Constitutional Law Commons^™

Brewer V. Williams, Massiah And Miranda: What Is 'Interrogation'? When Does It Matter?, Yale Kamisar

Articles

On Christmas Eve, 1968, a ten-year-old girl, Pamela Powers, disappeared while with her family in Des Moines, Iowa.2 Defendant Williams, an escapee from a mental institution and a deeply religious person, 3 was suspected of murdering her, and a warrant was issued for his arrest.4 Williams telephoned a Des Moines lawyer, McKnight, and on his advice surrendered himself to the Davenport, Iowa, police.5 Captain Learning and another Des Moines police officer arranged to drive the 160 miles to Davenport, pick up Williams, and return him directly to Des Moines. 6 Both the trial court 7 and the federal district court8 …

Recent Developments

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court, Warrantless Searches, And Exigent Circumstances, Richard A. Williamson

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

State Taxation And The Supreme Court: Toward A More Unified Approach To Constitutional Adjudication?, Walter Hellerstein

Michigan Law Review

The first section of this Article examines three recent cases, each addressed to a different constitutional limitation on the scope of state tax power, that may be read as signifying a new approach: Michelin Tire Corp. v. Wages, which concerned the import-export clause; United States v. County of Fresno, which concerned the supremacy clause; and Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady, which concerned the commerce clause. Section II considers the implications of these decisions and explores -the possibility that they share an underlying doctrinal unity.

Judicial Protection Of Minorities, Terrance Sandalow

Articles

In United States v. Carolene Products Co., Justice Stone suggested by indirection that there "may be narrower scope for operation of the presumption of constitutionality" when courts are called upon to determine the validity "of statutes directed at particular religious . . . or national . . . or racial minorities."' In such cases, he explained, "prejudice against discrete and insular minorities may be a special condition, which tends seriously to curtail the operation of those political processes ordinarily to be relied upon to protect minorities, and which may call for a correspondingly more searching judicial inquiry."' Forty years later, …

Taxpayer Rights In Noncustodial Irs Investigations After Beckwith V. United States, Curtis L. Christensen

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The recent Supreme Court decision in Beckwith v. United States, holding that Miranda does not extend to noncustodial tax investigations, has important implications with respect to the News Release doctrine and the involuntary consent grounds considered in motions to suppress evidence. This article will examine Beckwith and its potential significance with respect to these other doctrines, discussing the factors which the IRS and the courts should consider in order to assure fair treatment of taxpayers during investigations.

The Supreme Court And The Constitutional Rights Of Prisoners: A Reappraisal, Emily Calhoun

Publications

No abstract provided.

Competency To Stand Trial In Federal Courts: Conceptual And Constitutional Problems, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.

National League Of Cities V. Usery: Its Implications For The Equal Pay Act And The Age Discrimination In Employment Act, Ellen B. Spellman

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In National League of Cities v. Usery, the Supreme Court invalidated the application of the FLSA minimum wage and maximum hours provisions to certain essential state government activities as an unconstitutional intrusion on state sovereignty. This article will explore the implications of that decision with respect to the application of the EPA and the ADEA to state and local governments.

Part I contains a brief discussion of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Amendments. Part II discusses National League with reference to traditional commerce clause interpretation. Part III analyzes the difficulties of applying the decision, particularly the problem of …

Federal Habeas Corpus After Stone V. Powell: A Remedy Only For The Arguably Innocent?, Sam Boyte

University of Richmond Law Review

State prisoners lost several grounds for seeking federal habeas corpus relief during the Supreme Court's 1975 term. In each case, the Court was prepared to admit, at least for the purposes of argument, that there were constitutional infirmities in the state criminal process which resulted in the confinement of the prisoner; nonetheless, the Court held that the prisoner would not be permitted to attack his conviction collaterally in federal court. Because the prisoner in Francis v. Henderson had not complied with a state procedural rule requiring such challenges to be brought before trial, the Supreme Court held that he could …

Balanced Justice: Mr. Justice Powell And The Constitution, Randolph C. Duvall, John E. Ely, Mark S. Gardner, William C. Goodwin, H. P. Williams

University of Richmond Law Review

In his first five years on the United States Supreme Court, Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr. has become and will most likely continue to be a leading force in shaping the direction of the Court. In many areas, Justice Powell's desire for judicial flexibility as well as judicial restraint has made him a leader in turning the Burger Court away from the bright-line tests enunciated by the Warren Court. However, where the Warren Court had been flexible, Justice Powell has usually preserved this flexibility and expanded it if possible. The tool consistently utilized to achieve this flexibility has been a …

Foreword: Brewer V. Williams--A Hard Look At A Discomfiting Record, Yale Kamisar

Articles

In recent decades, few matters have split the Supreme Court, troubled the legal profession, and agitated the public as much as the police interrogation-confession cases. The recent case of Brewer v. Williams3 is as provocative as any, because the Supreme Court there revdrsed the defendant's conviction for the "savage murder of a small child" even though no Justice denied his guilt,4 he was warned of his rights no fewer than five times, 5 and any "interrogation" that might have occurred seemed quite mild.6

The New Dimensions Of Constitutional Adjudication, Archibald Cox

Washington Law Review

The new dimensions to which my title refers are of a different order; they are not substantive but institutional. That the Supreme Court has always played a partly political role—that it has always made a certain amount of public policy in some areas under the guise of interpreting the Constitution—is all too obvious. That it has usually felt partly bound by "law" is equally obvious to anyone who understands the self-discipline of the legal method. The question of emphasis always remains. How large or small is—or should be—the political element in judicial decisions? There also remains a second question. How …

The Value Of Comparative Constitutional Law, Donald P. Kommers

Journal Articles

The publication of an English translation of a notable decision by a major foreign tribunal' is a fitting occasion on which to discuss the value of comparative constitutional law as a subject of academic study and as a legal discipline of valid current applicability. When referring to comparative constitutional law, I am speaking mainly of case law and most particularly of judicial decisions handed down by national tribunals empowered to review the constitutionality of legislative and executive acts.

Contribution To An Explication Of The Activity Of The Warren Majority Of The Supreme Court, Mitchell Franklin

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Taney Period, 1836-64, David S. Bogen

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Common Law, Henry Paul Monaghan

Faculty Scholarship

Mr. Justice Powell has publicly characterized the 1974 Term of the Supreme. Court as a "dull" one. Whatever the accuracy of that description, the 1974 Term was, in the public eye, a quiet one. When, late in the Term, the Court ordered the death penalty case held over for reargument, it ensured that the 1974 Term would generate few front-page testimonials to the supreme authority of the Supreme Court. But neither a dull nor a quiet Term can obscure the current reality that the Court's claim to be the "ultimate interpreter of the Constitution" appears to command more nearly universal …

Kauper's 'Judicial Examination Of The Accused' Forty Years Later—Some Comments On A Remarkable Article, Yale Kamisar

Articles

For a long time before Professor Paul Kauper wrote "Judicial Examination of the Accused" in 1932, and for a long time thereafter, the "legal mind" shut out the de facto inquisitorial system that characterized American criminal procedure. Paul Kauper could not look away. He recognized the "naked, ugly facts" (p. 1224) and was determined to do something about them -more than thirty years before Escobedo v. Illinois' or Miranda v. Arizona.2

Police Interrogation: Michigan V. Tucker, Quentin T. Sumner

North Carolina Central Law Review

No abstract provided.

Book Reviews, Wythe Holt, Kermit L. Hall

Vanderbilt Law Review

The recent death of Earl Warren reminds us, rather sadly, that the great Chief Justice and "his" Court have been subjected to withering and sometimes vicious and unfair criticism from within the academic circle.' The heart of the criticism (most charitably put) has been that the Warren Court hastily, simplistically, and even unnecessarily attempted to elevate egalitarianism into a high,perhaps the highest, social value and standard for constitutional and governmental decision making. We like to think that we believe in a democracy free for all-that is the way we portray ourselves propagandistically to the rest of the world-but the truth …

The Court, The Constitution, And Chief Justice Burger, William F. Swindler

Vanderbilt Law Review

Although the constitutional crisis of 1973 has not yet demanded a definitive response from the Supreme Court, it obviously has established a landmark in the ultimate history of Warren Burger's Chief Justiceship. While the unprecedented confrontation between executive and judiciary was not carried beyond the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Burger's old court,' and although the prospective confrontation between executive and Congress did not--at least in its first round-- reach a stage of review on the merits, the questions presented went to the cornerstones of Anglo-American constitutional theory itself. The case of Vice President Agnew raised issues …

The Court, The Constitution, And Chief Justice Burger, William F. Swindler

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Conclusive Presumption Doctrine: Equal Process Or Due Protection?, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

In Vlandis v. Kline and United States Department of Agriculture v. Murry, decided during its past term, the Supreme Court invoked the conclusive presumption doctrine to invalidate statutory provisions, that restricted access to certain state and federal government benefits. This term, in Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, the Court used the same rationale to strike down school board rules requiring teachers to take maternity leaves without pay. The essence of the doctrine is as follows: When a statutory provision imposes a burden upon a class of individuals for a particular purpose and certain individuals within the burdened class …

Kirby, Biggers, And Ash: Do Any Constitutional Safeguards Remain Against The Danger Of Convicting The Innocent?, Joseph D. Grano

Michigan Law Review

Even recognizing the danger of misidentification, procedural safeguards, especially constitutional ones, are not readily apparent. Some judges, such as Justice Stewart, find less need for counsel at photographic displays than at lineups; others find an equivalent or even greater need for counsel. Some judges, in approving on-the-scene identifications without counsel, find a guarantee of accuracy in the short interval between the crime and the identification; other judges decry such procedures and find them inherently suggestive. The problem stems directly from the lack of scientific knowledge and inquiry. Therefore, in analyzing the recent identification cases, this Article will draw upon experimental …

Book Review: Antecedents And Beginnings To 1801, David S. Bogen

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Boraas V. Village Of Belle Terre: The New, New Equal Protection, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

In Boraas v. Village of Belle Terre a group of unrelated college students who rented a home in Belle Terre challenged a zoning ordinance that limited home occupancy to persons related by blood, marriage, or adoption. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, finding for the students, decided the case using a novel equal protection theory, and the Supreme Court reversed. This Note deals with the theory adopted by the Second Circuit, its sources, and its future in light of the subsequent Supreme Court opinion in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez and the Supreme Court's analysis of …

The Use Of In Camera Hearings In Ruling On The Informer Privilege, Ronald E. Levine

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The thesis of this article is that most of the problems of defining the scope of the privilege in a particular case are due to the paucity of information available to the trial judge who must rule on the issue. Furthermore, many of the formulas presently used are conceptually and functionally inadequate. Both of these problems can be solved by the use of in camera hearings, for such proceedings not only will provide the trial judge with sufficient information to make a fair and rational decision, but will also alleviate the present necessity to rule only on the basis of …

A Critique Of The Recent Supreme Court Obscenity Decisions, Herald Price Fahringer, Michael J. Brown

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Spence V. Washington, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Immunity Under The Speech Or Debate Clause For Republican And From Questioning About Sources, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Gravel v. United States, which arose out of Senator Mike Gravel's attempt to publicize the Pentagon Papers, concerned the scope of the immunity conferred upon a legislator and his aide under article I, section 6, of the United States Constitution. This provision, commonly called the "speech or debate clause," provides that "for any Speech or Debate in either House, [United States Senators or Representatives] shall not be questioned in any other Place." Gravel is one of the few Supreme Court interpretations of this clause.