Constitutional Law Commons^™

Enemies Foreign And Domestic: A Historical Look At The Use Of Military Commissions By The United States And The Case For Using Them Against American Citizens, James T. Barnett

ExpressO

An historical look at the use of Military Commissions by the United States of America. This article examines the constitutional powers to use Military Commissions as well as the limitations on such commissions.

It also examines the use of these commissions against American citizens and argues that they are proper in certain circumstances. The limitations set out by the Supreme Court are eroded to the point of being void.

The article goes on to examine the cases of John Walker Lindh and Yasser Hamdi to show that Military Commissions are the proper forum for such cases.

A Call To Leadership: The Future Of Race Relations In Virginia, Rodney A. Smolla

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

Racial Profiling Of African-American Males: Stopped, Searched, And Stripped Of Constitutional Protection, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 439 (2004), Floyd D. Weatherspoon

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The New Post 9/11 America Or The Making Of King George: A Review Of Executive Power In The Effort To Combat Global Terrorism As It Relates To The Power Of The Purse, Woodrow E. Turner

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Ohio Dilemma: Race, Equal Protection, And The Unfulfilled Promise Of A State Bill Of Rights, Jonathan L. Entin

Cleveland State Law Review

Race was a central issue in Ohio from the very beginning. The original state constitution of 1802 and the successor constitution of 1851 explicitly limited suffrage to whites even as both documents forbade slavery. Moreover, the legislature imposed various legal disabilities and restrictions on African Americans. For much of the Nineteenth Century, however, the Ohio Supreme Court tried to narrow the scope of those restrictions by developing a distinctive jurisprudence that was in some respects more progressive, and in general less obnoxious, than that developed in other states and by the U.S. Supreme Court. Before the end of the century, …

Affirmative Action And Colorblindness From The Original Position, Guy-Uriel Charles

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, the author explores Grutter v. Bollinger from the vantage point of the colorblindness principle. He posits that the Grutter decision is noteworthy for two reasons. First, the Court rejected the argument that the Constitution is colorblind and that the classifications based on race are per se unconstitutional. Second, the Court explicitly recognized that racial categorizations are not all morally equivalent. The author uses classical liberalism as a heuristic for exploring whether the colorblindness argument is necessarily a moral imperative. He ultimately concludes that the Court adopted the correct approach in Grutter in rejecting the allure of the …

In Defense Of Deference, Guy-Uriel Charles, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Employment Law: Congress Giveth And The Supreme Court Taketh Away: Title Vii's Prohibition Of Religious Discrimination In The Workplace, Huma T. Yunus

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is There A Place For Race As A Legal Concept, Sharona Hoffman

Faculty Publications

What does "race" mean? The word "race" is omnipresent in American social, political, and legal discourse. The concept of "race" is central to contemporary debate about affirmative action, racial profiling, hate crimes, health inequities, and many other issues. Nevertheless, the best research in genetics, medicine, and the social sciences reveals that the concept of "race" is elusive and has no reliable definition.

This article argues that "race" is an unnecessary and potentially pernicious concept. As evidenced by the history of slavery, segregation, the Holocaust, and other human tragedies, the idea of "race" can perpetuate prejudices and misconceptions and serve as …

Critical Race Histories: In And Out, Darren Lenard Hutchinson

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Legacy Of Public Law 280: Comparing And Contrasting Minnesota’S New Rule For The Recognition Of Tribal Court Judgments With The Recent Arizona Rule, Kevin K. Washburn, Chloe Thompson

William Mitchell Law Review

Tribal court dockets across the country have been growing steadily, and tribal courts are becoming an important part of the judicial fabric of the United States. To acknowledge this reality, state courts and legislatures across the United States have begun to address the important issues of how and whether to recognize tribal court judgments in state courts. The Minnesota Supreme Court adopted a rule that took effect in January of 2004 that provides guidelines for the recognition and enforcement of tribal court orders and judgments. The Minnesota Supreme Court Rule on the Recognition and Enforcement of Tribal Court Orders and …

Introduction, Joel K. Goldstein

All Faculty Scholarship

Brown v. Board of Education [1] is the seminal case of the Twentieth Century. Mere mention of the case can start discussion on any number of topics, all important and all that relate to, or were importantly affected by, Brown. Some of those discussions relate to the immediate subject of Brown: Was state-imposed racially segregated public education a violation of the Equal Protection Clause? What is the nature of race relations in America? How close are we to achieving a racially just society? How fair is our system of public education? Others might focus on Brown for its impact on …

O Say, Can You See: Free Expression By The Light Of Fiery Crosses, Jeannine Bell

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This Article presents a comprehensive, context-based theory which both places cross burning in its proper doctrinal framework and recognizes the history of cross burning as one of Ku Klux Klan-inspired terrorism directed at African Americans. The author prefaces critical commentary on the Supreme Court's decision in Virginia v. Black with analysis of the full landscape of cross burning cases including another issue to which others have paid little attention - the ways in which state courts have negotiated First Amendment challenges to cross burning statutes. Thoroughly examining cross burning from each of these perspectives, the Article argues that cross burning …

After Grutter V. Bollinger-- Revisiting The Desegregation Era From The Perspective Of The Post-Desegregation Era, Kevin D. Brown

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Furthering American Freedom: Civil Rights & The Thirteenth Amendment, Alexander Tsesis

Faculty Publications & Other Works

Abstract: This Article discusses why the Thirteenth Amendment's reach extends beyond the institution of slavery and has important implications for civil liberties. The Amendment-in providing a mechanism to protect fundamental rights articulated in the Declaration of Independence and Preamble to the Constitution-not only ended slavery, but also created a substantive assurance of freedom. This Article reviews Thirteenth Amendment jurisprudence and shows that, despite substantial narrowing after its adoption, the Amendment is a source of sweeping constitutional power for enacting federal civil rights legislation. The Article also distinguishes congressional power under the Thirteenth Amendment from that under the Fourteenth Amendment and …

The Tri-Ethnic Dilemma: Race, Equality, And The Fourteenth Amendment In The American West, Tom I. Romero Ii

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law: Beyond The Bounds Of Roe: Does Stenberg V. Carhart Invalidate The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act Of 2003, Scott A. Hodges

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Discrimination Cases Of The 2002 Term (Symposium: The Fifteenth Annual Supreme Court Review), Eileen Kaufman

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Federalism Re-Constructed: The Eleventh Amendment's Illogical Impact On Congress' Power, Marcia L. Mccormick

All Faculty Scholarship

The Constitution is designed to protect individual liberty and equality by diffusing power among the three branches of the federal government and between the federal and state governments, and by providing a minimum level of protection for individual rights. Yet, the Supreme Court seems to think that federalism is about protecting states as states rather than balancing governmental power to protect individuals. In the name of federalism, the Supreme Court has been paring away at Congress' power to enact civil rights legislation. In doing so, it has transformed the Fourteenth Amendment into a vehicle for protecting states rights rather than …

The "Inexorable Zero", Bert I. Huang

Faculty Scholarship

[F]ine tuning of the statistics could not have obscured the glaring absence of minority [long-distance] drivers .... [T]he company's inability to rebut the inference of discrimination came not from a misuse of statistics but from "the inexorable zero."

The Supreme Court first uttered the phrase "inexorable zero" a quarter-century ago in International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States, a landmark Title VII case. Ever since, this enigmatic name for a rule of inference has echoed across legal argument about segregation, discrimination, and affirmative action. Justice O'Connor, for instance, cited the "inexorable zero" in a major sex discrimination decision upholding an …

Diversity And The Practice Of Interest Assessment, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

"You Are Entering A Gay And Lesbian Free Zone": On The Radical Dissents Of Justice Scalia And Other (Post-) Queers – [Raising Questions About Lawrence, Sex Wars, And The Criminal Law], Bernard Harcourt

Faculty Scholarship

The most renowned substantive criminal law decision of the October 2002 Term, Lawrence v. Texas, will go down in history as a critical turning point in criminal law debates over the proper scope of the penal sanction. For the first time in the history of American criminal law, the United States Supreme Court has declared that a supermajoritarian moral belief does not necessarily provide a rational basis for criminalizing conventionally deviant conduct. The Court's ruling is the coup de grâce to legal moralism administered after a prolonged, brutish, tedious, and debilitating struggle against liberal legalism in its various criminal …

Bolling Alone, Richard A. Primus

Articles

Under the doctrine of reverse incorporation, generally identified with the Supreme Court's decision in Bolling v. Sharpe, equal protection binds the federal government even though the Equal Protection Clause by its terms is addressed only to states. Since Bolling, however, the courts have almost never granted relief to litigants claiming unconstitutional racial discrimination by the federal government. Courts have periodically found unconstitutional federal discrimination on nonracial grounds such as sex and alienage, and reverse incorporation has also limited the scope of affirmative action. But in the presumed core area of preventing federal discrimination against racial minorities, Boiling has virtually no …

Reading Clarence Thomas, Kendall Thomas

Faculty Scholarship

Several years ago, a special issue of The New Yorker entitled "Black in America" included an extraordinary profile of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Authored by Jeffrey Rosen, the article begins with an account of Justice Thomas's interventions in two of the most important cases decided during the Court's previous term. In the first of these cases, Missouri v. Jenkins, the Court was called upon to define the constitutional scope and limits of the federal judicial power to address racial concentration in Kansas City's public schools through salary increases and the creation of magnet programs. In the second …

A Glimpse Behind And Beyond Grutter, Evan H. Caminker

Articles

Many people have suggested that the recent battle over affirmative action was a defining moment for the contemporary relevance of Brown v. Board of Education and that it would determine the promise and potential for widespread societal integration. In my remarks, I want to comment upon a couple of comparisons and links between the Brown, Bakke, Grutter, and Gratz cases.

You Can't Ask (Or Say) That: The First Amendment And Civil Rights Restrictions On Decisionmaker Speech, Helen L. Norton

Faculty Scholarship

Many antidiscrimination statutes limit speech by employers, landlords, lenders, and other decisionmakers in one or both of two ways: (1) by prohibiting queries soliciting information about an applicant's disability, sexual orientation, marital status, or other protected characteristic; and (2) by proscribing discriminatory advertisements or other expressions of discriminatory preference for applicants based on race, sex, age, sexual orientation, or other protected characteristics.

This Article explores how we might think about these laws for First Amendment purposes. Part I outlines the range of civil rights restrictions on decisionmaker speech, while Part II identifies the antidiscrimination and privacy concerns that drive their …

Injustice Casts Shadow On History Of State Executions, John Bessler

All Faculty Scholarship

This article, published in the StarTribune of Minneapolis, discusses the history of lynchings and executions in the State of Minnesota. It specifically discusses miscarriages of justice that have taken place in Minnesota, along with highlighting other problems associated with capital punishment.

Equal Justice Under The Law: Why Iolta Programs Do Not Violate The First Amendment, Hillary A. Webber

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Changes In Immigration Law And Practice After September 11: A Practitioner's Perspective, Asli U. Bali

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article examines the significant changes in U.S. immigration law and practice following the September 11 attacks, highlighting how these changes have eroded civil liberties, particularly for Arab and Muslim communities. It argues that the misuse of immigration laws as a tool for anti-terrorism has led to a shift towards a security-state apparatus, undermining constitutional protections and setting a dangerous precedent for future infringements on civil liberties.

America After 9/11: Freedom Preserved Or Freedom Lost: Hearing Before The S. Comm. On The Judiciary, 108th Cong., Nov. 18, 2003 (Statement Of Viet D. Dinh, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Viet D. Dinh

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.