Constitutional Law Commons^™

Is Tiger Woods’S Swing Really A Work Of Art? Defining The Line Between The Right Of Publicity And The First Amendment, Michael R. Suppappola

ExpressO

My Comment, “Is Tiger Woods’s Swing Really a Work of Art? Defining the Line Between the Right of Publicity and the First Amendment,” focuses on the controversial “right of publicity,” a legal doctrine which is now recognized in the majority of states either at common law or by statute. The right of publicity allows athletes and celebrities to exclude others from using an entertainer’s likeness or image absent express permission. Although advocates claim that the right is needed to allow celebrities to profit from their own labor and goodwill, my Comment outlines how the right of publicity endangers traditional First …

The Dual Model Of Balancing: A Model For The Proper Scope Of Balancing In Constitutional Law, Iddo Porat

ExpressO

One of the most pressing problems of current constitutional law in the aftermath of September 11 is how to balance constitutional rights and national security interests. No one however seems to pause and ask should we balance individual rights and national security interests and if so when. One of the reasons for this is the widespread acceptance of what I shall term in this Article, the balancing consciousness: the view that every problem can and should be solved through balancing conflicting considerations. This Article demonstrates that the balancing consciousness is misleading. Not every problem can and should be solved through …

The Irrational Supreme Court, Michael I. Meyerson

ExpressO

Abstract: The Irrational Supreme Court

The pejorative “irrational” is used to describe many defects in legal reasoning, but is generally not meant to be understood as a literal lack of rational thinking. Similarly, the “rational basis test” is not meant to determine whether a legislature is “not endowed with reason or understanding,” but rather if it has acted with some hidden, invidious motive. Incredibly, though, the Supreme Court has frequently issued truly “irrational opinions,” simply due to the fundamental nature of group decision-making.

Much has been written about Nobel Prize winner Kenneth Arrow’s “Impossibility Theorem,” which proved that, when faced …

Book Review: Forensic Linguistics, Dru Stevenson

ExpressO

Review of John Gibbons' text "Forensic Linguistics"

In Or Out? Groups And The Fourteenth Amendment After Lawrence V. Texas, Miranda Mcgowan

ExpressO

This article explores a line of Supreme Court cases that have struck down state laws using a rigorous form of rational basis scrutiny, culminating in Lawrence v. Texas. The facts of these rigorous rational basis cases are diverse, but they share a common denominator: the Court has applied more rigorous rational basis scrutiny when a government has restricted the liberties of, or denied some state benefit, to a group—specifically, gays, lesbians, persons with disabilities, illegal immigrant children, and hippies.

Rigorous rational basis scrutiny has not wholly supplanted regular rational basis scrutiny. Courts still use regular rational basis scrutiny to review …

The Opacity Of Transparency, Mark Fenster

ExpressO

The normative concept of transparency, along with the open government laws that purport to create a transparent public system of governance promise the world—a democratic and accountable state above all, and a peaceful, prosperous, and efficient one as well. But transparency, in its role as the theoretical justification for a set of legal commands, frustrates all parties affected by its ambiguities and abstractions. The public’s engagement with transparency in practice yields denials of reasonable requests for essential government information, as well as government meetings that occur behind closed doors. Meanwhile, state officials bemoan the significantly impaired decision-making processes that result …

Water Justice In South Africa: Natural Resources Policy At The Intersection Of Human Rights, Economics, & Political Power, Rose Francis

ExpressO

This paper analyzes water as a social justice issue in South Africa, a nation that has undergone tremendous political and legal transformations over the last fifteen years, but whose population nonetheless continues to suffer from severe inequities in access to freshwater resources. In light of growing water scarcity worldwide, this paper highlights that legal treatment of water resources has significant socioeconomic and distributive justice impacts, even in progressive constitutional democracies that have embraced principles of human rights and international legal norms. The paper explores historical changes in South African water law and evaluates the current political and legal status of …

Federal-State Negotiations Over Federal Enclaves In The Early Republic, Adam S. Grace

ExpressO

This article examines practical solutions arrived at by the federal and state governments in resolving early interpretive issues that arose under Article I's "Enclave Clause." Focusing on the federal government's creation of federal "enclaves" for use in a national lighthouse system, the article compares these politically-based solutions with the later development of Supreme Court "Enclave Clause" jurisprudence.

Compliance Theory And The Inter-American Court Of Human Rights, Morse Hyun-Myung Tan

ExpressO

This essay fills a gap by exploring compliance theory in international law to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. After introducing the topic and setting the context, it delves into the question of why nations follow international law. Interacting with prominent theoretical models (including the managerial model, fairness and legitimacy, transnational legal process, self-interest, and a comparative perspective with Europe), it arrives at a critical synthesis in the conclusion.

The Supreme Court And The Trusts: Antitrust And The Foundations Of Modern American Business Regulation From Knight To Swift, Donald J. Smythe

ExpressO

The period from 1870-1920 was a turning point in modern history. It was during this time that the contours of the modern industrial state were formed. A “Great Merger Movement” occurred right in the middle of this period across most of the industrialized nations of the world. The trend toward industrial concentration, which was known at the time as the “trust problem,” generated considerable public alarm. Some have argued that it was caused by antitrust policy and the Supreme Court’s early antitrust decisions. Indeed, the idea has become the conventional wisdom among some antitrust scholars, especially those connected with the …

The Case For The Legislative Override, Nicholas Stephanopoulos

ExpressO

What is the optimal arrangement of judicial review? Most scholars who have addressed this question have assumed that there are only two important alternatives: judicial supremacy and parliamentary sovereignty. The literature has neglected the conceptual space that exists between these two poles, in particular the innovative legislative override model. This Article describes and evaluates the experiences of the two countries that have adopted the override, Canada and Israel. It also introduces a refined override model that promises to protect fundamental rights while promoting democratic decision-making. Finally, the Article explains which institutional and political contexts are hospitable to the override and …

Substantive Due Process As A Source Of Constitutional Protection For Nonpolitical Speech, Gregory P. Magarian

ExpressO

Present First Amendment doctrine presumptively protects anything within the descriptive category “expression” from government regulation, subject to balancing against countervailing government interests. As government actions during the present war on terrorism have made all too clear, that doctrine allows intolerable suppression of political debate and dissent – the expressive activity most integral to our constitutional design. At the same time, present doctrine fails to give a clear account of why the Constitution protects expressive autonomy and when that protection properly should yield to government interests, leading to an inconsistent and unsatisfying free speech regime. In this article, Professor Magarian advocates …

Overcoming Poletown: County Of Wayne V. Hathcock, Economic Development Takings, And The Future Of Public Use, Ilya Somin

George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series

County of Wayne v. Hathcock is an important step forward in public use takings law. The Michigan Supreme Court was right to overturn its notorious 1981 Poletown decision and forbid condemnations that transfer property to private parties solely on the grounds that the new owners will contribute to “economic development.” Poletown was the best known and most widely criticized decision justifying a nearly unlimited condemnation power.

As the Poletown case dramatically demonstrates, the economic development rationale is a virtual blank check for eminent domain abuse for the benefit of private parties. Poletown upheld a condemnation as a result of which …

A Positive Theory Of The War Powers Constitution, Jide O. Nzelibe

ExpressO

This Article explores the division of war-making authority between the President and Congress through the prism of positive political theory. For the most part, the scholarly treatment of the war-powers debate has been normative with various commentators offering various textual or functional accounts of what the proper allocation of war-making authority should be. This Article provides a positive account of the war-making powers by focusing on the domestic political constraints that the political branches face in the context of an imminent international crisis. This Article argues that the presidential decision to seek congressional authorization is determined by a two-level strategic …

Reclaiming The Public Forum: Courts Must Stand Firm Against Governmental Efforts To Displace Dissidence, Christopher B. Ford

ExpressO

Recognizing that the right to free speech for dissidents is increasingly at risk in the United States, this submission catalogs manifold methods the government has employed to constrain free speech and urges that courts not only serve as a bulwark against further erosion of public expression of dissent but endeavor to restore access to the public forum that recently has been lost. The submission surveys the background of the right to free expression and provides details and examples of the government’s increasing tendency to suppress dissident speech by deploying heavily armed police in demonstrations, committing violent acts against peaceful protesters, …

What Is A Tragedy Of The Commons? Overfishing And The Campaign Spending Problem, Shi-Ling Hsu

ExpressO

Over the thirty-seven years since its publication, Garden Hardin's "Tragedy of the Commons" has clearly become one of the most influential writings of all time. The tragedy of the commons is one of those rare scholarly ideas that has had an enormous impact in academia and is also commonly used outside of academia. In legal scholarship, the tragedy of the commons has been used to characterize a wide variety of resource problems, including intellectual property rights, overcrowding of telecommunications spectra, air and water pollution, and of course, the classic environmental commons problem, overfishing. But I suggest this embarrassment of citation …

Awakening An Empire Of Liberty: Exploring The Roots Of Socratic Inquiry And Political Nihilism In American Democracy, Maurice R. Dyson

ExpressO

This book review timely examines Cornel West’s latest sequel to his 1992 best seller, Race Matters. In Democracy Matters, West unflinchingly examines the waning of democratic energies and nihilistic practices of private and public sector in our present age of democracy. This review takes a critical examination of the logic underpinning West’s arguments, his nomenclature of various nihilism plaguing our society, the sometimes clumsy employment of literary devices and his thesis regarding the ‘niggerization’ of America after 9/11 that can serve as a basis for unifying collective action against imperialism. West makes a compelling argument that the public needs to …

Congressional Oversight Of Counterterrorism And Its Reform, Robert F. Blomquist

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Interstate Recognition Of Same-Sex Marriages And Civil Unions: A Handbook For Judges, Andrew Koppelman

Public Law and Legal Theory Papers

Same-sex marriage is here. Massachusetts now recognizes such marriages, and increasing numbers of same-sex couples have married. Other states have virtually the same status: Vermont recognizes "civil unions," and California recognizes "domestic partnerships," that have virtually all the rights of marriage. Are these statuses exportable? Will same-sex unions be recognized in other states? The answer should not be mysterious. There is a well developed body of law on the question of whether and when to recognize extraterritorial marriages that are contrary to the forum's public policy. Assuming that courts decide to follow that law, the answer is, it depends. This …

Does Obscenity Cause Moral Harm?, Andrew Koppelman

Public Law and Legal Theory Papers

This essay will reconsider the fundamentals of obscenity law: the harm that the law addresses and the means by which the law tries to prevent that harm. Strangely, even though an enormous amount of scholarship examines this doctrine, these fundamentals have not been adequately addressed. The harm that the doctrine seeks to prevent is not offense to unwilling viewers. It is not incitement to violence against women. It is not promotion of sexism. Rather, it is moral harm - a concept that modern scholarship finds hard to grasp. Liberals have not even understood the concept of moral harm, and so …

Morals-Based Justifications For Lawmaking: Before And After Lawrence V. Texas, 88 Minn. Law Rev. 1233, Suzanne B. Goldberg

ExpressO

Morals-Based Justifications for Lawmaking: Before and After Lawrence v. Texas looks in depth at the dissonance between the Supreme Court’s rhetorical support for morals-based lawmaking and the Court’s jurisprudence. In taking this approach, the article responds to a central post-Lawrence question regarding the sufficiency of a government’s moral agenda as a justification for restricting individual rights. It turns out, on close review of the cases going back to the mid-1800s, that the Court has almost never relied explicitly on a morals rationale to sustain an allegedly rights-infringing government action.

The article develops several explanations for this avoidance of explicit morals …

The Paperless Chase: Electronic Voting And Democratic Values, Daniel P. Tokaji

The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Working Paper Series

The 2000 election ignited a fierce controversy over the machinery used for voting. Civil rights advocates have called for the replacement of outdated paper-based voting equipment, like the infamous “hanging chad” punch card. Yet the introduction of paperless technology, especially electronic “touchscreen” machines, has induced widespread concern that software might be rigged to alter election results. This article examines the debate over electronic voting, which raises fundamental questions about the democratic values that should guide the administration of elections. It frames the debate by defining four equality norms embodied in federal voting rights laws and the Constitution. Electronic voting has …

Constitutional Law—State Employees Have Private Cause Of Action Against Employers Under Family And Medical Leave Act—Nevada Department Of Human Resources V. Hibbs, 538 U.S. 721 (2003)., Gabriel H. Teninbaum

ExpressO

The Eleventh Amendment of the United States Constitution provides that non-consenting states are not subject to suit in federal court. Congress may, however, abrogate the states’ sovereign immunity by enacting legislation to enforce the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment. In Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs, the Supreme Court of the United States considered whether Congress acted within its constitutional authority by abrogating sovereign immunity under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which allows private causes of action against state employers to enforce the FMLA’s family-leave provision. The Court held abrogation was proper under the FMLA and state …

Conceptualizing Blakely, Douglas A. Berman

The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law Working Paper Series

The Supreme Court’s decision in Blakely v. Washington has generated impassioned judicial and academic criticisms, perhaps because the “earthquake” ruling seems to announce a destructive rule in search of a sound principle. Read broadly, the jury trial rule articulated in Blakely might be thought to cast constitutional doubt on any and all judicial fact-finding at sentencing. Yet judicial fact-finding at sentencing has a long history, and such fact-finding has been an integral component of modern sentencing reforms and seems critical to the operation of guideline sentencing. The caustic reaction to Blakely reflects the fact that the decision has sowed confusion …

Thinking Outside The Pandora's Box: Why The Dmca Is Unconstitutional Under Article I §8 Of The U.S. Constitution, Joshua L. Schwartz

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Judicial Power & Civil Rights Reconsidered, David E. Bernstein, Ilya Somin

George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series

Michael Klarman's "From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality" is an important contribution to the scholarly literature on both the history of the civil rights struggle and judicial power more generally. Klarman argues that for much of the twentieth century, the Supreme Court was very reluctant to rule in favor of African American civil rights claimants, and had little impact when it did.

Klarman is right to reject traditional accounts that greatly exaggerated the Supreme Court's willingness and ability to protect minorities. However, he overstates his case. The Court's views on the …

A Culturally Correct Proposal To Privatize The British Columbia Salmon Fishery, D. Bruce Johnsen

George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series

Canada now faces two looming policy crises that have come to a head in British Columbia. The first is long-term depletion of the Pacific salmon fishery by mobile commercial ocean fishermen racing to intercept salmon under the rule of capture. The second results from Canadian Supreme Court case law recognizing and affirming “the existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada” under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. This essay shows that the economics of property rights provides a joint solution to these crises that would promote the Canadian commonwealth by way of a privatization auction …

Rules Of The Game: The "Play In The Joints" Between The Religion Clauses, Sharon Keller

ExpressO

Locke v. Davey is an exemplar of the new generation of Establishment clause cases that, particularly in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, have written into law a safe harbor, private choice, for governmental benefits that find their way into the coffers of religious institutions in amounts that are neither incidental nor trivial. In Locke the options presented in the private choice arguably infringed upon Free Exercise rights-- the dilemma that gives rise to the title of this article. Over the vigorous dissent of Justice Scalia, the Locke Court’s analysis of the permissibility of the conditioned benefit was based upon the argument that …

Common Constitutional Law, A. Daniel Feldman

ExpressO

This essay deals with a branch of New York Times v. Sullivan which appeared to make the question of whether the words were libelous a federal issue. The line of cases ends with Masson v. New Yorker Magazine, which decides that the meaning of the words is not a federal issue, but cites approvingly all the prior cases, which do exactly that. The ambiguity of cases leaves unresolved the status of the rule which underlies New York Times, which is that judges, not juries, are to determine the facts in First Amendment cases.

From Carlin’S Seven Dirty Words To Bono’S One Dirty Word: A Look At The Fcc’S Ever-Expanding Indecency Enforcement Role , Faith Sparr

ExpressO

The manuscript entitled: From Carlin’s Seven Dirty Words to Bono’s One Dirty Word: A Look at the FCC’s Ever-Expanding Indecency Enforcement Role examines whether the FCC, in the years since the Supreme Court’s 1978 decision in FCC v. Pacifica, has exceeded the limited holding that the Court rendered in that seminal case. Initially, the article focuses on the Pacifica holding itself, reminding the reader of the narrowness of the decision and pointing out some interesting limitations that the FCC appears to have forgotten in its recent race to crack down on speech it deems indecent. From that initial examination, the …