Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (640)
- Seattle University School of Law (217)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (217)
- William & Mary Law School (191)
- University of Colorado Law School (147)
-
- Universitas Indonesia (121)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (79)
- Notre Dame Law School (72)
- Duke Law (69)
- University of Richmond (69)
- Cleveland State University (60)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (57)
- St. John's University School of Law (57)
- Brooklyn Law School (54)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (52)
- Roger Williams University (48)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (47)
- Fordham Law School (44)
- University of Georgia School of Law (40)
- UIC School of Law (38)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (37)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (37)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (34)
- The University of Akron (31)
- American University Washington College of Law (30)
- Georgetown University Law Center (30)
- University of Arkansas, Fayetteville (30)
- Boston University School of Law (29)
- Columbia Law School (28)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (28)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (513)
- Supreme Court (427)
- Constitution (344)
- Constitutional law (226)
- First Amendment (138)
-
- Federalism (127)
- Federal (125)
- State (107)
- Due process (103)
- Fifth Amendment (102)
- Congress (99)
- Constitutional Law (98)
- Judicial review (95)
- Sixth Amendment (89)
- New York (85)
- Constitutional interpretation (77)
- Equal Protection Clause (71)
- Abortion (70)
- Equal protection (70)
- Originalism (66)
- Separation of powers (65)
- Discrimination (64)
- Fourteenth Amendment (64)
- Jurisprudence (60)
- Police (60)
- Defendant (57)
- Court of Appeals (56)
- 1990) (55)
- Supreme Court of the United States (55)
- History (54)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (403)
- Seattle University Law Review (213)
- Touro Law Review (202)
- Faculty Scholarship (175)
- Articles (174)
-
- Publications (143)
- "Dharmasisya” Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI (121)
- Faculty Publications (107)
- Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar (54)
- Northwestern University Law Review (48)
- University of Richmond Law Review (47)
- UIC Law Review (34)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (33)
- Journal Articles (32)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (32)
- Scholarly Articles (31)
- Akron Law Review (30)
- Cleveland State Law Review (30)
- Arkansas Law Review (29)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (29)
- William & Mary Law Review (28)
- Faculty Articles (27)
- Brooklyn Law Review (26)
- Catholic University Law Review (26)
- DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal (26)
- Notre Dame Law Review (26)
- Supreme Court Preview (26)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (26)
- All Faculty Scholarship (24)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (24)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 2311 - 2340 of 3212
Full-Text Articles in Constitutional Law
Are We Protecting The Wrong Rights?, Jennifer L. Saulino
Are We Protecting The Wrong Rights?, Jennifer L. Saulino
Michigan Law Review
Elizabeth Bartholet, in her book Nobody's Children, takes a strong step toward beginning a new kind of dialogue about abused and neglected children. She positions herself as a liberal who has come to terms with the fact that traditional liberal ideals are in conflict with the needs of abused and neglected children (p. 5). In doing so, she tries to convince her readers that, regardless of ideology, we all should have a different focus in the area of child abuse and neglect law. She uses Sabrina as one of several examples of how programs for abused and neglected children that …
Miranda, The Constitution, And Congress, David A. Strauss
Miranda, The Constitution, And Congress, David A. Strauss
Michigan Law Review
Are Miranda warnings required by the Constitution, or not? If they are, why has the Supreme Court repeatedly said that the rights created by Miranda are "not themselves rights protected by the Constitution"? If not, why can't an Act of Congress, such as 18 U.S.C. 3501, declare them to be unnecessary? These were the central questions posed by United States v. Dickerson. It is not clear that the majority opinion ever really answered them. The majority said that "Miranda is constitutionally based," that Miranda has "constitutional underpinnings," that Miranda is "a constitutional decision," and that Miranda "announced a constitutional rule." …
Miranda'S Mistake, William J. Stuntz
Miranda'S Mistake, William J. Stuntz
Michigan Law Review
The oddest thing about Miranda is its politics - a point reinforced by the decision in, and the reaction to, Dickerson v. United States. In Dickerson, the Supreme Court faced the question whether Miranda ought to be overturned, either directly or by permitting legislative overrides. The lawyers, the literature, and the Court split along right-left - or, in the Court's case, right-center - lines, with the right seeking to do away with Miranda's restrictions on police questioning, and the left (or center) seeking to maintain them. The split is familiar. Reactions to Miranda have always divided along ideological lines, with …
Separated At Birth But Siblings Nonetheless: Miranda And The Due Process Notice Cases, George C. Thomas Iii
Separated At Birth But Siblings Nonetheless: Miranda And The Due Process Notice Cases, George C. Thomas Iii
Michigan Law Review
Paraphrasing Justice Holmes, law is less about logic than experience. Courts and scholars have now had thirty-four years of experience with Miranda v. Arizona, including the Court's recent endorsement in Dickerson v. United States last Term. Looking back over this experience, it is plain that the Court has created a Miranda doctrine quite different from what it has said it was creating. I think the analytic structure in Dickerson supports this rethinking of Miranda. To connect the dots, I offer a new explanation for Miranda that permits us to reconcile Dickerson and the rest of the post-Miranda doctrine with the …
Identifying And (Re)Formulating Prophylactic Rules, Safe Harbors, And Incidental Rights In Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Susan R. Klein
Identifying And (Re)Formulating Prophylactic Rules, Safe Harbors, And Incidental Rights In Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Susan R. Klein
Michigan Law Review
The Miranda conundrum runs something like this. If the Miranda decision represents true constitutional interpretation, and all unwarned statements taken during custodial interrogation are "compelled" within the meaning of the Self-Incrimination Clause, the impeachment and "fruits" exceptions to Miranda should fall. If it is not true constitutional interpretation, than the Court has no business reversing state criminal convictions for its violation. I offer here what I hope is a satisfying answer to this conundrum, on both descriptive and normative levels, that justifies not only Miranda but a host of similar Warren, Burger, and Rehnquist Court decisions as well. In Part …
Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices: How Far Is Too Far?, Laurie Magid
Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices: How Far Is Too Far?, Laurie Magid
Michigan Law Review
Virtually all interrogations - or at least virtually all successful interrogations - involve some deception. As the United States Supreme Court has placed few limits on the use of deception, the variety of deceptive techniques is limited chiefly by the ingenuity of the interrogator. Interrogators still rely on the classic "Mutt and Jeff," or "good cop, bad cop," routine. Interrogators tell suspects that nonexistent eyewitnesses have identified them, or that still at-large accomplices have given statements against them. Interrogators have been known to put an unsophisticated suspect's hand on a fancy, new photocopy machine and tell him that the "Truth …
Religion And The First Amendment: Some Causes Of The Recent Confusion, Carl H. Esbeck
Religion And The First Amendment: Some Causes Of The Recent Confusion, Carl H. Esbeck
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
Social Meaning And School Vouchers, Neal Devins
Social Meaning And School Vouchers, Neal Devins
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Paths Not Taken: The Supreme Court's Failures In Dickerson, Paul G. Cassell
The Paths Not Taken: The Supreme Court's Failures In Dickerson, Paul G. Cassell
Michigan Law Review
Where's the rest of the opinion? That was my immediate reaction to reading the Supreme Court's terse decision in Dickerson, delivered to me via email from the clerk's office a few minutes after its release. Surely, I thought, some glitch in the transmission had eliminated the pages of discussion on the critical issues in the case. Yet, as it became clear that I had received all of the Court's opinion, my incredulity grew.
Miranda, Dickerson, And The Puzzling Persistence Of Fifth Amendment Exceptionalism, Stephen J. Schulhofer
Miranda, Dickerson, And The Puzzling Persistence Of Fifth Amendment Exceptionalism, Stephen J. Schulhofer
Michigan Law Review
Dickerson v. United States preserves the status quo regime for judicial oversight of police interrogation. That result could be seen, in the present climate, as a victory for due process values, but there remain many reasons for concern that existing safeguards are flawed - that they are either too restrictive or not restrictive enough. Such concerns are partly empirical, of course. They depend on factual assessments of how much the Miranda rules do restrict the police. But such concerns also reflect a crucial, though often unstated, normative premise; they presuppose a certain view of how much the police should be …
Questioning The Relevance Of Miranda In The Twenty-First Century, Richard A. Leo
Questioning The Relevance Of Miranda In The Twenty-First Century, Richard A. Leo
Michigan Law Review
Miranda v. Arizona is the most well-known criminal justice decision - arguably the most well-known legal decision - in American history. Since it was decided in 1966, the Miranda decision has spawned voluminous newspaper coverage, political and legal debate, and academic commentary. The Miranda warnings themselves have become so well-known through the media of television that most people recognize them immediately. As Patrick Malone has pointed out, the Miranda decision has added its own lexicon of words and phrases to the American language. Perhaps with this understanding in mind, George Thomas recently suggested that the Miranda warnings are more well-known …
In The Stationhouse After Dickerson, Charles D. Weisselberg
In The Stationhouse After Dickerson, Charles D. Weisselberg
Michigan Law Review
Miranda v. Arizona established the high water mark of the protections afforded an accused during a custodial interrogation. During the decades that followed, the United States Supreme Court allowed Miranda's foundation to erode, inviting a direct challenge to the landmark ruling. In Dickerson v. United States, the Court turned back such a challenge and placed Miranda upon a more secure, constitutional footing. This Article explores the impact of Dickerson in the place where Miranda was meant to matter most: the stationhouse. As I have described elsewhere, Supreme Court decisions have influenced a number of California law enforcement agencies to instruct …
Miranda'S Failure To Restrain Pernicious Interrogation Practices, Welsh S. White
Miranda'S Failure To Restrain Pernicious Interrogation Practices, Welsh S. White
Michigan Law Review
As Yale Kamisar's writings on police interrogation demonstrate, our simultaneous commitments to promoting law enforcement's interest in obtaining confessions and to protecting individuals from overreaching interrogation practices have created a nearly irreconcilable tension. If the police must be granted authority to engage in effective questioning of suspects, it will obviously be difficult to insure that "the terrible engine of the criminal law . . . not . . . be used to overreach individuals who stand helpless against it." If we are committed to accommodating these conflicting interests, however, some means must be found to impose appropriate restraints on the …
Laws As Treaties?: The Constitutionality Of Congressional-Executive Agreements, John C. Yoo
Laws As Treaties?: The Constitutionality Of Congressional-Executive Agreements, John C. Yoo
Michigan Law Review
Only twice in the last century, in 1919 with the Treaty of Versailles, and two years ago with the comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty, has the Senate rejected a significant treaty sought by the President. In both cases, the international agreement received support from a majority of the Senators, but failed to reach the two-thirds supermajority required by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution. The failure of the Versailles Treaty resulted in a shattering defeat for President Wilson's vision of a new world order, based on collective security and led by the United States. Rejection of the Test-Ban Treaty amounted …
The Commercial Activity Exception Under The Fsia, Personhood Under The Fifth Amendment And Jurisdiction Over Foreign States: A Partial Roadmap For The Supreme Court In The New Millennium, Stephen J. Leacock
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Note, Kdm Ex Rel. Wjm V. Reedsport School District, Kevin C. Walsh
Note, Kdm Ex Rel. Wjm V. Reedsport School District, Kevin C. Walsh
Scholarly Articles
No abstract provided.
Section 1983, The First Amendment, And Public Employee Speech: Shaping The Right To Fit The Remedy (And Vice Versa), Michael L. Wells
Section 1983, The First Amendment, And Public Employee Speech: Shaping The Right To Fit The Remedy (And Vice Versa), Michael L. Wells
Georgia Law Review
Constitutional rights have little value in the absence of effective remedies for their violation, includingsuitsfor damages to redress past constitutional wrongs and for injunctive relief to prevent continuing and future violations. Recognizing this, the Supreme Court has, especially over the past forty years, constructed an elaborate body of remedial doctrine. The Court has often acted on the premise that the remedial law should be more or less the same across the whole range of constitutional rights. The problem with this approach is that, from a remedial perspective, there are differences among the real world contexts in which constitutional violations occur. …
"Closet Case": Boy Scouts Of America V. Dale And The Reinforcement Of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, And Transgender Invisibility, Darren L. Hutchinson
"Closet Case": Boy Scouts Of America V. Dale And The Reinforcement Of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, And Transgender Invisibility, Darren L. Hutchinson
Faculty Articles
This Article argues that the Supreme Courts decision in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale misapplies and ignores controlling First Amendment precedent and incorrectly dermes "sexual identity" as a clinical or biological imposition that exists apart from expression or speech. This Article provides a doctrinal alternative to Dale that would protect vital interests in both equality and liberty and that would not condition, as does Dale, sexual "equality" upon the silencing of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender individuals.
'Bush' V. 'Gore': What Was The Supreme Court Thinking?, Richard D. Friedman
'Bush' V. 'Gore': What Was The Supreme Court Thinking?, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
One of the most astonishing episodes in American political history ended last month with perhaps the most imperial decision ever by the United States Supreme Court. In one stroke, the Court exercised power that belonged to Congress, the legislature of Florida, Florida's courts and administrators, and, most importantly, the people of the state.
'Appropriate' Means-Ends Constraints On Section 5 Powers, Evan H. Caminker
'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 …
Turning Section 1983'S Protection Of Civil Rights Into An Attractive Nuisance: Extra-Textual Barriers To Municipal Liability Under Monell, Brian J. Serr
Georgia Law Review
This essay addresses the problem of "Making Government Pay" from a different perspective than Professor Levinson's article.1 Instead of focusing on social and economic barriers to deterrence and corrective justice, this essay will focus on the arbitrary legal barriers that the Supreme Court has placed between a constitutionally injured citizen and the municipal treasury. These legal barriers are more fairly attributable to the Supreme Court than to Congress because the barriers to establishing municipal liability under the Court's § 1983 jurisprudence are hardly self-evident from the statutory text of § 1983, nor are those barriers readily inferrable from that text. …
Afterword, Marshall S. Shapo
Afterword, Marshall S. Shapo
Georgia Law Review
It is a great pleasure to comment on these papers on a subject that has fascinated me since the beginning of my teaching career. My observations will no doubt reflect the roots of my thinking in an article I wrote on the subject in 1965' and other early publications, and, doubtless, my relative ignorance of the immense amount of case law that has flowed from courts since the mid-sixties. However, informed by a little independent study and refreshed by the commentaries, I venture a few somewhat angular thoughts. They do not" in any way pretend to be exhaustive with respect …
Corrective Justice And Constitutional Torts, Bernard P. Dauenhauer, Michael L. Wells
Corrective Justice And Constitutional Torts, Bernard P. Dauenhauer, Michael L. Wells
Georgia Law Review
Tort liability in the private realm may be understood both as "an instrument aimed... at deterrence... [and] a way of achieving corrective justice between the parties."' Following the common law model, the Supreme Court has borrowed this normative framework for constitutional torts, ruling that the aims of liability for damages are to vindicate constitutional rights and to deter constitutional violations. A recent article by Daryl Levinson takes issue vith this approach. Levinson argues that the superficial similarities between public torts and private torts conceal real differences, to which neither the Court nor scholars have paid adequate attention. The main point …
Why The Eleventh Amendment Always Matters, Even When Transaction Costs Are Zero: A Reply To Professor Farber, Neil S. Siegel
Why The Eleventh Amendment Always Matters, Even When Transaction Costs Are Zero: A Reply To Professor Farber, Neil S. Siegel
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Getting Beyond Formalism In Constitutional Law: Constitutional Theory Matters, Erwin Chemerinsky
Getting Beyond Formalism In Constitutional Law: Constitutional Theory Matters, Erwin Chemerinsky
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Replies To Professor Chemerinsky, David W. Levy, Harry F. Tepker Jr., Arthur G. Lefrancois, Kevin W. Saunders, Michael A. Scaperlanda, Katheleen R. Guzman, Lindsay G. Robertson
Replies To Professor Chemerinsky, David W. Levy, Harry F. Tepker Jr., Arthur G. Lefrancois, Kevin W. Saunders, Michael A. Scaperlanda, Katheleen R. Guzman, Lindsay G. Robertson
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Further Thoughts, Erwin Chemerinsky
Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel
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
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.
The Emergence Of Private Land-Use Controls In Large-Scale Subdivisions: The Companion Story To Village Of Euclid V. Ambler Realty Co., Gerald Korngold
The Emergence Of Private Land-Use Controls In Large-Scale Subdivisions: The Companion Story To Village Of Euclid V. Ambler Realty Co., Gerald Korngold
Articles & Chapters
No abstract provided.