Constitutional Law Commons^™

Ohio's Unconstitutional Burden Of Proof For Criminal New Trial Motions Based On Newly Discovered Evidence, David B. Alden, Michael P. Koslen

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Re-Imagining Tomorrow: A Technology, Innovation Law, And Ethics Symposium On Addictive Technology And Children, Margaret Chon

Seattle University Law Review

In this Foreword, Professor Margaret Chon introduces Seattle University's Technology, Innovation Law, and Ethics (TILE) program, the 2024 TILE Symposium, and Dr. Gaia Bernstein’s Unwired: Gaining Control Over Addictive Technologies.

Keynote Address: The Movement To Protect Kids From Addictive Technologies, Gaia Bernstein

Seattle University Law Review

In this keynote address, I describe my personal journey starting with a school outreach program I created in 2017 to address technology overuse among kids. While I initially advocated for self-help methods, I grew to recognize that the tech industry bore responsibility. This realization led me to write Unwired: Gaining Control over Addictive Technologies, which focused on collective action to pressure the tech industry to redesign its addictive products.

I then describe the movement to control addictive technologies and protect kids, which has gained momentum since the end of the pandemic. This movement combines grassroots parent activism with legal-political action. …

Moral Panic Or Public Health Crisis? Lessons From Drugs And Gambling For “Addictive” Design, Matthew B. Lawrence, Haomin (Kevin) Yan

Seattle University Law Review

Alcohol, automobiles, guns, lottery, loot boxes, meat, music, opioid painkillers, processed foods, prop bets, slot machines, television, tobacco, violent video games. Over the last century each of these has been subject to concerns—some might even say “moral panics”—from parents and policymakers about avoidable harms to kids and adults. In some cases we look back with the benefit of hindsight and dismiss those concerns as naïve or moralistic. In others we look back at them as justified or as having come too late to check an expanding industry before it did unfathomable harm while growing so powerful that it became all …

Responding To Digital Addiction, Ned Snow

Seattle University Law Review

In Unwired: Gaining Control over Addictive Technologies, Professor Gaia Bernstein calls our attention to the growing problem of digital addiction. Digital addiction may sound like something out of a science-fiction novel or something that does not raise the same sort of real-life practical concerns as are present in a physical health crisis or an economic decline. But as Bernstein presents the evidence, we learn that the consequences of digital addiction can be just as harmful as a serious disease or a financial depression. Cognitive development disorders, anxiety, emotional depression, social isolation, and other mental health ills can be debilitating—as much …

The Ai Doppelgänger Dilemma: Cloned Voices In The Music Industry, Elizabeth Shields

Seattle University Law Review

With the rise of generative artificial intelligence (AI), there has been an influx of “voice clones”—deep-learning algorithms that create synthetic speech to realistically mimic human voices. Celebrities and, in particular, music artists, have been subjected to the proliferation of AI voice clones on social media platforms like TikTok and streaming platforms such as Spotify. Despite music utilizing AI voice clones having amassed much popularity, this technology can be harmful and highly invasive to musicians whose livelihoods often depend on their distinct voices. While legal scholars have attempted to articulate various rights that could protect a person’s voice, individuals are largely …

Let The Sunshine In: Crafting Constitutional Transparency Regulations For Content Moderation, Caitlin Ring Carlson

Seattle University Law Review

In response to public concern about the impact of social media, legislators in some U.S. states have developed laws to regulate the process of content moderation. Many include mandatory transparency and disclosure requirements, some of which courts have already deemed an unconstitutional infringement on social media platforms’ right to free expression. This article explores the parameters for crafting constitutional social media transparency regulations using existing U.S. media policy and insights from recent legal challenges. The resulting analysis identifies content neutral transparency requirements that mandate the disclosure of purely factual, non-controversial information as those most likely to withstand judicial scrutiny. Specifically, …

This Is Not A Game: The Addictive Allure Of Digital Companions, Nizan Geslevich Packin, Karni Chagal-Feferkorn

Seattle University Law Review

Artificial Intelligence (AI) agents have become an inescapable part of modern childhood, reshaping education, leisure activities, entertainment, and social interaction. From AI-powered tutors that adapt to individual learning styles to emotionally responsive chatbots that simulate human companionship, these systems promise unprecedented personalization, cognitive stimulation, and social support. However, these benefits mask significant risks that remain unregulated and inadequately addressed.

Although adults are also susceptible to forming deep emotional bonds with AI companions—often trusting them as if they possessed genuine understanding and empathy—children are particularly vulnerable. Their misplaced trust can more severely distort social development, weaken critical thinking, and foster unhealthy …

Slow, Expensive, And Out Of Control: A Statutory Solution To The Competency Crisis, Robert Barnhart

Maine Law Review

The United States Constitution guarantees both the right to a speedy trial and the right to be competent to stand trial. United States Supreme Court decisions have recognized both of these rights but left the hard work of implementing them to legislatures and rulemakers. After turning the technicalities over to the states, the Supreme Court has generally stayed out of the business of setting bright-line rules to follow, both for setting speedy trial limits and ensuring defendants are evaluated and restored to competency. This delegation has led to a dual crisis. Cases are not resolved on time, and a substantial …

Growing Pains: The Evolution Of Jlwop Sentences In Washington, Selena M. Galvan

Washington Law Review

In 2021, the Washington State Supreme Court abolished de facto life sentences— those that amount to a life sentence despite not carrying the life without parole label—for juvenile offenders, finding them unconstitutional under article 1, section 14 of the Washington Constitution. In 2022, less than a year later, the Court reversed course in the case of State v. Anderson by upholding a sixty-one-year sentence for crimes a juvenile offender committed at age seventeen. The Washington State Supreme Court’s decision in Anderson runs contrary to what modern science demonstrates about the diminished culpability of juvenile offenders, and it runs contrary to …

Not Demented Enough: Dementia And Competency To Stand Trial, Rashmi Goel

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Original Understanding Of The Western State Constitutions' Protections From Searches, Seizures, And Self-Incrimination, Greg Sergienko

UMKC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Compromised Guilt: Systemic Denial Of The Right To A Unanimous Verdict In Arkansas, Bryan Altman

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

Currently, the State of Arkansas curiously stands alone in opposition to the rest of the nation when it comes to honoring the individual’s right to a unanimous verdict in a criminal trial. While never explicitly adopted by the Arkansas Supreme Court, Arkansas law has passively permitted two illegitimate practices to develop. First, prosecutors are permitted to submit evidence of multiple, separate acts to sustain a single criminal charge. Second, jurors are permitted to disregard factual disagreements and render patchwork verdicts, especially in the context of sex crime cases.

Arkansas practice and custom currently does not protect against a conviction based …

Rethinking Article I, Section 9: State Protections Against Self-Incrimination In The Wake Of Gr 37, Zachary L. Hentzel

Washington Law Review

When adopted by Washington courts in 2018, General Rule 37 marked a significant advance in the fight against racial discrimination. Modifying the third step of Batson v. Kentucky, GR 37 requires that peremptory challenges must be denied if an “objective observer” could view race or ethnicity as a factor in the strike. Applying the objective observer standard to contexts beyond jury selection—such as evaluation of jury verdicts, seizures of persons, and prosecutorial misconduct—has led to major statewide victories toward establishing a more equitable justice system. However, courts have not granted all requests to extend the objective observer standard to …

Can Prosecutors' Offices Preserve Public Confidence In Their Nonpartisanship - And, If So, How?, Rebecca Roiphe, Bruce Green

Articles & Chapters

Politicians, the media, and others erode public confidence in prosecutors by accusing them of “weaponizing” their power in cases with political implications. This essay argues that prosecutors’ offices have a responsibility not only to do their work in accordance with professional norms, training and policy that call for nonpartisan decision-making, but also to make affirmative efforts to restore and preserve public faith that prosecutors are in fact acting neutrally, objectively and impartially. Despite limits to what prosecutors’ offices can do in the current climate, this essay suggests some possible measures to counteract the perception of political bias.

Properly Partitioning Prejudice: Analyzing Mixed Brady And Napue Claims, Patrick Scariano

Fordham Law Review

Due process affords criminal defendants the right to receive evidence possessed by the government that would aid in their defense. This right was codified in Brady v. Maryland. Brady’s lesser-known ancestor is Napue v. Illinois, which gave defendants the right to a new trial if the government knowingly offered perjured testimony in their original trial. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that these rights are critical to support verdicts worthy of confidence necessary to ensure due process.

Unfortunately, defendants victimized by misconduct are often affected by multiple violations of their rights. Courts have developed ways to examine …

Two Piecemeal Treatments For A System Addicted To Punishment, Myles Crandall

University of Miami Law Review

For decades, the American criminal legal system has failed to curtail illicit drug use and overdose deaths through punitive and selective enforcement. The federal government has prosecuted people and succeeded in securing many long prison sentences based on drug crimes. In the past two years, two amendments by the United States Sentencing Commission offered a measured reprieve through sentence reductions. Amendment 821 offered the possibility for sentence reductions based on recalculating the guidelines associated with certain prior offenses. Amendment 814 updated policy statements for assessing “extraordinary and compelling reasons” for a sentence reduction. These changes are not revolutionary; however, the …

Brief Of Criminal Law Professors Andrea Roth And J.D. King As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Lesh V. United States, U.S. Supreme Court Docket No. 24-654, David B. Owens

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED

Article III of the Constitution provides that “[t]he Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury.” And the Sixth Amendment provides that “[i]n all criminal prosecutions,” the accused shall enjoy the right to trial by jury.

The question presented is: Whether the Constitution’s dual guarantee of trial by jury contains an unstated exception for “petty” offenses.

The Eighth Amendment’S Paper Tiger: Pain, Executions, And The Cruel And Unusual Punishment Clause, Alexandra L. Klein

Scholarly Articles

The Eighth Amendment prohibits “cruel and unusual punishments.” This prohibition applies to the way states carry out executions: states may impose capital punishment but may not do so in a way that is unconstitutionally cruel. Over a trilogy of cases that began with Baze v. Rees in 2008, the Court developed a test for analyzing whether a state’s proposed method of execution violated the Eighth Amendment. Under Baze/Glossip/Bucklew, a person challenging a state’s method of execution must show that the method of execution poses a severe risk of “superadded” pain and suffering that can be alleviated by a readily …

Policing As General Warrants, Warren Buff, Brandon Hasbrouck

Scholarly Articles

The drafters of the Bill of Rights and its proponents envisioned a document constitutionalizing protections against some of the worst abuses they had experienced under English rule. Prominent businessmen—many of them engaged in smuggling— found their homes ransacked in search of contraband on flimsy evidence and without any reason given for the disruption of their business and consequent enrichment of government agents. The Fourth Amendment addressed the use of general warrants and writs of assistance to allow government agents to conduct broad searches with limited scrutiny. In the early years of the Constitution, this had little practical effect, because public …

Through A Glass Darkly: How Securities Disclosures Give A Distorted View Of The Economy, Gerald F. Davis

Seattle University Law Review

Our understanding of the American economy often relies on stylized facts derived from mandatory disclosures by listed corporations. Data vendors like Standard & Poor’s vacuum up 10Ks and proxy statements into databases, and scholars distill these into tentative maps. This may have been adequate for a postwar economy centered on asset-heavy manufacturers, but it is increasingly out of step with an information-based economy. Companies listed on the stock market are fewer in number and less representative than they were, light in tangible assets and people, and heavy on IP. Basic facts such as what industry they are in are increasingly …

Rethinking Juror Impartiality, Anna Offit

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Jury impartiality in the contemporary court often justifies the perpetuation

of exclusionary selection practices that make juries more—not less—biased.

This Article calls for a rethinking of this important but flawed concept. Constitutional

interpretations and conceptions of “impartiality” frame it as a transient

orientation toward particular evidence or parties. Yet, during voir dire, the prevailing

conception of jury impartiality is that it is an immutable character trait

that must be discovered—if not created—by professional legal actors. What voir

dire creates is not an impartial jury, but precisely the opposite: a venire shaped

by the strategic biases of lawyers.

This Article offers …

“Digital Integrity”: Defending The Judicial Integrity In The Digital Age, Guy Alon, Doron Menashe, Guy Itzhak Sender

Touro Law Review

Recent revelations have shown that the protection of the Fourth Amendment in the digital age is inadequate. Despite well-known exclusionary rules regarding evidence obtained by illegal search and seizure, current trends in the digital age and the law of evidence resulted in courts that tend to include such evidence, and by doing so, create significant risk of both substantive and procedural errors and hence increase the potential for wrongful convictions. To address the matter and try to empower and modernize the protection given by the Fourth Amendment, this article suggests performing a revolution in the law of evidence in the …

The Challenge That The Advent Of Artificial Intelligence (Ai) Tools Poses To The Procedures For Determining The Existence Of The Preliminary Facts That Condition The Admissibility Of Items Of Evidence, Edward J. Imwinkelried

Marquette Law Review

“[A]d quæstionem facti non respondent judices; . . . ad quæstionem juris not respondent juratores.” Judges do not answer questions of fact; jurors do not answer questions of law.

The jury is a central institution in the American level infrastructure. The Sixth and Seventh Amendments elevate the jury trial right to constitutional status. Of course, when a judge presides at a jury trial, the question that naturally arises is the division of decision-making labor between judge and jury. In the past few decades, the Supreme Court’s Apprendi v. New Jersey line of authority has expanded the jury’s authority to decide …

Shrines Of Discrimination: A Comparative Exploration Of American And Indian Approaches To Balancing Religious Freedom And Equal Rights, Sree Vedala

MC Law Review

Religious freedom and equality, foundational human rights, often clash in legal contexts, particularly when religious practices justify discriminatory actions. The U.S. judiciary has grappled with this tension, as exemplified in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission and Yeshiva University v. YU Pride Alliance. These cases reflect opposing judicial tendencies: deference to religious beliefs versus prioritization of equality. However, neither case established a clear framework for balancing these rights. This article examines India’s "essentiality test," which assesses whether a religious practice is integral to a faith, as a potential model for resolving such conflicts. By comparing U.S. and Indian …

Amending Rule 15.3 Of The Mississippi Rules Of Criminal Procedure To Fully Capture Boykin V. Alabama And Acknowledge Systemic Coercion Indigent Defendants Face In Mississippi, Sarina P. Larson

MC Law Review

The U.S. Constitution—not a state—is what governs questions of constitutionality. It follows that for a state court to make a constitutionally sufficient record of a defendant’s waiver at their plea, the complete interpretation as to sufficiency by the United States Supreme Court must be followed. This Comment stands for the proposition that when Rule 15.3 of the Mississippi Rule of Criminal Procedure was adopted in 2017, it misinterpreted the call of the United States Supreme Court in Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969). Ultimately, this Comment suggests amendments to Rule 15.3 that would place it in compliance with Boykin, …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Corporate Scenarios: Drawing Lessons From History, Madison Condon

Seattle University Law Review

As corporations are increasingly pressed to reveal information about their exposure to climate-related risks, they are often asked to undertake and disclose the outcome of “scenario analysis.” In this exercise, corporations, including financial institutions, examine how their business would fare under different pathways the future may take. One oft-used scenario, for example, is the International Energy Agency’s “Net-Zero by 2050: A Roadmap for the Energy Sector.” This Essay presents a history of the use of scenarios as a corporate planning tool, particularly in the oil industry, arguing that it is key for understanding our present moment and the role of …

Shareholder Expression In A Time Of Heightened Political Tension, Aaron A. Dhir

Seattle University Law Review

In this article, I provide context for my forthcoming research project on shareholder proposals and racial equity audits. Since the murder of George Floyd in May of 2020, progressive shareholder actors have increasingly used the proposal mechanism to advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice-related goals. These proposals have frequently gone beyond requesting the usual corporate fare of diversity trainings, intersectionality workshops, affinity groups, etc. Instead, a more ambitious type of proposal asks corporate America to conduct racial equity audits, defined as “an independent, objective and holistic analysis of a company’s policies, practices, products, services and efforts to combat systemic racism …