Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (65)
- University of Arkansas, Fayetteville (8)
- Fordham Law School (7)
- Pepperdine University (7)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (5)
-
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (4)
- New York Law School (4)
- Seattle University School of Law (3)
- Cleveland State University (2)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (2)
- University of Richmond (2)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (2)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
- Florida State University College of Law (1)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (1)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (60)
- Arkansas Law Review (8)
- Fordham Law Review (7)
- Pepperdine Law Review (7)
- Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity (5)
-
- Indiana Law Journal (4)
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (4)
- NYLS Law Review (4)
- Seattle University Law Review (3)
- Cleveland State Law Review (2)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (2)
- University of Richmond Law Review (2)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (2)
- American Indian Law Review (1)
- Barry Law Review (1)
- Florida State University Law Review (1)
- Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality (1)
- Northwestern University Law Review (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 115
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Pioneers, Waves, And Random Walks Of Securities Law In The Supreme Court, Elizabeth Pollman
The Pioneers, Waves, And Random Walks Of Securities Law In The Supreme Court, Elizabeth Pollman
Seattle University Law Review
After the pioneers, waves, and random walks that have animated the history of securities laws in the U.S. Supreme Court, we might now be on the precipice of a new chapter. Pritchard and Thompson’s superb book, A History of Securities Law in the Supreme Court, illuminates with rich archival detail how the Court’s view of the securities laws and the SEC have changed over time and how individuals have influenced this history. The book provides an invaluable resource for understanding nearly a century’s worth of Supreme Court jurisprudence in the area of securities law and much needed context for …
Three Stories: A Comment On Pritchard & Thompson’S A History Of Securities Laws In The Supreme Court, Harwell Wells
Three Stories: A Comment On Pritchard & Thompson’S A History Of Securities Laws In The Supreme Court, Harwell Wells
Seattle University Law Review
Adam Pritchard and Robert Thompson’s A History of Securities Laws in the Supreme Court should stand for decades as the definitive work on the Federal securities laws’ career in the Supreme Court across the twentieth century.1 Like all good histories, it both tells a story and makes an argument. The story recounts how the Court dealt with the major securities laws, as well the agency charged with enforcing them, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the rules it promulgated, from the 1930s into the twenty-first century. But the book does not just string together a series of events, “one …
Subjectively Speaking, The Applicable Standard For Deficient Medical Treatment Of Pretrial Detainees Should Be One Of Objective Reasonableness, Benjamin R. Black
Subjectively Speaking, The Applicable Standard For Deficient Medical Treatment Of Pretrial Detainees Should Be One Of Objective Reasonableness, Benjamin R. Black
Touro Law Review
There is no uniformity amongst the circuits when it comes to pretrial detainees claims for inadequate medical care. The circuits are currently grappling with this problem, applying two separate tests to pretrial detainees’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims depending on the jurisdiction in which the incident arose. The test that should be applied across all circuits is one of objective reasonableness. However, some circuits do not see it that way, applying the deliberate indifference standard, also known as the subjective standard test. The circuits applying the subjective standard are relying on case law that does not properly analyze the rights …
A Country In Crisis: A Review Of How The Illegitimate Supreme Court Is Rendering Illegitimate Decisions And Doing Damage That Will Not Soon Be Undone., Regina L. Ramsey ,Esq
A Country In Crisis: A Review Of How The Illegitimate Supreme Court Is Rendering Illegitimate Decisions And Doing Damage That Will Not Soon Be Undone., Regina L. Ramsey ,Esq
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
This article will discuss in detail exactly how the court is illegitimate and makes decisions that are illegitimate, using examples from the October 2021 term. It will also explain why action needs to be taken immediately to reign in this run-away Court to restore public trust. As discussed herein, we cannot sit by and patiently wait for the Court to right itself over time because there are important issues on the current docket, such as race-conscious admissions policies of colleges and universities to ensure student bodies are diverse as future leaders are prepared to live and work in a diverse …
The Legacy Of Brown V. Board Of Education: Achieving Student Body Diversity In All Levels Of Education, Nancy L. Zisk
The Legacy Of Brown V. Board Of Education: Achieving Student Body Diversity In All Levels Of Education, Nancy L. Zisk
Touro Law Review
This Article addresses the legal standard by which school admissions programs may be judged and validated as school districts struggle to achieve student body diversity. As the Supreme Court recognized in its seminal decision, Brown v. Board of Education, education “is the very foundation of good citizenship.” Twenty years after that case was decided, Thurgood Marshall, who had argued that separate was not equal in the Brown case, observed as a Justice of the Court that “unless our children begin to learn together, there is little hope that our people will ever learn to live together.” Because achieving student body …
Administrative Investigations, Aram A. Gavoor, Steven A. Platt
Administrative Investigations, Aram A. Gavoor, Steven A. Platt
Indiana Law Journal
This Article establishes the subject of federal administrative investigations as a new area of study in administrative law. While the literature has addressed investigations by specific agencies and congressional investigations, there is no general account for the trans-substantive constitutional value of administrative investigations. This Article provides such an account by exploring the positive law, agency behaviors, and constraints pertaining to this unresearched field. It concludes with some urgency that the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946—the statute that stands as a bill of rights for the Administrative State—does not serve to regulate administrative investigations and that Article III courts have held …
How In The World Could They Reach That Conclusion?, Hon. Carlton Reeves
How In The World Could They Reach That Conclusion?, Hon. Carlton Reeves
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
No abstract provided.
“Seeking The Fruits Of Their Labors”: The Story Of Johnson V. Mcadoo, The First Major Reparations Case, John G. Browning
“Seeking The Fruits Of Their Labors”: The Story Of Johnson V. Mcadoo, The First Major Reparations Case, John G. Browning
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Reflections On Nomos: Paideic Communities And Same Sex Weddings, Marie A. Failinger
Reflections On Nomos: Paideic Communities And Same Sex Weddings, Marie A. Failinger
Touro Law Review
Robert Cover’s Nomos and Narrative is an instructive tale for the constitutional battle over whether religious wedding vendors must be required to serve same-sex couples. He helps us see how contending communities’ deep narratives of martyrdom and obedience to the values of their paideic communities can be silenced by the imperial community’s insistence on choosing one community’s story over another community’s in adjudication. The wedding vendor cases call for an alternative to jurispathic violence, for a constitutionally redemptive response that prizes a nomos of inclusion and respect for difference.
A Government Of Laws That Is A Government Of Men And Women, Mark Tushnet
A Government Of Laws That Is A Government Of Men And Women, Mark Tushnet
Arkansas Law Review
I take Mark Killenbeck’s “provocative” article as an occasion for some informal comments about what Korematsu and Trump v. Hawaii tell us about the saying, “a government of laws, not a government of men and women.” My basic thought is that the “not” in the saying has to be replaced “but also.” And, in some sense we have always had to have known that the saying was wrong as stated. Whatever the laws are, they don’t make themselves. Nor do they administer themselves, nor interpret themselves. Men and women appear at the stages of enactment, application, and adjudication. So, for …
A Proper Burial, Robert L. Tsai
A Proper Burial, Robert L. Tsai
Arkansas Law Review
In his article, Professor Mark Killenbeck defends both Korematsu v. United States and Trump v. Hawaii on their own terms, albeit on narrow grounds. He goes on to conclude that comparisons of the two decisions don’t hold up. Killenbeck has authored a thoughtful and contrarian paper, but I’m not sold. In my view, Korematsu simply isn’t worth saving; in fact, a more complete repudiation of the internment decisions is overdue. Trump v. Hawaii, too, must also be revisited at the earliest opportunity and its more alarming features that abet presidential discrimination against non-citizens rejected. Moreover, I believe that comparisons between …
Tainted Precedent, Darrell A.H. Miller
Tainted Precedent, Darrell A.H. Miller
Arkansas Law Review
We have a common law system of constitutional adjudication, at least in the sense that constitutional practice in the United States relies on prior rulings rather than reasoning from first principles in each case. If there’s controlling precedent on point, it’s binding. Neither “inferior courts” in the federal system, nor state courts adjudicating federal law, are permitted to start anew with the “original public meaning” of the First Amendment or pronounce a fresh Dworkinian “moral reading” of the Fourth. Even the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court of the United States, for reasons of reputation, stability, and rule …
There Was Nothing "Neutral" About Executive Order 9066, Eric L. Muller
There Was Nothing "Neutral" About Executive Order 9066, Eric L. Muller
Arkansas Law Review
There is no more appropriate place to discuss the Japanese American cases of World War II than in the pages of the Arkansas Law Review. This is not only because Arkansas was the only state outside the Western Defense Command to host not one but two of the War Relocation Authority’s (WRA) concentration camps for Japanese Americans. It is because one of the most important lawyers to oversee the development and administration of all the WRA camps was the dean under whose leadership this law review was founded: Robert A. Leflar. Leflar’s is not a name that constitutional lawyers are …
Korematsu, Hawaii, And Pedagogy, Sanford Levinson
Korematsu, Hawaii, And Pedagogy, Sanford Levinson
Arkansas Law Review
I begin with some reflections on my own career in teaching—or, perhaps, attempting to teach—American constitutional law to generations of students from 1975 to the present. Or, more accurately, until about three years ago, when I taught introductory constitutional law for the last time. I am quite happy to no longer be teaching that course, whatever joys it did provide me in the past, for a very simple reason: I became more and more frustrated by the demands of coverage, i.e., the duty to take up a variety of topics—including attendant cases and collateral materials—and the unfortunate certainty that what …
Korematsu As The Tribute That Vice Pays To Virtue, Jack M. Balkin
Korematsu As The Tribute That Vice Pays To Virtue, Jack M. Balkin
Arkansas Law Review
Mark Killenbeck wants to (partially) rehabilitate the reputation of one of the Supreme Court’s most despised legal decisions, Korematsu v. United States. He argues that “[w]e should accept and teach Korematsu as an exemplar of what thelaw regarding invidious discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, and national origin should be.” In both Korematsu (and Hirabayashi v. United States) the Court asserted that classifications based on race were subject to strict scrutiny. But “[t]he majority,” Killenbeck explains, “refused to heed their own mandate. In Hirabayashi they held that the government policy was ‘reasonable.’ In Korematsu, . . . they failed …
Sober Second Thought? Korematsu Reconsidered, Mark R. Killenbeck
Sober Second Thought? Korematsu Reconsidered, Mark R. Killenbeck
Arkansas Law Review
How to best describe and treat Korematsu v. United States? A self-inflicted wound? It is certainly an exemplar of a case that in key respects tracks Justice Stephen Breyer’s caution about decisions that have “harm[ed] not just the Court, but the Nation.” Part of an “Anticanon,” resting on “little more than naked racism and associated hokum” and “embod[ying] a set of propositions that all legitimate constitutional decisions must be prepared to refute”? Perhaps. Or is it simply an opinion and result that “has long stood out as a stain that is almost universally recognized as a shameful mistake”?
Symposium: Giving Korematsu V. United States A Sober Second Thought, Nick Bell, Emily Levy, Julian Sharp
Symposium: Giving Korematsu V. United States A Sober Second Thought, Nick Bell, Emily Levy, Julian Sharp
Arkansas Law Review
We are elated to present Professor Mark Killenbeck’s thought provoking article, Sober Second Thought? Korematsu Reconsidered. Killenbeck dives into the Korematsu opinion and its history with great care to determine whether it truly “has no place in law under the Constitution” as Chief Justice John Roberts declared in Trump v. Hawaii.1 While Korematsu’s result provides an understandable “impulse to condemn” it, Killenbeck shows us that focusing solely on the case’s result “stands apart from and in stark contrast to its most important place in the constitutional order: articulation of precepts and terminology that provide the foundations for strict scrutiny.”
Keeping Up: Walking With Justice Douglas, Charles A. Reich
Keeping Up: Walking With Justice Douglas, Charles A. Reich
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Why Do The Poor Not Have A Constitutional Right To File Civil Claims In Court Under Their First Amendment Right To Petition The Government For A Redress Of Grievances?, Henry Rose
Seattle University Law Review
Since 1963, the United States Supreme Court has recognized a constitutional right for American groups, organizations, and persons to pursue civil litigation under the First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances. However, in three cases involving poor plaintiffs decided by the Supreme Court in the early 1970s—Boddie v. Connecticut,2 United States v. Kras,3 and Ortwein v. Schwab4—the Supreme Court rejected arguments that all persons have a constitutional right to access courts to pursue their civil legal claims.5 In the latter two cases, Kras and Ortwein, the Supreme Court concluded that poor persons were properly barred from …
The Future Of Pretrial Detention In A Criminal System Looking For Justice, Gabrielle Costa
The Future Of Pretrial Detention In A Criminal System Looking For Justice, Gabrielle Costa
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Ethical Considerations For Attorneys Researching Jurors On The Internet, Anthony M. Lapinta
Ethical Considerations For Attorneys Researching Jurors On The Internet, Anthony M. Lapinta
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Police Brutality And State-Sanctioned Violence In 21st Century America, Itohen Ihaza
Police Brutality And State-Sanctioned Violence In 21st Century America, Itohen Ihaza
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division Third Department
Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division Third Department
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Notice, Due Process, And Voter Registration Purges, Anthony J. Gaughan
Notice, Due Process, And Voter Registration Purges, Anthony J. Gaughan
Cleveland State Law Review
In the 2018 case of Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, a divided United States Supreme Court upheld the procedures that Ohio election authorities used to purge ineligible voters from the state’s registration lists. In a 5-4 ruling, the majority ruled that the Ohio law complied with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) as amended by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA). This Article contends that the controlling federal law—the NVRA and HAVA—gave the Supreme Court little choice but to decide the case in favor of Ohio’s secretary of state. But this article also argues …
Solitary Confinement Of Juvenile Offenders And Pre-Trial Detainees, Nicole Johnson
Solitary Confinement Of Juvenile Offenders And Pre-Trial Detainees, Nicole Johnson
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
How To Get Away With Murder: The “Gay Panic” Defense, Omar T. Russo
How To Get Away With Murder: The “Gay Panic” Defense, Omar T. Russo
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Let All Voters Vote: Independents And The Expansion Of Voting Rights In The United States, Jeremy Gruber, Michael A. Hardy, Harry Kresky
Let All Voters Vote: Independents And The Expansion Of Voting Rights In The United States, Jeremy Gruber, Michael A. Hardy, Harry Kresky
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Arlington Heights Won In The Supreme Court But The Fair Housing Act’S Goal Of Promoting Racial Integration Saved The Low-Income Housing, Henry Rose
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Mccleskey V. Kemp: Field Notes From 1977-1991, John Charles Boger
Mccleskey V. Kemp: Field Notes From 1977-1991, John Charles Boger
Northwestern University Law Review
The litigation campaign that led to McCleskey v. Kemp did not begin as an anti-death-penalty effort. It grew in soil long washed in the blood of African-Americans, lynched or executed following rude semblances of trials and hasty appeals, which had prompted the NAACP from its very founding to demand “simple justice” in individual criminal cases. When the Warren Court signaled, in the early 1960s, that it might be open to reflection on broader patterns of racial discrimination in capital sentencing, the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF) began to gather empirical evidence and craft appropriate constitutional responses. As …
Buck V. Davis: Anti-Discriminatory Principles In Habeas Corpus Cases, Daniella Rubin
Buck V. Davis: Anti-Discriminatory Principles In Habeas Corpus Cases, Daniella Rubin
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
No abstract provided.