Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Indefinite Deflection Of Congressional Standing, Nat Stern

Pepperdine Law Review

Recent litigation brought or threatened against the administration of President Obama has brought to prominence the question of standing by Congress or its members to sue the President for nondefense or non-enforcement of federal law. While scholars divide over the normative propriety of such suits, the Court has never issued a definitive pronouncement on their viability. Nevertheless, the Court’s rulings when the issue has arisen have displayed a distinct pattern. While the Court has not formally repudiated suits of this nature, neither has it issued a decision that hinges on the presence of congressional standing. On the contrary, the Court …

Justified Outbreak: Bringing Together Law, Public Health, And Ethics During An Infectious Disease Emergency, Clark Colwell

LLM Theses

Infectious diseases have recently found renewed significance in Canadian scholarship, with a corresponding increased interest in Canada's overall preparedness, including legal preparedness, to combat infectious disease emergencies. Nearly every Canadian province has emergency legislation containing a "basket clause" - a provision which, for the duration of an emergency, authorizes a decision maker to take 'all necessary measures' to defeat it. Public health legal preparedness scholarship has not yet examined what criteria the decision maker must consider before deciding to deploy measures that could seriously impact the rights of individuals, including those under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This …

Filling The Gap Of Domestic Violence Protection: Returning Human Rights To U.S. Victims, Melanie Kalmanson

Florida State University Law Review

The prevalence of domestic violence in the United States indicates a need for increased governmental protection. The current state-based system inadequately serves victims of domestic violence, and previous US. Supreme Court rulings indicate that the U.S. Constitution leaves the federal government in an impotent position for providing any form of protection for domestic violence victims. Pursuant to the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man, domestic violence violates one's human rights, or those fundamental to personhood. By ratifying the American Declaration through the Charter of the Organization of the American States, the United States established its responsibility for …

Does A House Of Congress Have Standing Over Appropriations?: The House Of Representatives Challenges The Affordable Care Act, Bradford Mank

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In U.S. House of Representatives v. Sylvia Matthews Burwell, the District Court for D.C. in 2015 held that the House of Representatives has Article III standing to challenge certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act as violations of the Constitution’s Appropriations Clause. The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on legislative standing is complicated. The Court has generally avoided the contentious question of whether Congress has standing to challenge certain presidential actions because of the difficult separation-of-powers concerns in such cases. In Raines v. Byrd, the Court held that individual members of Congress generally do not have Article III standing by simply holding …

The Second Amendment In The 21st Century: An In-Depth Examination Of Firearm Freedoms And Their Relationship With Public Safety And Interests, Mathew E. Klein

Honors Undergraduate Theses

One of the most hotly contested topics in the world today revolves around an object. An object that has caused debate among all members of society both in the United States, and all across the globe. But how could an object, something that on its own does nothing, spur such heated argument? This object is the evolution of invention and the product of fighting amongst each other. This object changes the way people think and how they act. This object can be used for both good and bad. This object is a gun.

This research project will explore the Second …

Interpretation: Article I, Section 5, Ronald Weich, Martin B. Gold

All Faculty Scholarship

In Article I of the Constitution, the Framers vest the legislative authority of the United States government in a bicameral Congress, and over the ten sections of the Article they systematically flesh out the structure, duties, and powers of that Congress. In the early sections of Article I they describe the membership of each House, giving life to the “Great Compromise” of the Constitutional Convention under which each state has equal representation in the Senate but population-based representation in the House of Representatives. In Section 5, they grant Congress the power to govern itself.

Section 5 consists of four separate …

To Catch A Terrorist: The Improper Use Of Profiling In U.S. Post-9/11 Counterterrorism, Kamillia Crawford

Honors Undergraduate Theses

The attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) caused thousands of deaths, national and global panic, and immediate action by the federal government to protect the borders of the United States of America (USA) from terrorism. In response to these attacks, the United States (U.S.) government enacted laws for law enforcement agencies to protect against terrorist activities. Law enforcement agencies are effective in combating terrorism, but their measures contain a major flaw - the improper use of race in profiling to address national security and public safety concerns. Racial profiling is an ineffective measure for preventing terrorism. There are solutions to …

Is Textualism Required By Constitutional Separation Of Powers?, Ofer Raban

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

This article examines the often-heard claim that textualism in statutory interpretation is mandated by constitutional separation of powers. The claim is examined using both the formalist and the functionalist approaches to separation of powers doctrine under the Federal Constitution. As we shall see, these doctrinal inquiries quickly devolve into examinations of the purposes and justification of textualism, and of separating the three branches of government. The article concludes not only that standing constitutional doctrine fails to support the textualist claim, but also that, as a matter of fact, textualism is a judicial philosophy that runs counter to the most basic …

Diy Solutions To The Hobby Lobby Problem, Kristin Haule

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Model Or Anti-Model? U.S. Regulatory Takings Doctrine In Foreign Jurisdictions, Melanie Benesh

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

Canada and Australia have taken a different approach to regulatory takings than Peru, despite some similarities among the countries. Like Peru, Canada and Australia both have IIAs with the United States. Like Peru, both have also addressed regulatory takings issues in their domestic jurisprudence since signing those IIAs. And like Peru, both Canada and Australia have looked to U.S. regulatory takings doctrine while developing their own domestic jurisprudence. However, unlike Peru, Canada and Australia have both ultimately decided that the U.S. regulatory takings doctrine would not be viable in their constitutional and political systems. They view U.S. regulatory takings doctrine …

Is The Constitution Special?, Nelson Tebbe, Christopher Serkin

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Road To Adopting And Implementing Systemic Disclosure Changes In The Dallas County District Attorney’S Office, Susan Hawk, Patricia J. Cummings

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

Discovery and Brady are currently two of the most discussed and debated topics in our criminal justice system. Americans have become more and more aware of the number of individuals convicted and incarcerated for crimes they did not commit. In 2007, in a very bold and innovative move, the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office created the Conviction Integrity Unit (CIU) to reexamine questionable convictions to determine if a particular defendant was in fact guilty.

Australians' "Right" To Be Bigoted: Protecting Minorities' Rights From The Tyranny Of The Majority, Jillian Rudge

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

Australia’s Racial Discrimination Act (RDA) is a federal statute prohibiting behavior that offends, insults, humiliates, or intimidates people based on their race, nationality, ethnicity, or immigration status. It appropriately limits the right to freedom of expression where the exercise of that right encroaches on other, equally fundamental rights to equality and freedom from discrimination. The RDA is one of Australia’s few human rights laws focused on fighting racism. It is especially important for protecting the rights of minorities since Australia lacks a constitutional or federal bill of rights. Unfortunately, in 2014 and 2015, conservative politicians called for a repulsion of …

Switch Hitters: How League Involvement In Daily Fantasy Sports Could End The Prohibition Of Sports Gambling, Jordan Meddy

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

Whether in the form of lotto tickets or casino table games, gambling is legally permitted in some way in virtually every U.S. state. Yet, in all but a handful of jurisdictions, federal law prohibits wagering on sporting events or professional athletes in any form. Several economically challenged states, particularly New Jersey, have been trying to authorize sports gambling within their borders as a way to raise tax revenues and support their local gambling industries. While these attempts have thus far been unsuccessful, Daily Fantasy Sports have simultaneously experienced a meteoric rise, becoming a multi-billion dollar industry. This Note examines the …

Why Enumeration Matters, Richard A. Primus

Michigan Law Review

The maxim that the federal government is a government of enumerated powers can be understood as a “continuity tender”: not a principle with practical consequences for governance, but a ritual statement with which practitioners identify themselves with a history from which they descend. This interpretation makes sense of the longstanding paradox whereby courts recite the enumeration principle but give it virtually no practical effect. On this understanding, the enumerated-powers maxim is analogous to the clause that Parliament still uses to open enacted statutes: “Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty.” That text might imply that the Queen is …

Congress And The Reconstruction Of Foreign Affairs Federalism, Ryan Baasch, Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash

Michigan Law Review

Though the Constitution conspicuously bars some state involvement in foreign affairs, the states clearly retain some authority in foreign affairs. Correctly supposing that state participation may unnecessarily complicate or embarrass our nation’s foreign relations, the Supreme Court has embraced aggressive preemption doctrines that sporadically oust the states from discrete areas in foreign affairs. These doctrines are unprincipled, supply little guidance, and generate capricious results. Fortunately, there is a better way. While the Constitution permits the states a limited and continuing role, it never goes so far as guaranteeing them any foreign affairs authority. Furthermore, the Constitution authorizes Congress to enact …

"A Trial Of Strength In Scenes Of Violence": Building A Case For The Prenatal Rights Of Willing Fathers Towards Custody, Anton Sorkin

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

In the 1920s, family law jurisprudence saw the development of a fundamental right to direct the upbringing and education of children by parents. However, in the aftermath of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court began a trajectory that culminated in what would amount to a total deprivation of a father's prenatal rights despite an absence of judicial review of these matters. This evolution has created a grave injustice and a violation of the rule of law, in addition to facilitating the breakdown offamily oneness in our culture. While proponents like Lynne Marie Kohm, Michael J Higdon, Mary Totz, and Matthew …

Agenda-Setting In The Regulatory State: Theory And Evidence, Cary Coglianese, Daniel E. Walters

Faculty Scholarship

Government officials who run administrative agencies must make countless decisions every day about what issues and work to prioritize. These agenda-setting decisions hold enormous implications for the shape of law and public policy, but they have received remarkably little attention by either administrative law scholars or social scientists who study the bureaucracy. Existing research offers few insights about the institutions, norms, and inputs that shape and constrain agency discretion over their agendas or about the strategies that officials employ in choosing to elevate certain issues while putting others on the back burner. In this article, we advance the study of …

Protecting The Watchdog: Using The Freedom Of Information Act To Preference The Press, Erin C. Carroll

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The fourth estate is undergoing dramatic changes. Many newspaper reporters, already surrounded by a growing number of empty desks, are shifting their focus away from costly investigative reporting and towards amassing Twitter followers and writing the perfect “share line.” Newspapers’ budgets can no longer robustly support accountability journalism and pitching fights against the government. And so, while this busier and noisier media environment may have a desirable democratizing effect—more of us are able to participate in analyzing, debating, and perhaps even making the news—it has not succeeded in filling a role that print journalists have traditionally played well—keeping watch on …

Taxing Legalized Marijuana: How Courts Should Treat Drug Tax Statutes In Light Of The Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause And Executive Non-Enforcement Of The Controlled Substances Act, Joseph A. Goldstein

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The War Powers Consultation Act: Keeping War Out Of The Zone Of Twilight, Brendan Flynn

Catholic University Law Review

The Constitution divides the war powers between Congress, which declares war, and the President, who serves as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Since the Korean War, the President has claimed increased authority to send the military into harm’s way without Congressional authorization. ­This Comment surveys the war powers issue through U.S. history and asserts that the President’s claim of increased authority has been enabled by Congressional abdication of its role, leading to­­ wars fought in a legal­­ “zone of twilight” in which Congress has neither authorized nor forbidden Presidential action (drawing on Justice Jackson’s famous tripartite analysis in his Youngstown …

Enhancing Accountability At The Department Of Veterans Affairs: The Legality Of The Veterans Access, Choice, And Accountability Act Of 2014 Under The Due Process Clause, Ashton Habighurst

Catholic University Law Review

In April 2014, news of long delays at the Phoenix VA Medical Center and the subsequent deaths of forty Veterans awaiting medical appointments shocked the nation. Based on this perceived failure among VA’s senior medical staff, legislation swept through the House and the Senate in an attempt to enhance accountability at the VA. By August 2014, President Obama signed the Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act of 2014 into law. This Act revises the termination procedures concerning the VA’s senior executives, by eliminating the notice requirement, significantly reducing the appellate procedures for adverse employment decision to the Merit Systems Protection …

Taking Care Of Federal Law, Leah Litman

Articles

Article II of the Constitution vests the “executive power” in the President and directs the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” But do these provisions mean that only the President may execute federal law? Two lines of Supreme Court precedent suggest conflicting answers to that question. In several prominent separation-of-powers cases, the Court has suggested that only the President may execute federal law: “The Constitution requires that a President chosen by the entire Nation oversee the execution of the laws.” Therefore, the Court has reasoned, Congress may not create private rights of action that allow nonexecutive …

Bias Crime Legislation: A Constitutional Rebuttal To Sticks And Stones . . ., Diana M. Torres

Akron Law Review

In a recent article, Susan Gellman of the Ohio bar provides perhaps the clearest and most persuasive arguments against these statutes both on constitutional and policy grounds. 5 This paper is, in many respects, a response to her arguments. It will first briefly discuss the need for bias crime legislation. It will then address the various forms of such statutes and respond to the constitutional objections of vagueness, overbreadth and infringement on free speech as set forth in Gellman's article. The paper will analogize the statutes to civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation and the principles behind sentencing discretion. Finally, the …

The Dangerous Right To Food Choice, Samuel R. Wiseman

Seattle University Law Review

Scholars, advocates, and interest groups have grown increasingly concerned with the ways in which government regulations—from agricultural subsidies to food safety regulations to licensing restrictions on food trucks—affect access to local food. One argument emerging from the interest in recent years is that choosing what foods to eat, what I have previously called “liberty of palate,” is a fundamental right. The attraction is obvious: infringements of fundamental rights trigger strict scrutiny, which few statutes survive. As argued elsewhere, the doctrinal case for the existence of such a right is very weak. This Essay does not revisit those arguments, but instead …

Restoration Constitutionalism And Socialist Asia, Bui Ngoc Son

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

House Of Cards: How Rediscovering Republicanism Brings It Crashing Down, Jonathan E. Maddison

Catholic University Law Review

Using Frank Underwood’s maniacal political journey in the Netflix series House of Cards as an example of what is wrong with American politics, this article argues that the Supreme Court’s misapplication of First Amendment principles in Citizens United and other key campaign finance cases plays a large and problematic role. Providing an extensive historical overview of republicanism and First Amendment jurisprudence, this article suggests that a return to republican ideals, while not perfect, is both the solution and proper tool of analysis to be used by the Supreme Court for campaign finance cases and beyond.

Putting A Gag On Farm Whistleblowers: The Right To Lie And The Right To Remain Silent Confront State Agricultural Protectionism, Rita-Marie Cain Reid, Amber L. Kingery

Journal of Food Law & Policy

Whistleblowers play an important role in filling gaps in government food safety systems. Unfortunately, several dominant food-producing states have pursued legislative initiatives that punish farm whistleblowers and silence investigative tactics. First, this research describes various state legislative initiatives that curb criticism of agriculture. The work analyzes the federal food safety system and how these protections limiting agricultural criticism contravene that food safety net. Further, the research analyzes the free speech concerns in the newest protectionist laws. The analysis recommends strategies and future research to improve agriculture safety and protect free speech in an evolving food safety landscape.

The Commonwealth Of Puerto Rico: Trying To Gain Dignity And Maintain Culture, Arnold Leibowitz

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

"Home Rule" Vs. "Dillon's Rule" For Washington Cities, Hugh Spitzer

Seattle University Law Review

This Article focuses on the tension between the late-nineteenth century “Dillon’s Rule” limiting city powers, and the “home rule” approach that gained traction in the early and mid-twentieth century. Washington’s constitution allows cities to exercise all the police powers possessed by the state government, so long as local regulations do not conflict with general laws. The constitution also vests charter cities with control over their form of government. But all city powers are subject to “general laws” adopted by the legislature. Further, judicial rulings on city powers to provide public services have fluctuated, ranging from decisions citing the “Dillon’s Rule” …