Constitutional Law Commons^™

Lilly V. Virginia Glimmers Of Hope For The Confrontation Clause?, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

In 1662, in The Case of Thomas Tong and Others, which involved charges of treason against several defendants, the judges of the King's Bench conferred on a crucial set of points of procedure. As reported by one of the judges, Sir John Kelyng, the judges agreed unanimously that a pretrial confession made to the authorities was evidence against the Party himself who made the Confession, and indeed, if adequately proved could support a conviction of that party without additional witnesses to the treason itself. But -- again unanimously, and quite definitively -- the judges also agreed that the confession cannot …

Reanimator: Mark Tushnet And The Second Coming Of The Imperial Presidency, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Indirect Constitutional Discourse: A Comment On Meese, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

Judges And Federalism: A Comment On "Justice Kennedy's Vision Of Federalism", Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

How Constitutional Law Casebooks Perpetuate The Myth Of Judicial Supremacy, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Dissent, Free Speech, And The Continuing Search For The "Central Meaning" Of The First Amendment, Ronald J. Krotoszynski Jr.

Michigan Law Review

Since the Warren Court's expansive construction of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, there has been no shortage of legal scholarship aimed at justifying the remarkably broad protections afforded the freedom of speech under landmark cases such as Brandenburg v. Ohio, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, and Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc. At the same time, in recent years, a growing chorus of free speech skeptics have made their voices heard.5 These legal scholars have questioned why a commitment to freedom of expression should displace other (constitutional) values such as equality, …

The Importance Of Being Biased, Anthony M. Dillof

Michigan Law Review

The war against bias crimes is far from finished. In contrast, the battle over bias-crime laws is largely over. Bias-crime laws, as commonly formulated, increase the penalties for crimes motivated by bias. The Supreme Court has held that such laws do not violate the First Amendment. Virtually every state has enacted some sort of biascrime law. Even the federal government, which may consider itself without power to enact a general bias-crime law, has made bias a sentence-aggravating factor for the range of federal criminal offenses. Bias-crime laws thus are an established feature of the legal landscape. Against this background, Frederick …

Life On Campus Really Ain't So Bad, Avern Cohn

Michigan Law Review

The Shadow University is a highly tendentious account of Alan Charles Kors and Harvey A. Silverglate's view of academic and student life in America's colleges and universities over the last twenty years. Kors and Silverglate see these colleges and universities turning from promoting personal and academic freedom to suppressing open expression and denying basic liberties to students and faculty alike. To make their point, they have scoured college and university campuses from coast to coast to find incidents involving student speech code violations, as well as student and faculty discipline and misbehavior proceedings. They also examine multicultural and diversity programs …

Congress' Arrogance, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Does Dickerson v. U.S., reaffirming Miranda and striking down §3501 (the federal statute purporting to "overrule" Miranda), demonstrate judicial arrogance? Or does the legislative history of §3501 demonstrate the arrogance of Congress? Shortly after Dickerson v. U.S. reaffirmed Miranda and invalidated §3501, a number of Supreme Court watchers criticized the Court for its "judicial arrogance" in peremptorily rejecting Congress' test for the admissibility of confessions. The test, pointed out the critics, had been adopted by extensive hearings and debate about Miranda's adverse impact on law enforcement. The Dickerson Court did not discuss the legislative history of §3501 at all. However, …

Uncoupling The Law Of Takings, Michael A. Heller, James E. Krier

Articles

The law of takings couples together matters that should be treated independently. The conventional view, shared by courts and commentators alike, has been that any takings case can be resolved in one of two ways: either there is a taking and compensation is due, or there is no taking and no compensation is due. These results are fine as long as one holding or the other serves the two central concerns of the Takings Clause - eficiency and justice. But a problem arises when the two purposes behind the law of takings come into cordhct, as they readily might. It …

Francis Bacon Takes On The Ghouls: The "First Principles" Of Religious Freedom, Richard W. Garnett

Journal Articles

John Witte, Jr.
Religion and the American Constitutional Experiment:
Essential Rights and Liberties
Westview Press 2000

From the Review

This is a great time for students of the First Amendment's Religion Clauses and of what Professor John Witte calls the American "experiment" with religious freedom. We've been blessed these past few years with an in-print seminar - an upper-division offering, team-taught by faculty heavyweights - on this experiment, its products and prospects, and the values that have shaped it. Our teachers and texts have included, to name just a few, Professor Steven Smith's Foreordained Failure: The Constitutional Quest for a …

Recovering The Original Fourth Amendment, Thomas Y. Davies

Michigan Law Review

Claims regarding the original or intended meaning of constitutional texts are commonplace in constitutional argument and analysis. All such claims are subject to an implicit validity criterion - only historically authentic assertions should matter. The rub is that the original meaning commonly attributed to a constitutional text may not be authentic. The historical Fourth Amendment is a case in point. If American judges, lawyers, or law teachers were asked what the Framers intended when they adopted the Fourth Amendment, they would likely answer that the Framers intended that all searches and seizures conducted by government officers must be reasonable given …

Constitutional Law -- Due Process Clause -- Third Circuit Holds That $50 Million Punitive Damages Award In Context Of A $48 Million Compensatory Award Is Unconstitutionally Excessive -- Inter Medical Supplies, Ltd. V. Ebi Medical Systems, Inc., 181 F.3d 446 (3d Cir. 1999)., A. Benjamin Spencer

Faculty Publications

In 1996, the Supreme Court, in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, struck down a punitive damages award on the ground that it was "grossly excessive" in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . Since BMW, many courts have faced the challenge of applying its principles to determine whether punitive damages awards surpass the constitutional limit. Last June, in Inter Medical Supplies, Ltd. v. EBI Medical Systems, Inc., the Third Circuit faced this difficulty when it considered whether a $50 million punitive damages award, granted in conjunction with a $48 million compensatory damages award, was …

Zoning Speech On The Internet: A Legal And Technical Model, Lawrence Lessig, Paul Resnick

Michigan Law Review

Speech, it is said, divides into three sorts - (1) speech that everyone has a right to (political speech, speech about public affairs); (2) speech that no one has a right to (obscene speech, child porn); and (3) speech that some have a right to but others do not (in the United States, Ginsberg speech, or speech that is "harmful to minors," to which adults have a right but kids do not). Speech-protective regimes, on this view, are those where category (1) speech predominates; speech-repressive regimes are those where categories (2) and (3) prevail. This divide has meaning for speech …

Staking Out The Border Between Comandeering And Conditional Preemption: Is The Driver's Privacy Protection Act Constitutional Under The Tenth Amendment?, Rachel F. Preiser

Michigan Law Review

Congress passed the Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994 ("DPPA") in response to state sales of personal information contained in motor vehicle records to individuals and to direct marketing companies who use it to identify select groups of prospective customers for particular products. Thirty-four states sell their department of motor vehicles ("DMV") records to individual citizens and to direct marketers, essentially allowing their unregulated distribution to any party seeking them. This practice of selling and distributing personal information has serious implications for the privacy and safety of individual citizens. In considering the DPP A, Congress dwelt in particular on the …

Is The Clean Air Act Unconstitutional?, Cass R. Sunstein

Michigan Law Review

This Article deals with two linked questions. The first involves the future of the Clean Air Act. The particular concern is how the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") might be encouraged, with help from reviewing courts, to issue better ambient air quality standards, and in the process to shift from some of the anachronisms of 1970s environmentalism to a more fruitful approach to environmental protection. The second question involves the role of the nondelegation doctrine in American public law, a doctrine that shows unmistakable signs of revival. I will suggest that improved performance by EPA and agencies in general, operating in …

Winning The Battle, Losing The War?: Judicial Scrutiny Of Prisoners' Statutory Claims Under The Americans With Disabilities Act, Christopher J. Burke

Michigan Law Review

When he was convicted in 1994 of drunken driving, escape, and resisting arrest, Ronald Yeskey was sentenced to serve 18 to 36 months in a Pennsylvania prison. In addition, the judge recommended that Yeskey be sent to a motivational boot camp operated by the state. Upon successful completion of the boot camp program, Yeskey's sentence would then be reduced to six months. Although he eagerly wanted to participate, the prison refused him entrance into the boot camp program because of his history of hypertension, and also denied him admission into an alternative program for the disabled. As a result, he …

Section 4: Federalism, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

The Standing Of The United States: How Criminal Prosecutions Show That Standing Doctrine Is Looking For Answers In All The Wrong Places, Edward A. Hartnett

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court insists that Article III of the Constitution requires a litigant to have standing in order for her request for judicial intervention to constitute a "case" or "controversy" within the jurisdiction of a federal court; it also insists that the "irreducible constitutional minimum" of standing requires (1) that the litigant suffer an "injury in fact"; (2) that the person against whom the judicial intervention is sought have caused the injury; and (3) that the requested judicial intervention redress the injury. The requisite injury in fact, the Court repeatedly declares, must be "personal," "concrete and particularized," and "actual or …

Pinochet And International Human Rights Litigation, Curtis A. Bradley, Jack L. Goldsmith

Michigan Law Review

The British House of Lords recently considered whether Augusto Pinochet was subject to arrest and possible extradition to Spain for alleged acts of torture and other egregious conduct carried out during his reign as Chile's head of state. The Law Lords held that a large majority of the charges against Pinochet were not proper grounds for extradition under British law. They also held, however, that Pinochet could potentially be extradited for alleged acts of torture committed after Britain's 1988 ratifica· tion of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In reaching this latter conclusion, …

Television In The Courtroom: Mightier Than The Pen?, Richard P. Matsch

Michigan Law Review

In his Introduction, author Ronald L. Goldfarb explains that his purpose is to address all the arguments advanced against televised trials, cover the points made by proponents of televised trials, and find a sensible solution to what he believes is the fundamental issue: "How can we best blend new media technologies with our traditional and revered commitment to democracy and justice?" (p. xxiv). He ends the book with this prospective paragraph: "I expect that all the courtrooms of the future - state and federal, trial and appellate - will be equipped with cameras. I suggest that all trials should be …

The Democracy-Forcing Constitution, Neal Devins

Michigan Law Review

During my freshman year in college, I was told not to judge a book by its cover. The book in question - Lolita; the cover suggested something quite salacious. My professor explained that a soldier, who had purchased Lolita to work out some of the kinks of military life, found himself tossing the book out, proclaiming in disgust "Literature!" Well, I cannot claim precisely the same reaction to Cass Sunstein's One Case at a Time (my expectations were lower than the soldier's). Nevertheless, for those expecting a lefty defense of judicial restraint, One Case at a Time is not your …

The Qualities Of Completeness: More? Or Less?, Mark R. Killenbeck

Michigan Law Review

On January 14, 1983, Chief Judge W. Brevard Hand announced what he knew would be widely regarded as a rather startling proposition. Believing that "[t]he first amendment in large part was a guarantee to the states which insured that the states would be able to continue whatever church-state relationship existed in 1791," Judge Hand held that the people of Alabama were perfectly free to "establish[] a religion," in this instance by allowing public school teachers to begin the school day with prayer. The ruling reversed an earlier decision in the same case, which characterized the statutory provision at issue as …

Punishing Hateful Motives: Old Wine In A New Bottle Revives Calls For Prohibition, Carol S. Steiker

Michigan Law Review

Hate crimes are nothing new: crimes in which the victim is selected because of the victim's membership in some distinctive group (be it racial, ethnic, religious, or other) have been with us as long as such groups have coexisted within legal systems. What is relatively new is their recognition and designation as a discrete phenomenon. But as appellations like "sexual harassment" and "community policing" have begun to teach us, words are only the beginning of the life cycle of a new socio-legal concept. What follows are debates about whether the new category is really a coherent one, what activities should …

Forgotten Constitutional History: The Production And Migration Of Meaning Within Constitutional Cultures, Gregory A. Mark

Michigan Law Review

When was the last time you read a serious, recently published work of constitutional history that did not deal mainly with the work of the Supreme Court? When, even among those works, did the author look beyond the immediate litigants to give the reader a sense of an evolving constitutional culture - a culture in symbiosis with the larger political and social culture - its eddies and byways, as well as its mainstream? My strong hunch is that anyone who can triumphantly respond to the implicit condemnation of narrowness in these questions will do so in large measure having read …

Reconceiving The Right To Present Witnesses, Richard A. Nagareda

Michigan Law Review

Modem American law is, in a sense, a system of compartments. For understandable curricular reasons, legal education sharply distinguishes the law of evidence from both constitutional law and criminal procedure. In fact, the lines of demarcation between these three subjects extend well beyond law school to the organization of the leading treatises and case headnotes to which practicing lawyers routinely refer in their trade. Many of the most interesting questions in the law, however, do not rest squarely within a single compartment; instead, they concern the content and legitimacy of the lines of demarcation themselves. This article explores a significant, …

Race, Class, Caste…? Rethinking Affirmative Action, Clark D. Cunningham, N.R. Madhava Menon

Michigan Law Review

Many who oppose affirmative action programs in the United States because they use "racial" categories such as black, African American, or Latino, claim that equally effective and more equitable programs can be developed using only class categories, such as "low income." A key test case for the "race v. class" debate is admission to law schools, made urgent by recent legal prohibitions on the use of "race" in the admission procedures to state universities in California, Washington, and Texas. An empirical study by Linda Wightman, the former director of research for the Law School Admissions Council (LSAC), has shown that …

Affirmative Action, Caste, And Cultural Comparisons, Cass R. Sunstein

Michigan Law Review

What is permitted, and what is prohibited, by the equality principle of a liberal democracy? Does affirmative action run afoul of that principle? And where should we look to answer these questions? Many critics of affirmative action take it as axiomatic that affirmative action violates the equality principle. But this is far from clear. Every law classifies. The current law of equality itself classifies by, for example, treating discrimination on the basis of race differently from discrimination on the basis of age. No one thinks that the law of equality is, for this reason, inconsistent with the Equal Protection Clause. …

Dissecting The State: The Use Of Federal Law To Free State And Local Officials From State Legislatures' Control, Roderick M. Hills Jr.

Michigan Law Review

In discussions about American federalism, it is common to speak of a "state government" as if it were a black box, an individual speaking with a single voice. State governments are, of course, no such thing. Rather, a "state" actually incorporates a bundle of different subdivisions, branches, and agencies controlled by politicians who often compete with each other for electoral success and governmental power. In particular, these institutions compete with each other for the power to control federal funds and implement federal programs. This article explores one aspect of this intrastate competition - the extent to which federal law can …

Constitutional Fact And Theory: A Response To Chief Judge Posner, Deborah Jones Merritt

Michigan Law Review

In his James Madison Lecture on Constitutional Law, Chief Judge Richard Posner chides both professors and judges for devoting too much attention to constitutional theory and too little time to empiricism. Although I agree with Judge Posner's endorsement of empiricism, I dispute the roles he assigns empiricism and theory. Social science matters when interpreting the Constitution, but not in the way Posner posits. Facts cannot replace constitutional theories, nor can they mechanically resolve questions posed by theory. Instead, empirical knowledge is most useful in unmasking the theoretical assumptions that undergird constitutional law, in focusing those theories, and in contributing to …