Common Law Commons^™

How Wartime Detention Ends, Deborah N. Pearlstein

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rethinking Constitutional Review In America And The Commonwealth: Judicial Protection Of Human Rights In The Common Law World, Po Jen Yap

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Qualified Immunity And Statutory Interpretation, Ilan Wurman

Seattle University Law Review

Before the 1989 case of Graham v. Connor, excessive force cases were pursued under either state law or the insuperable “shocks the conscience” test of the Fourteenth Amendment. Only after Graham did excessive force cases—now under the Fourth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983—inundate the federal courts, which had by then granted far-reaching immunities to officers for their constitutional torts. As a result of federal qualified immunity doctrine, which many states have adopted for themselves, excessive force cases rarely get to trial, plaintiffs often cannot recover, and courts struggle to find principled distinctions from one qualified immunity case to the …

Federal Jurisdiction Over U.S. Citizens' Claims For Violations Of The Law Of Nations In Light Of Sosa, Gwynne Skinner

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Mandatory Death Penalty In Ghana: A Comparative Constitutional Perspective On Dexter Johnson V. Republic, Andrew Novak

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article examines the Supreme Court of Ghana's decision to uphold the mandatory death penalty, contrasting it with the global trend towards abolition. It highlights the tension between the court's textual interpretation of the constitution and international human rights pressures, emphasizing the need for legislative reform to align with human rights standards.

The Common Law Foundations Of The Takings Clause: The Disconnect Between Public And Private Law, Richard A. Epstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Taxing Judicial Restraint: How Washington's Supreme Court Misinterpreted Its Role And The Washington State Constitution, Nicholas Carlson

Seattle University Law Review

In the realm of constitutional interpretation, the judicial department reigns supreme. League of Education Voters v. State exemplifies the judiciary’s potential abuse of its interpretative role: The Washington Supreme Court misinterpreted its judicial function because it ignored the text of Washington State’s constitution and held a statute unconstitutional. The court, therefore, voided a statute because of judicial volition, not because Washington’s constitution demanded that outcome. This Note challenges the reasoning in League and makes a novel suggestion for Washington State constitutional analysis, an approach that may apply to other states. This Note details a new analytical framework for constitutional analysis …

The Islamic Influence In (Pre-)Colonial And Early America: A Historico-Legal Snapshot, Nadia B. Ahmad

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Canadian Bijuralism At A Crossroad? The Impact Of Section 8.1 Of The Interpretation Act On Judicial Interpretation Of Federal Legislation, Aline Grenon

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

Section 8.1 of the Interpretation Act affirms the equal authority of the common law and civil law in the field of property and civil rights. The section states, subject to two exceptions, that federal enactments based on rules and concepts that are part of the law of property and civil rights are to be interpreted in accordance with these rules and concepts. Prior to the enactment of section 8.1 in 2001, courts had a tendency to opt for a uniform application of federal legislation based on common law concepts, with often negative results for Quebec civil law. Since then, the …

The Controversy Over Citations To Foreign Authorities In American Constitutional Adjudication And The Conflict Of Judicial Philosophies: A Reply To Professor Glendon, Michel Rosenfeld

Articles

The controversy over U.S. Supreme Court justices citing foreign authorities in constitutional cases reflects a deeper ideological divide between restrictive and expansive judicial philosophies. This debate, evident in cases like Lawrence v. Texas and Roper v. Simmons, transcends traditional labels like originalism or political ideology, focusing instead on whether judges should defer to majoritarian decisionmaking or actively shape evolving rights. The article argues that the furor over foreign citations will diminish once the broader philosophical clash over judicial interpretation is resolved, as differences over foreign authorities are secondary to this central divide.

Saving The Trees One Constitutional Provision At A Time: Judicial Activism And Deforestation In India, Lennon Banks Haas

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Criminal Forfeiture And The Sixth Amendment: The Role Of The Jury At Common Law, Richard E. Finneran, Steven K. Luther

Cardozo Law Review

Throughout its recent jurisprudence after Apprendi v. New Jersey, the Supreme Court has emphasized that its analysis of the Sixth Amendment jury trial right centers upon the historical role of the jury at common law. Just last year, in Southern Union Co. v. United States, the Court extended the Sixth Amendment jury trial right to criminal fines after concluding that the jury's verdict determined the maximum fine that could be imposed at common law. The Court remained silent, however, with regard to another financial penalty commonly applied in the federal system: criminal forfeitures. Given that the Supreme Court …

Illegitimate Children And Constitutional Review, Clayton W. Plotkin, John Vodonick

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Allocating The Costs Of Parental Free Exercise: Striking A New Balance Between Sincere Religious Belief And A Child's Right To Medical Treatment , Paul A. Monopoli

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Separation Of Powers Doctrine On The Modern Supreme Court And Four Doctrinal Approaches To Judicial Decision-Making, R. Randall Kelso

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Punishment Without Culpability, John F. Stinneford

UF Law Faculty Publications

For more than half a century, academic commentators have criticized the Supreme Court for failing to articulate a substantive constitutional conception of criminal law. Although the Court enforces various procedural protections that the Constitution provides for criminal defendants, it has left the question of what a crime is purely to the discretion of the legislature. This failure has permitted legislatures to evade the Constitution’s procedural protections by reclassifying crimes as civil causes of action, eliminating key elements (such as mens rea) or reclassifying them as defenses or sentencing factors, and authorizing severe punishments for crimes traditionally considered relatively minor.

The …

Response: There Is No New General Common Law Of Severability, Kevin C. Walsh

Law Faculty Publications

In this solicited response to The New General Common Law of Severability, I first offer an interpretation of Ayotte and subsequent Supreme Court decisions as continuous with existing doctrine instead of a departure from it. I then suggest that much of Scoville’s evidence for a federalization of severability doctrine is better viewed as evidence of doctrinal looseness rather than of doctrinal change. I conclude by returning to the lessons of severability’s doctrinal history, suggesting that the prehistory of severability doctrine may supply a better guide for how courts should deal with problems of partial unconstitutionality in the future.

Prosecution Appeals Of Court-Ordered Midtrial Acquittals: Permissible Under The Double Jeopardy Clause?, David S. Rudstein

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Backdrops, Stephen E. Sachs

Faculty Scholarship

The Constitution is often said to leave important questions unanswered. These include, for example, the existence of a congressional contempt power or an executive removal power, the role of stare decisis, and the scope of state sovereign immunity. Bereft of clear text, many scholars have sought answers to such questions in Founding-era history. But why should the historical answers be valid today, if they were never codified in the Constitution's text?

This Article describes a category of legal rules that weren't adopted in the text, expressly or implicitly, but which nonetheless have continuing legal force under the written Constitution. These …

Reason, The Common Law, And The Living Constitution (Review Of The Living Constitution By David Strauss), Matthew J. Steilen

Book Reviews

This article reviews David Strauss’s recent book, The Living Constitution. The thesis of Strauss’s book is that constitutional law is a kind of common law, based largely on judicial precedent and common-sense judgments about what works and what is fair. Strauss argues constitutional doctrines prohibiting discrimination and protecting free speech have a common law basis, and that the originalist would have to reject them. However, it is unclear that the common law can justify these rights. This review examines Strauss’s account of the common law and shows why it cannot justify our First Amendment protections of subversive advocacy, as Strauss …

Judicial Takings And Collateral Attacks On State Court Property Decisions, Stacey L. Dogan, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

In Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection,1 the U.S. Supreme Court divided over the question whether takings alleged to have occurred as a result of judicial action should be treated identically to takings by legislative or executive actors. In this essay, we accept the plurality’s basic contention that it makes little sense to treat judicial takings of property categorically differently than takings by other branches of government. If a judge decided to condemn property for a highway project, for example, we agree with Justice Scalia that the Constitution would compel compensation, just as it does …

The Conflicted Assumptions Of Modern Constitutional Law, H. Jefferson Powell

Faculty Scholarship

Contribution to Symposium - The Nature of Judicial Authority: A Reflection on Philip Hamburger's Law and Judicial Duty

Sex Work By Law: Bedford's Impact On The Municipal Regulation Of Sex Work, Elaine Craig

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The recent Ontario trial decision in Bedford suggests three interrelated principles that municipal law makers should consider when formulating bylaws aimed at regulating sex work. These principles, if upheld on appeal, will inform the constitutionality of both current and prospective bylaws regulating sex work in Canadian cities. In Bedford, Justice Himel concluded that the constitutionality of laws regulating the sex trade must be determined in a legal context which recognizes the violence faced by sex workers. She confirmed that laws that indirectly make sex work more dangerous and harmful must be consistent with those principles that our legal system, through …

Sex Work By Law: Bedford's Impact On The Municipal Regulation Of Sex Work, Elaine Craig

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The recent Ontario trial decision in Bedford suggests three interrelated principles that municipal law makers should consider when formulating bylaws aimed at regulating sex work. These principles, if upheld on appeal, will inform the constitutionality of both current and prospective bylaws regulating sex work in Canadian cities.

In Bedford, Justice Himel concluded that the constitutionality of laws regulating the sex trade must be determined in a legal context which recognizes the violence faced by sex workers. She confirmed that laws that indirectly make sex work more dangerous and harmful must be consistent with those principles that our legal system, through …

The Disposing Power Of The Legislature, Thomas W. Merrill

Faculty Scholarship

The Constitution as we understand it includes principles that have emerged over time in a common law fashion. One such principle is the disposing power of the legislature – the understanding that only the legislature has the power to arrange, order, and distribute the power to act with the force of law among the different institutions of society. This Essay illustrates the gradual emergence of the disposing power in criminal, civil, and administrative law, and offers some reasons why it is appropriate that the legislature be given this exclusive authority. One implication of the disposing power is that another type …

Converging Queer And Feminist Legal Theories: Family Feuds And Family Ties, Elaine Craig

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

The notion that queer theory and feminism are inevitably in tension with one another has been well developed both by queer and feminist theorists. Queer theorists have critiqued feminist theories for being anti-sex, overly moralistic, essentialist, and statist. Feminist theorists have rejected queer theory as being un-critically pro-sex and dangerously protective of the private sphere. Unfortunately these reductionist accounts of what constitutes a plethora of diverse, eclectic and overlapping theoretical approaches to issues of sex, gender, and sexuality, often fail to account for the circumstances where these methodological approaches converge on legal projects aimed at advancing the complex justice interests …

Equitable Balancing In The Age Of Statutes, Jared Goldstein

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Appropriations Power And Sovereign Immunity, Paul F. Figley, Jay Tidmarsh

Michigan Law Review

Discussions of sovereign immunity assume that the Constitution contains no explicit text regarding sovereign immunity. As a result, arguments about the existence-or nonexistence-of sovereign immunity begin with the English and American common-law doctrines. Exploring political, fiscal, and legal developments in England and the American colonies in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, this Article shows that focusing on common-law developments is misguided. The common-law approach to sovereign immunity ended in the early 1700s. The Bankers' Case (1690- 1700), which is often regarded as the first modern common-law treatment of sovereign immunity, is in fact the last in the line of English …

Just Not Who We Are: A Critique Of Common Law Constitutionalism, Andrew C. Spiropoulos

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Giles V. California: Sixth Amendment Confrontation Right, Forfeiture By Wrongdoing, And A Misguided Departure From The Common Law And The Constitution, 40 U. Tol. L. Rev. 577 (2009), Ralph Ruebner, Eugene Goryunov

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.