillance: A Moment Of Truth For Fourth Amendment Rights In Public Places, Douglas Fretty

Douglas A Fretty

Americans are increasingly monitored with face-recognition technology (FRT), a surveillance tool that allows the state to identify a pedestrian based on a pre-existing database of facial photographs. This Article argues that FRT embodies the fundamental Fourth Amendment dilemmas raised by contemporary digital surveillance and will serve as harbinger for the Amendment’s future. FRT cases will test whether people retain a reasonable expectation of privacy in their identities when they move in public, and whether the aggregation of information about a person’s movements amounts to an unreasonable search. Further, the suspicionless identification of pedestrians will test whether a seizure can occur …

The Niqab In The Courtroom: Protecting Free Exercise Of Religion In A Post-Smith World, Adam Schwartzbaum

Adam Schwartzbaum

The niqab has become enmeshed in heated political controversy all across the world. In the United States, the situation of Ginnah Muhammad exemplifies the complex legal issues arising from conflicts between individuals whose religious beliefs compel this practice and the secular state. Muhammad, an African-American Muslim woman, was ejected from a Michigan small claims court for refusing to remove her veil while testifying. This Comment explores the constitutionality of this action, and a subsequent amendment to the Michigan Rules of Evidence passed in response to her case giving judges the power to “exercise reasonable control over parties and witnesses." Inevitably, …

Regulating The Marketplaces Of Political And Economic Ideas, Christopher S. Ford

Christopher S Ford

Ever since Justice Holmes’ famous dissent in Abrams v. United States, First Amendment jurisprudence has labored under the metaphor of a ‘marketplace of ideas.’ The government must abstain from regulating this market, courts and commentators have argued, to best ensure healthy and free competition among ideas. The Supreme Court has frequently relied on this metaphor when evaluating claims under the First Amendment, and did so prominently when deciding the recent case of Citizens United v. F.E.C. Yet the sweeping majority opinion by Justice Kennedy and strident dissent by Justice Stevens advance two fundamentally different ideas of how the marketplace of …

Life, Death & The God Complex: The Effectiveness Of Incorporating Religion-Based Arguments Into The Pro-Choice Perspective On Abortion, Stacy A. Scaldo

Stacy A Scaldo

While speaking on the issue of healthcare in August of 2009, President Barrack Obama told a meeting of Jewish rabbis, “We are God’s partners in matters of life and death.” While the President’s message was expressly targeting choices in healthcare and end of life decisions, the statement is representative of a shift in the public rhetoric reflective of all matters concerning life - including abortion. This, indeed, would be a remarkable change in both express policy and argument identification – one that appears to be a new weapon in the arsenal of those who identify themselves with the pro-choice movement. …

Crumbs From The Table: The Syrophoenician Woman And International Law, Mark Chinen

Mark A. Chinen

International law has been criticized, not just for its formal incoherence, but for its alleged complicity in the exclusion of large numbers of people from the benefits and processes of the international system. In this Article I consider a story from the New Testament for what it might say about those critiques. A woman of Syrophoenician origin, whose daughter is possessed by an evil spirit, asks Jesus for help. Jesus protests, “First let the children eat all they want, for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to their dogs.” The woman replies, “Yes, Lord, …

Between Judicial And Legislative Supremacy: A Cautious Defense Of Constrained Judicial Review, Alon Harel, Adam Shinar

Alon Harel

This Article explores and evaluates theories that we label “theories of constrained judicial review.” These theories, which include popular constitutionalism, departmentalism, and weak judicial review, challenge both the constitutional supremacy of courts and adopt an intermediate position that grants courts a privileged but not supreme role in interpreting the Constitution.

To evaluate such theories, this Article develops both a negative and a positive argument. It criticizes the existing justifications of constrained judicial review and provides a new justification for such theories. More specifically, we argue that the ultimate justification for constrained judicial review cannot be grounded in instrumentalist or consequentialist …

Review Essay: The Challenges Of Religous Neutrality, Samuel J. Levine

Samuel J. Levine

Levine begins this review essay by noting that at the outset of his discussion, Gedicks notes the difficulty one faces in critically engaging Supreme Court decisions in the area of church and state law. Gedicks goes on to premise his analysis on the identification of “competing rhetorical discourses of church-state relations,” through which he attempts to “organize virtually all of religion clause doctrine.” Gedicks applies this phenomenon, which he terms “discourse,” to church and state law. Thus, in The Rhetoric of Church and State: A Critical Analysis of Religion Clause Jurisprudence, Professor Gedicks succeeds in his goal of providing a …

Originalism As Popular Constitutionalism?: Theoretical Possibilities And Practical Differences, Lee Strang

Lee J Strang

The common perception is that originalism and popular constitutionalism are incompatible. Supporting this perception is the widely-shared opinion that most advocates for popular constitutionalism are liberal while most originalists are conservative-libertarian. Not only is this the perception, it has a basis in reality. Looking at the names of leading originalists and popular constitutionalists reveals that there is significant overlap between originalism and conservatism-libertarianism, and between popular constitutionalism and liberalism.

In this Article, I argue that the common perception that originalism and popular constitutionalism are incompatible is mistaken. Instead, I show that there is no uniquely correct answer to the question …