Constitutional Law Commons^™

Justice Stevens And The Emerging Law Of Sex Discrimination , John P. Wagner

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Religion And First Amendment Prosecutions: An Analysis Of Justice Black's Constitutional Interpretation, Constance Mauney

Pepperdine Law Review

Justice Hugo L. Black served on the United States Supreme Court over a period of thirty-four years, encompassing Supreme Court terms from 1937 to 1971. During this period, the subject of the constitutional limitations of the freedom of religion was increasingly subjected to intense social pressures. Justice Black figured prominently in the development of constitutional law as the Supreme Court attempted to give meaning to the establishment and free exercise clause of the first amendment. He wrote the majority opinions which dealt with the establishment clause in the Everson, McCulloin, Engel and Torcaso cases. Yet, on later occasions, Justice Black …

Public Policy Against Religion: Doubting Thomas , Richard H. Seeburger

Pepperdine Law Review

In free exercise cases, the Supreme Court has adopted a least restrictive alternative test in an attempt to maximize protection for religiously motivated practices. Because the least restrictive alternative test only considers the importance of the governmental interest and the availability of alternative means to accomplish those interests, thereby ignoring the importance of the burdened religious activity to the individual and the degree of burden on religious activity, all religious interests are treated equally when asserted against a governmental interest. Under such an inflexible and brittle test, the Supreme Court has recently denied religious claims which had previously been recognized. …

Nollan V. California Coastal Commission: You Can't Always Get What You Want, But Sometimes You Get What You Need, Timothy A. Bittle

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Thompson V. Oklahoma: Debating The Constitutionality Of Juvenile Executions, Susan M. Simmons

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Coy V. Iowa: A Constitutional Right Of Intimidation, John A. Mayers

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States V. Kozminski: On The Threshold Of Involuntary Servitude , Kenneth T. Koonce Jr.

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Sentencing Error: Thomas V. Morris And The Double Jeopardy Clause , Paul G. Flynn

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Thornburgh V. Abbott: Slamming The Prison Gates On Constitutional Rights, Megan M. Mcdonald

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Restraints On The Doctrine Of Punitive Damages, Theodore B. Olson, Theodore J. Boutrous Jr.

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

National Treasury Employees Union V. Von Raab—Will The War Against Drugs Abrogate Constitutional Guarantees?, Alyssa C. Westover

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Texas V. Johnson: The Constitutional Protection Of Flag Desecration, Patricia Lofton

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Constitutionality Of The Federal Sentencing Reform Act After Mistretta V. United States, Charles R. Eskridge Iii

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls And Potential Of The Mosaic Theory Of Fourth Amendment Privacy, David C. Gray, Danielle Keats Citron

Faculty Scholarship

On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a landmark non-decision in United States v. Jones. In that case, officers used a GPS-enabled device to track a suspect’s public movements for four weeks, amassing a considerable amount of data in the process. Although ultimately resolved on narrow grounds, five Justices joined concurring opinions in Jones expressing sympathy for some version of the “mosaic theory” of Fourth Amendment privacy. This theory holds that we maintain reasonable expectations of privacy in certain quantities of information even if we do not have such expectations in the constituent parts. This Article examines and …

The Mighty Work Of Making Nations Happy: A Response To James Davison Hunter, Patrick Mckinley Brennan

Working Paper Series

This article is an invited response to James Davison Hunter’s much-discussed book To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World (Oxford University Press, 2010). Hunter, a sociologist at UVA and a believing Protestant, claims that law’s capacity to contribute to social change is “mostly illusory” and that Christians, therefore, should practice “faithful presence” in the public square rather than seek to influence law directly. My response is that it is, in fact, law’s stunning ability to alter and limit available choices that makes it an object of deservedly fierce contest. The wild …

Between Seminole Rock And A Hard Place: A New Approach To Agency Deference, Kevin O. Leske

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Nonsense And The Freedom Of Speech: What Meaning Means For The First Amendment, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

A great deal of everyday expression is, strictly speaking, nonsense. But courts and scholars have done little to consider whether or why such meaningless speech, like nonrepresentational art, falls within “the freedom of speech.” If, as many suggest, meaning is what separates speech from sound and expression from conduct, then the constitutional case for nonsense is complicated. And because nonsense is so common, the case is also important — artists like Lewis Carroll and Jackson Pollock are not the only putative “speakers” who should be concerned about the outcome.

This Article is the first to explore thoroughly the relationship between …

The New Textualism, Progressive Constitutionalism, And Abortion Rights: A Reply To Jeffrey Rosen, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A General Defense Of Erie Railroad Co. V. Tompkins, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins was the most important federalism decision of the Twentieth Century. Justice Brandeis’s opinion for the Court stated unequivocally that “[e]xcept in matters governed by the Federal Constitution or by acts of Congress, the law to be applied in any case is the law of the state. . . . There is no federal general common law.” Seventy-five years later, however, Erie finds itself under siege. Critics have claimed that it is “bereft of serious intellectual or constitutional support” (Michael Greve), based on a “myth” that must be “repressed” (Craig Green), and even “the worst decision …

Lafler And Frye: A New Constitutional Standard For Negotiation, Rishi Batra

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

The Sixth Amendment guarantees "[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense." In 1984 the Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington established the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel that is a violation of this right. In a pair of decisions handed down in 2012, Lafler v. Cooper and Missouri v. Frye, the Supreme Court extended the holding in Strickland to cover ineffective assistance by defense counsel in the plea-bargaining phase. Recognizing that pleas account for ninety-five percent of all criminal convictions, the court stated that "the negotiation …

The Next Battleground? Personhood, Privacy, And Assisted Reproductive Technologies, Mark Strasser

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Growing Pains Of Graham V. Florida: Deciphering Whether Lengthy Term-Of-Years Sentences For Juvenile Defendants Can Equate To The Unconstitutional Sentence Of Life Without The Possibility Of Parole, Therese A. Savona

St. Thomas Law Review

This article will provide a basic understanding of Eighth Amendment jurisprudence and then explores how the most recent United States Supreme Court cases of Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama affect juvenile resentencing. Additionally, this article addresses the most recent trend presented in juvenile cases where the juvenile defendant is charged as an adult, tried as an adult, and sentenced accordingly. Specifically, the issue of a lengthy term-of-years sentence in states such as California and Florida appear to be the battleground of diverse opinions, more so perhaps than other states.

Law, Liberty And The Rule Of Law (In A Constitutional Democracy), Imer Flores

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In the hunt for a better--and more substantial--awareness of the “law,” The author intends to analyze the different notions related to the “rule of law” and to criticize the conceptions that equate it either to the sum of “law” and “rule” or to the formal assertion that “law rules,” regardless of its relationship to certain principles, including both “negative” and “positive” liberties. Instead, he pretends to scrutinize the principles of the “rule of law,” in general, and in a “constitutional democracy,” in particular, to conclude that the tendency to reduce the “democratic principle” to the “majority rule” (or “majority principle”), …

The Problem Of Democracy In Contexts Of Polarization, Imer Flores

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this paper I argue that contemporary democracies all over the world are more polarized than ever and intend to analyze not only the conditions of possibility of a democracy, in general, and in contexts of polarization, in particular, but also the relationship between democracy and polarization. My claim is that polarization, if certain conditions are met, more than a problem it is a great opportunity to democracy and a greater democratization. Hence, I bring to mind that it was Ronald Dworkin, who recently asked about the conditions of possibility of a democracy and its relationship with polarization by developing …

Discriminating Speech: The Heterophilia Of The Freedom Of Speech Doctrine, Zvi Triger

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

In this Article, I seek to shed light on freedom ofspeech jurisprudence as it is reflected in the Snyder v. Phelps and Skokie cases, as well as in two analogous Israeli cases, namely petitions of members of the extreme right against the pride parades in Jerusalem, as well as petitions by the same petitioners for police permits to hold anti-Arab processions in the Arab town of Umm al-Fahm.

Comparing the cases, I identify the moral relativity built into the interpretation offreedom of expression doctrine in both countries. I introduce the concept of discriminating speech, which is speech that is designed …

Communicative Content And Legal Content, Lawrence B. Solum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay investigates a familiar set of questions about the relationship between legal texts (e.g., constitutions, statutes, opinions, orders, and contracts) and the content of the law (e.g., norms, rules, standards, doctrines, and mandates). Is the original meaning of the constitutional text binding on the Supreme Court when it develops doctrines of constitutional law? Should statutes be given their plain meaning or should judges devise statutory constructions that depart from the text to serve a purpose? What role should default rules play in the interpretation and construction of contracts? This essay makes two moves that can help lawyers and legal …

Political And Constitutional Obligation, Louis Michael Seidman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In his provocative, courageous, and original new book, "Against Obligation: The Multiple Sources of Authority in a Liberal Democracy," Abner Greene argues that there is “no successful general case for a presumptive (or ‘prima facie’) moral duty to obey the law.” In my own book, "On Constitutional Disobedience," I argue that there is no moral duty to obey our foundational law–the Constitution of the United States. This brief article, prepared for a symposium on the two books to be published by the Boston University Law Review, I address three issues related to these claims. First, I discuss what seem to …

E Pluribus Unum: Liberalism's March To Be The Singular Influence On Civil Rights At The Supreme Court, Aaron J. Shuler

Barry Law Review

This article seeks to apply Rogers Smith’s Multiple Traditions thesis to the United States Supreme Court’s treatment of the Fourteenth Amendment to uncover the influences behind its major civil rights decisions. It will argue that liberalism dominates at the Court after mostly, but not completely, shedding its illiberal tendencies. This article will argue that the Court’s focus on intent over impact and its “color-blind” approach to racial classifications in the era of subterranean prejudice and indifference or ignorance to inequality solidifies and perpetuates the hierarchies created by ascriptive forms of Americanism under the Court’s liberal notions. This article will also …

A Reporter's Privilege In Florida: Has The Conflict Between The First Amendment And Sixth Amendment Been Reconciled?, Jay B. Rosman

Barry Law Review

This article examines the reporter's privilege in Florida and the inherent conflict between the First Amendment and Sixth Amendment as it exists between the freedom of the press and the right to a fair trial. The salient question addressed is whether the conflict between the First Amendment and the Sixth Amendment has been reconciled on the issue of a reporter's privilege by Florida courts and the Florida Legislature. The author provides both an analytic and empirical study. Analytically, the article looks to the two amendments to define a reporter's privilege and considers the history of the privilege. The article discusses …

State Interests And The Duration Of Abortion Rights, Randy Beck

Scholarly Works

Few areas of the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence have attracted as much attention in recent decades as the case law recognizing a constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy has exercised more influence over the Court’s abortion jurisprudence than perhaps any other sitting Justice. His jointly authored plurality opinion in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey reaffirmed the basic right to an abortion first recognized in Roe v. Wade, applying that right to regulations effective from the outset of pregnancy. Later opinions, particularly Justice Kennedy’s dissent in Stenberg v. Carhart and his majority opinion in Gonzales v. …