Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Politicization Of The Designation Of Foreign Terrorist Organizations: The Effect On The Separation Of Powers, Julie B. Shapiro

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article critiques the U.S. process for designating foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs) under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) and subsequent amendments, arguing that the concentration of power in the Executive Branch undermines the separation of powers and risks politicization. The process, while intended to deter terrorism, often lacks transparency, adequate oversight, and judicial scrutiny, leading to potential misuse and unintended consequences, such as radicalizing targeted groups. The author advocates for reforms to restore constitutional principles and ensure the process remains effective and legitimate.

The Insanity Of The Mens Rea Model: Due Process And The Abolition Of The Insanity Defense, Jean K. Gilles Phillips, Rebecca E. Woodman

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

Completely Unguided Discretion: Admitting Non-Statutory Aggravating And Non-Statutory Mitigating Evidence In Capital Sentencing Trials, Sharon Turlington

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “As an attorney practicing exclusively in the area of death penalty defense at the trial level for the last ten years, my perspective on the problems inherent in the system seems vastly different from that presented in academic research and even in case law. While most of the recent changes in death penalty law have focused on the right of the defendant to have sentencing enhancing elements of an offense proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, much of the evidence presented in an actual death penalty jury trial is non-statutory aggravation and non-statutory mitigation. Generally, non-statutory aggravating …

Death Is Unconstitutional: How Capital Punishment Became Illegal In America—A Future History, Jur. Eric Engle Ph.D.

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “A constitution is an organic fact of every state: it is a part of the being of the state. People, like the state, also have a constitution—a character. Just as people change over time, so do states. But just as there are natural limits on what people can or cannot become, so there are natural limits on what the state can and cannot fairly do. No man, nor any group of men, ex ante may justly take the life of another person, though perhaps their killing may be excused (or forgiven) ex post.”

"The death of Death would surely …

Are Journalists Privileged?: Panel Discussion, Anthony Lewis, Max Frankel, Victor Kovner

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Return Of Reasonableness: Saving The Fourth Amendment From The Supreme Court, Melanie D. Wilson

Scholarly Articles

Although there is no recipe for defining Fourth Amendment reasonableness, the Supreme Court produces its most anomalous Fourth Amendment outcomes when it decides "mixed" questions of reasonableness, assessing issues that turn on how ordinary, prudent citizens think and behave. The Court treats these mixed issues, combinations of fact and law, as if they raise purely legal questions. But mixed issues are more complex and require someone to determine historical facts, apply those facts to principles of Fourth Amendment law, and consider the totality of the circumstances, including taking into account community and cultural influences. The Supreme Court will take its …

Presumptions, Inferences, And Strict Liability In Illinois Criminal Law: Preempting The Presumption Of Innocence?, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 715 (2008), Theodore A. Gottfried, Peter G. Baroni

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal And Sentencing Law Review Commissions: Detached, Contemplative Decision Making On Matters Of Criminal Justice Reform, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 777 (2008), John J. Cullerton, Kirk W. Dillard, James B. Durkin, Robert S. Molaro, Peter G. Baroni

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reforming The Illinois Criminal Code: Where The Clear Commission Stopped Short Of Its Goals, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 741 (2008), Terri L. Mascherin, Andrew Vail, Jennifer L. Dlugosz

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

"I'D Grab At Anything. And I'D Forget." Domestic Violence Victim Testimony After Davis V. Washington, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 937 (2008), Nancee Alexa Barth

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Nontestimonial Declarations Against Penal Interest: Eschewing The Corroboration Requirement For Inculpatory Statements, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 969 (2008), Michael Duffy

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Straddling The Civil-Criminal Divide: A Bifurcated Approach To Understanding The Nature Of Immigration Removal Proceedings, Peter L. Markowitz

Articles

The article challenges the traditional classification of removal proceedings as civil, arguing that expulsion, particularly for permanent residents, functions similarly to criminal punishment and should therefore be treated as criminal. It proposes a bifurcated approach distinguishing exclusion and expulsion, advocating for criminal protections in expulsion proceedings to align with historical and constitutional principles.

‘Move On’ Orders As Fourth Amendment Seizures, Stephen E. Henderson

Faculty Articles

If a police officer orders one to move on, must the recipient comply? This article analyzes whether there is a federal constitutional right to remain, and in particular whether a police command to move on constitutes a seizure of the person for purposes of the Fourth Amendment. Although it is a close question, I conclude that the Fourth Amendment typically does not restrict a move on (MO) order, and that substantive due process only prohibits the most egregious such orders. It is a question of broad significance given the many legitimate reasons police might order persons to move on, as …

In The Trenches: Searches And The Misunderstood Common-Law History Of Suspicion And Probable Cause, Fabio Arcila

Scholarly Works

A detailed analysis of the common law during the Framers’ era, and of how it reflected the Fourth Amendment’s restrictions, shows that many judges believed they could issue search warrants without independently assessing the adequacy of probable cause, and that this view persisted even after the Fourth Amendment became effective. This conclusion challenges the leading originalist account of the Fourth Amendment, which Professor Thomas Davies published in the Michigan Law Review in 1999.

Learned treatises in particular, and to a lesser extent a few case decisions, had articulated a judicial duty to monitor probable cause. But it is a mistake …

A Response To Professor Steinberg’S Fourth Amendment Chutzpah, Fabio Arcila

Scholarly Works

Professor David Steinberg believes that the Fourth Amendment was intended only to provide some protection against physical searches of homes through imposition of a specific warrant requirement because the Framers' only object in promulgating the Fourth Amendment was to ban physical searches of homes under general warrants or no warrants at all. This response essay takes issue with his thesis by (1) discussing its implications, (2) reviewing some concerns with his methodology in reviewing the historical record, and (3) examining the theoretical implication underlying his thesis that, except as to homes, we have a majoritarian Fourth Amendment, and questioning whether …

Roth At Fifty: Reconsidering The Common Law Antecedents Of American Obscenity Doctrine, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 393 (2008), James R. Alexander

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Crawford, Retroactivity, And The Importance Of Being Earnest, J. Thomas Sullivan

Law Faculty Scholarship

In this article Professor Sullivan examines the Supreme Court's evolving Confrontation Clause jurisprudence through its dramatic return to pre-Sixth Amendment appreciation of the role of cross-examination in the criminal trial reflected in its 2004 decision in Crawford v. Washington. He discusses the past quarter century of the Court's confrontation decisions and their impact on his client, Ralph Rodney Earnest, recounting the defendant's conviction and twenty-four-year litigation journey through state and federal courts to his eventual release from prison in the only successful attempt to use Crawford retroactively known to date.

Section 1983 Civil Rights Litigation From The October 2006 Term, Martin Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rehabilitating Juvenile Sex Offenders With A Life Sentence, 42 J. Marshall L. Rev. 187 (2008), Adam Doeringer

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Arbitrary Detention: Whither - Or Wither? - Section 9, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

It is a remarkable fact that more than 25 years after the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into effect, we still have no section 9 jurisprudence. It is not that there have been no decisions at all concerning the right not to be arbitrarily detained, of course, but taken in total they do not come anywhere near setting out an analytical framework. This stands in contrast to most other legal rights in the Charter. Section 7 jurisprudence has established the two-step approach to take in assessing claims under that section, including a three-step test for determining whether a …

The End Of Constitutional Exemptions, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

In R. v. Ferguson (reported ante p. 197) the Supreme Court decided that constitutional exemptions are not available as a remedy when a mandatory minimum sentence is said to violate section 12 of the Charter. This is a well reasoned and sensible decision. As mandatory minimum sentences are the context in which the possibility of the constitutional exemption as a Charter remedy has most frequently arisen, as a practical matter Ferguson largely disposes of the issue. Nonetheless, a further clarification at some point that constitutional exemptions are not available in any context, for other violations of section 12 or of …

Grand Jury Discretion And Constitutional Design, Roger Fairfax

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The grand jury possesses an unqualified power to decline to indict - despite probable cause that alleged criminal conduct has occurred. A grand jury might exercise this power, for example, to disagree with the wisdom of a criminal law or its application to a particular defendant. A grand jury might also use its discretionary power to send a message of disapproval regarding biased or unwise prosecutorial decisions or inefficient allocation of law enforcement resources in the community. This ability to exercise discretion on bases beyond the sufficiency of the evidence has been characterized pejoratively as grand jury nullification. The dominant …

Does An Accused Forfeit The Confrontation Right By Murdering A Witness, Absent A Purpose To Render Her Unavailable?, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

If an accused murdered a witness, should he be deemed to have forfeited the right under the Sixth Amendment "to be confronted with" the witness, absent proof that the accused committed the murder for the purpose of rendering her unavailable as a witness?

Congressional Oversight Of National Security Activities: Improving Information Funnels, Heidi Kitrosser

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is A Forensic Laboratory Report Identifying A Substance As A Narcotic 'Testimonial'?, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

Is a state forensic analyst's laboratory report, prepared for use in a criminal proceeding and identifying a substance as cocaine, "testimonial" evidence and so subject to the demands of the Confrontation Clause as set forth in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004)?

Decisions About Coercion: The Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege Waiver Problem, Daniel C. Richman

Faculty Scholarship

For almost a decade, law reviews and hearing rooms have resounded with cogent arguments that, for corporations at least, the attorney-client privilege has been chilled, eroded, attacked, or even killed by the federal government's misuse of its bargaining leverage. Yet it is unclear whether this rhetoric is overstated or understated. Given that most federal criminal defendants plead guilty, and that an extraordinarily large percentage of them provide information and testimony against others in order to avoid harsh sentences (or to avoid being charged at all), one could as easily say that the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution …

More Stories Of Jurisdiction-Stripping And Executive Power: Interpreting The Prison Litigation Reform Act (Plra), Giovanna Shay, Johanna Kalb

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Uninvited Guest: The Federal Death Penalty And The Massachusetts Prosecution Of Nurse Kristen Gilbert, John P. Cunningham

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Meaning Of Life (Or Limb): An Originalist Proposal For Double Jeopardy Reform, Justin W. Curtin

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Legal, Political, And Social Implications Of The Death Penalty, Hon. William W. Wilkins

University of Richmond Law Review

A recent national poll found that sixty-five percent of Americans favor the death penalty. That's down from eighty percent ten years ago. Moreover, the total favoring the death penalty dropped to fifty percent when those polled were asked to assume that thealternative to the death penalty was life in prison with no chance of parole. And, the number of death sentences imposed in the United States during the last few years has dropped to the lowest level since capital punishment was reinstated thirty years ago. Thus, it would seem that our society's attitude toward capital punishment is changing. What was …