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

Constitutional Law Commons™

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

Courts

Institution
Keyword
Publication Year
Publication
Publication Type
File Type

Articles 2521 - 2550 of 3555

Full-Text Articles in Constitutional Law

Making Sense Out Of Nevada V. Hicks: A Reinterpretation, Alex Tallchief Skibine Jan 2001

Making Sense Out Of Nevada V. Hicks: A Reinterpretation, Alex Tallchief Skibine

St. Thomas Law Review

This article will first, summarize the law as it was before Hicks and second, focus on the various concurring opinions found in Hicks. Then, it will analyze the nature of the tribal right to exclude in an attempt to reconcile the results reached by the U.S. Supreme Court in terms of federalist principles. The article continues by arguing that Hicks can be conceived of as a special case requiring a clear statement from Congress before tribal jurisdiction can be judicially acknowledged. Finally, the article concludes by debating whether tribal powers, having been judicially divested, can be resuscitated through legislation, and …


Challenges To Racial Redistricting In The New Millennium: Hunt V. Cromartie As A Case Study, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel E. Charles Jan 2001

Challenges To Racial Redistricting In The New Millennium: Hunt V. Cromartie As A Case Study, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer, Guy-Uriel E. Charles

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.


Fetal Neglect And State Intervention: Preventing Another Attleboro Cult Baby Death, Marilyn L. Miller Jan 2001

Fetal Neglect And State Intervention: Preventing Another Attleboro Cult Baby Death, Marilyn L. Miller

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note examines the legal and ethical implications of the Rebecca Corneau case, where the state intervened in her pregnancy due to concerns about the viability of her fetus and her refusal of medical care based on religious beliefs. The court balanced Corneau's constitutional rights against the state's interest in protecting the fetus, ultimately prioritizing the latter. This decision highlights the tension between individual autonomy, religious freedom, and fetal rights, raising significant questions about the limits of state intervention in pregnancy.


Drug Tests, Arrests & Fetuses: A Comment On The U.S. Supreme Court's Narrow Opinion In Ferguson V. City Of Charleston, Brigitte M. Nahas Jan 2001

Drug Tests, Arrests & Fetuses: A Comment On The U.S. Supreme Court's Narrow Opinion In Ferguson V. City Of Charleston, Brigitte M. Nahas

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article examines the Supreme Court's decision in Ferguson v. City of Charleston, where the Court ruled that a hospital's drug-testing policy for pregnant patients violated the Fourth Amendment. The analysis critiques the Court's narrow opinion for failing to provide clear guidance on future drug-testing policies, while emphasizing the unconstitutionality of using such policies primarily for law enforcement purposes. The author argues that the decision leaves unresolved questions about the balance between government interests and women's privacy and reproductive rights, particularly in the context of prenatal care and drug use.


Nationalized Political Discourse, Robert F. Nagel Jan 2001

Nationalized Political Discourse, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.


Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel Jan 2001

Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel

Articles

When I was first introduced to the constitutional regulation of criminal procedure in the mid-1950s, a single issue dominated the field: To what extent did the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment impose upon states the same constitutional restraints that the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments imposed upon the federal government? While those Bill of Rights provisions, as even then construed, imposed a broad range of constitutional restraints upon the federal criminal justice system, the federal system was (and still is) minuscule as compared to the combined systems of the fifty states. With the Bill of Rights provisions …


From Miranda To §3501 To Dickerson To...(Symposium: Miranda After Dickerson: The Future Of Confession Law), Yale Kamisar Jan 2001

From Miranda To §3501 To Dickerson To...(Symposium: Miranda After Dickerson: The Future Of Confession Law), Yale Kamisar

Articles

Once the Court granted [certiorari in Dickerson] court-watchers knew the hour had come. At long last the Court would have to either repudiate Miranda, repudiate the prophylactic-rule cases [the cases viewing Miranda's requirements as not rights protected by the Constitution, but merely "prophylactic rules"] or offer some ingenious reconciliation of the two lines of precedent. The Supreme Court of the United States, however, doesn't "have to" do anything, as the decision in Dickerson once again reminds us.


W(H)Ither Zschernig?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez Jan 2001

W(H)Ither Zschernig?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The author argues here that a declaration of victory by the critics of the dormant foreign affairs doctrine would be premature. Notwithstanding the Court's citation of Ashwander v. TVA, the actual grounds of the decision in Crosby were in no meaningful sense less "constitutional" in nature than a decision based on the dormant foreign affairs power would have been. Moreover, even though the Court said that its decision was based on a straightforward application of "settled ... implied preemption doctrine," the Court's preemption analysis was anything but ordinary. Indeed, Crosby's version of preemption analysis is subject to the …


Towards A Constitutional Architecture For Cooperative Federalism, Philip J. Weiser Jan 2001

Towards A Constitutional Architecture For Cooperative Federalism, Philip J. Weiser

Publications

In this Article, Professor Weiser calls for a new conception of federal-state relations to justify existing political practice under cooperative federalism regulatory programs. In particular, Professor Weiser highlights how Congress favors cooperative federalism programs--that combine federal and state authority in creative ways--and has rejected the dual federalism model of regulation--with separate spheres of state and federal authority that current judicial rhetoric often celebrates. Given the increasing dissonance between prevailing political practice and judicial rhetoric, courts will ultimately have to confront three fault lines for current cooperative federalism programs: the legal source of authority for state agencies to implement federal law, …


Legal Rights In The Supreme Court Of Canada In 2000: Seeing The Big Picture, Janine Benedet Jan 2001

Legal Rights In The Supreme Court Of Canada In 2000: Seeing The Big Picture, Janine Benedet

All Faculty Publications

In 2000, the Supreme Court of Canada decided four cases which raised claims concerning some of the legal rights provisions of the Charter. Two of the cases were criminal: R. v. Darrach, [2000] 2 S.C.R. 443; R. v. Morrisey, [2000] 2 S.C.R. 90. The other two cases involved a human rights investigation (Blencoe v. British Columbia (Human Rights Commission), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 307), and a child protection proceeding (Winnipeg Child and Family Services v. K.L.W., [2000] 2 S.C.R. 519). This comment focuses on two of these decisions (Blencoe and Darrach) where the SCC considered claims under section 7 of the …


Miranda And Some Puzzles Of 'Prophylactic' Rules, Evan H. Caminker Jan 2001

Miranda And Some Puzzles Of 'Prophylactic' Rules, Evan H. Caminker

Articles

Constitutional law scholars have long observed that many doctrinal rules established by courts to protect constitutional rights seem to "overprotect" those rights, in the sense that they give greater protection to individuals than those rights, as abstractly understood, seem to require.' Such doctrinal rules are typically called "prophylactic" rules.2 Perhaps the most famous, or infamous, example of such a rule is Miranda v. Arizona,' in which the Supreme Court implemented the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination4 with a detailed set of directions for law enforcement officers conducting custodial interrogations, colloquially called the Miranda warnings. 5


'Appropriate' Means-Ends Constraints On Section 5 Powers, Evan H. Caminker Jan 2001

'Appropriate' Means-Ends Constraints On Section 5 Powers, Evan H. Caminker

Articles

With the narrowing of Congress' Article I power to regulate interstate commerce and to authorize private suits against states, Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment provides Congress with an increasingly important alternative source of power to regulate and police state conduct. However, in City of Boerne v. Flores and subsequent cases, the Supreme Court has tightened the doctrinal test for prophylactic legislation based on Section Five. The Court has clarified Section Five's legitimate ends by holding that Congress may enforce Fourteenth Amendment rights only as they are defined by the federal judiciary, and the Court has constrained Section Five's permissible …


Book Review: We The People: The Fourteenth Amendment And The Supreme Court, S. I. Strong Nov 2000

Book Review: We The People: The Fourteenth Amendment And The Supreme Court, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

Never one to shirk a challenge, Michael Perry has taken on the difficult task of investigating whether, as charged by a number of prominent social and legal commentators, "the modern Supreme Court, in the name of the Fourteenth Amendment [to the US Constitution], [has] usurped prerogatives and made choices that properly belong to the electorally accountable representatives of the American people," and if so, to what extent (p. 8). Perry makes no attempt to address every facet of Fourteenth Amendment doctrine, but instead focuses his discussion on some of the most controversial topics: racial segregation, affirmative action, discrimination on the …


Why The Courts, Anthony Lewis Nov 2000

Why The Courts, Anthony Lewis

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.


Court Decisions As Information Sources For Journalists: How Journalists Can Better Cover Appellate Decisions, F. Dennis Hale Oct 2000

Court Decisions As Information Sources For Journalists: How Journalists Can Better Cover Appellate Decisions, F. Dennis Hale

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.


Is Payne Defensible?: The Constitutionality Of Admitting Victim-Impact Evidence At Capital Sentencing Hearings, Joshua D. Greenberg Oct 2000

Is Payne Defensible?: The Constitutionality Of Admitting Victim-Impact Evidence At Capital Sentencing Hearings, Joshua D. Greenberg

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.


Rules And Judicial Review, Emily Sherwin Sep 2000

Rules And Judicial Review, Emily Sherwin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Judicial review of statutes on constitutional grounds is affected by a cluster of doctrinal practices that are generally accepted, but not very well explained, by the courts and not entirely consistent with each other. Courts usually judge statutes “as applied” rather than as written; they favor “severance” of valid applications of statutes from invalid or possibly invalid applications when possible; and they interpret statutes in ways that avoid constitutional difficulty. These overlapping practices presumably are intended to preserve legislation, and hence are associated with a modest conception of the role of courts in government. Yet they are not always modest …


The Normless And Exceptionless Exception: Carl Schmitt's Theory Of Emergency Powers And The "Norm-Exception" Dichotomy, Oren Gross May 2000

The Normless And Exceptionless Exception: Carl Schmitt's Theory Of Emergency Powers And The "Norm-Exception" Dichotomy, Oren Gross

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.


Losing Faith: America Without Judicial Review?, Erwin Chemerinsky May 2000

Losing Faith: America Without Judicial Review?, Erwin Chemerinsky

Michigan Law Review

In the last decade, it has become increasingly trendy to question whether the Supreme Court and constitutional judicial review really can make a difference. Gerald Rosenberg, for example, in The Hollow Hope, expressly questions whether judicial review achieves effective social change. Similarly, Michael Klarman explores whether the Supreme Court's desegregation decisions were effective, except insofar as they produced a right-wing backlash that induced action to desegregate. In Taking the Constitution Away from the Courts, Mark Tushnet approvingly invokes these arguments (pp. 137, 145), but he goes much further. Professor Tushnet contends that, on balance, constitutional judicial review is harmful. He …


Carl Schmitt And The Three Moments Of Democracy, Andreas Kalyvas May 2000

Carl Schmitt And The Three Moments Of Democracy, Andreas Kalyvas

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.


Introduction, Andreas Kalyvas, Jan Müller May 2000

Introduction, Andreas Kalyvas, Jan Müller

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.


Carl Schmitt And His Influence On Historians, Reinhard Mehring May 2000

Carl Schmitt And His Influence On Historians, Reinhard Mehring

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.


Carl Schmitt: The Defective Guidance For The Critique Of Political Liberalism, Emanuel Richter May 2000

Carl Schmitt: The Defective Guidance For The Critique Of Political Liberalism, Emanuel Richter

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.


Carl Schmitt's Antiliberalism: Its Theoretical And Historical Sources And Its Philosophical And Political Meaning, Carlo Galli May 2000

Carl Schmitt's Antiliberalism: Its Theoretical And Historical Sources And Its Philosophical And Political Meaning, Carlo Galli

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Exile Of The Nomos: For A Critical Profile Of Carl Schmitt, Giacomo Marramao May 2000

The Exile Of The Nomos: For A Critical Profile Of Carl Schmitt, Giacomo Marramao

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.


Schmittian Positions On Law And Politics?: Cls And Derrida, John P. Mccormick May 2000

Schmittian Positions On Law And Politics?: Cls And Derrida, John P. Mccormick

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.


Schmitt, History, And Habermas: Comments On Mehring And Rasch, Joseph W. Bendersky May 2000

Schmitt, History, And Habermas: Comments On Mehring And Rasch, Joseph W. Bendersky

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.


"The Mis-Characterization Of The Negro": A Race Critique Of The Prior Conviction Impeachment Rule, Montrè D. Carodine Apr 2000

"The Mis-Characterization Of The Negro": A Race Critique Of The Prior Conviction Impeachment Rule, Montrè D. Carodine

Indiana Law Journal

The election of Barack Obama as the nation's first Black President was a watershed moment with respect to race relations in the United States. Obama's election removed what to many seemed a nearly insurmountable racial barrier. Yet as he transitions into his historic role and his family becomes the first Black occupants of the White House, scores of Blacks are housed in jails and prisons across the country. The mass incarceration of Blacks, among other serious issues, demonstrates that race still matters in the United States. As then-presidential candidate Obama acknowledged in the speech that many viewed to be pivotal …


Litigation In The United States And Mexico: A Comparative Overview, Robert M. Kossick, Jr. Mar 2000

Litigation In The United States And Mexico: A Comparative Overview, Robert M. Kossick, Jr.

University of Miami Inter-American Law Review

No abstract provided.


Changing Relationships Among European Constitutional Courts, Stephen Breyer Feb 2000

Changing Relationships Among European Constitutional Courts, Stephen Breyer

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.