Constitutional Law Commons^™

Dna And Distrust, Kerry Abrams, Brandon L. Garrett

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past three decades, government regulation and funding of DNA testing has reshaped the use of genetic evidence across various fields, including criminal law, family law, and employment law. Courts have struggled with questions of when and whether to treat genetic evidence as implicating individual rights, policy trade-offs, or federalism problems. We identify two modes of genetic testing: identification testing, used to establish a person’s identity, and predictive testing, which seeks to predict outcomes for a person. Judges and lawmakers have often drawn a bright line at predictive testing, while allowing uninhibited identity testing. The U.S. Supreme Court in …

Being Deprived Of The Right To Effective Counsel In Removal Proceedings: Why The Eighth Circuit’S Decision In Rafiyev Must Be Overturned, Charles Shane Ellison

Faculty Scholarship

The situation for immigrants who have received frightfully defective assistance from their attorneys, or non-attorneys masquerading as such, is all too common. For the reasons discussed more fully in this article, immigrant victims are at particular risk in tribunals beneath the Eighth Circuit because of its aberrant precedent in the area of ineffective assistance of counsel in immigration proceedings. In this article, I will first provide an overview of the procedure for making a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel in removal proceedings and give a brief history of this procedure as used since the Board’s seminal decision in Matter …

California Constitutional Law: The Right To An Adequate Education, Anne D. Gordon

Faculty Scholarship

Plaintiffs' victory in Vergara v. State, a case about teacher evaluation and employment regulations, has thrust the issue of educational adequacy into the spotlight in California. Campaign for Quality Education v. State, a case based on the California Constitution's education clause, has been fully briefed before the California Supreme Court and is waiting to be set for argument. These cases require California courts to again look to the constitution to determine what the right to education means. Although the California Supreme Court found this right fundamental over forty years ago, no supreme court decision has yet articulated whether this right …

The Death Penalty And The Fifth Amendment, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

Can the Supreme Court find unconstitutional something that the text of the Constitution “contemplates”? If the Bill of Rights mentions a punishment, does that make it a “permissible legislative choice” immune to independent constitutional challenges?

Recent developments have given new hope to those seeking constitutional abolition of the death penalty. But some supporters of the death penalty continue to argue, as they have since Furman v. Georgia, that the death penalty must be constitutional because the Fifth Amendment explicitly contemplates it. The appeal of this argument is obvious, but its strength is largely superficial, and is also mostly irrelevant …

Presidential War Powers As A Two-Level Dynamic: International Law, Domestic Law, And Practice-Based Legal Change, Curtis A. Bradley, Jean Galbraith

Faculty Scholarship

There is a rich literature on the circumstances under which the United Nations Charter or specific Security Council resolutions authorize nations to use force abroad, and there is a rich literature on the circumstances under which the U.S. Constitution and statutory law allows the President to use force abroad. These are largely separate areas of scholarship, addressing what are generally perceived to be two distinct levels of legal doctrine. This Article, by contrast, considers these two levels of doctrine together as they relate to the United States. In doing so, it makes three main contributions. First, it demonstrates striking parallels …

Lethality, Public Carry, And Adequate Alternatives, Joseph Blocher, Darrell A. H. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores the relationship between lethality and the right to bear arms, and considers how that relationship might be shaped by the availability of non-lethal alternative weapons. Prior scholarship has asked whether the Second Amendment includes a right to carry non-lethal “Arms.” An important set of related questions remains: does the Second Amendment necessarily include a right to arm oneself publicly with lethal force, if non-lethal alternatives are available? And how should one evaluate the adequacy of those alternatives?

The European Union: A Comparative Perspective, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

This chapter, to be included in the Oxford Principles of EU Law volume, compares the federalisms of Europe and the United States. It argues that Europe can be sensibly viewed from both federal and intergovernmental perspectives, and that particular aspects of the European Union’s structure fit each model. In particular, the EU is federal—that is, integrated to a comparable degree to the U.S.—with respect to its distribution of competences and the sovereignty attributed to EU law and institutions. But it is intergovernmental—that is, it preserves a center of gravity within the individual member states—with respect to the allocation of governmental …

Brief For Professor Walter Dellinger As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Walter E. Dellinger Iii

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Religiously-Motivated Medical Neglect: A Response To Professors Levin, Jacobs, And Arora, Doriane Lambelet Coleman

Faculty Scholarship

This Response to Professors Levin, Jacobs, and Arora’s article To Accommodate or Not to Accommodate: (When) Should the State Regulate Religion to Protect the Rights of Children and Third Parties? focuses on their claim that the law governing religious exemptions to medical neglect is messy, unprincipled, and in need of reform, including because it violates the Establishment Clause. I disagree with this assessment and provide support for my position. Specifically, I summarize and assess the current state of this law and its foundation in the perennial tussle between parental rights and state authority to make decisions for and about the …

Our Prescriptive Judicial Power: Constitutive And Entrenchment Effects Of Historical Practice In Federal Courts Law, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

Scholars examining the use of historical practice in constitutional adjudication have focused on a few high-profile separation-of-powers disputes, such as the recent decisions in NLRB v. Noel Canning and Zivotofsky v. Kerry. This essay argues that “big cases make bad theory” — that the focus on high-profile cases of this type distorts our understanding of how historical practice figures in constitutional adjudication more generally. I shift focus here to the more prosaic terrain of federal courts law, in which practice plays a pervasive role. That shift reveals two important insights: First, while historical practice plays an important constitutive role, structuring …

Practice And Precedent In Historical Gloss Games, Joseph Blocher, Margaret H. Lemos

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Darryl K. Brown, Robert P. Burns, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar, Jessica L. West

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Theory Of Copyright Authorship, Christopher Buccafusco

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to grant rights to “Authors” for their “Writings.” Despite the centrality of these terms to copyright jurisprudence, neither the courts nor scholars have provided coherent theories about what makes a person an author or what makes a thing a writing. This article articulates and defends a theory of copyrightable authorship. It argues that authorship involves the intentional creation of mental effects in an audience. A writing, then, is any fixed medium capable of producing mental effects. According to this theory, copyright may attach to the original, fixed, and minimally creative form or manner …

What Is Gun Control? Direct Burdens Incidental Burdens, And The Boundaries Of The Second Amendment, Joseph Blocher, Darrell A. H. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

Particularly in places with few recognizable gun control laws, “gun neutral” civil and criminal rules are an important but often-unnoticed basis for the legal regulation of guns. The burdens that these rules impose on the keeping and bearing of arms are at times significant, but they are also incidental, which raises hard questions about the boundaries between constitutional law, regulation, and legally enforceable private ordering. Does the Second Amendment apply to civil suits for trespass, negligence, and nuisance? Does the Amendment cover gun-neutral laws of general applicability like assault and disturbing the peace? In the course of addressing these practical …

The Supreme Court As A Filter Between International Law And American Constitutionalism, Curtis A. Bradley

Faculty Scholarship

As part of a symposium on Justice Stephen Breyer’s book, “The Court and the World,” this essay describes and defends the Supreme Court’s role as a filter between international law and the American constitutional system. In this role, the Court ensures that when international law passes into the U.S. legal system, it does so in a manner consistent with domestic constitutional values. This filtering role is appropriate, the Essay explains, in light of the different processes used to generate international law and domestic law and the different functions served by these bodies of law. The Essay provides examples of this …

Brief For Amici Curiae Professors Of Law In Support Of Petitioner, Barbara Allen Babcock, Jeffrey Bellin, Robert P. Burns, Sherman J. Clark, James E. Coleman Jr., Lisa Kern Griffin, Robert P. Mosteller, Deborah Tuerkheimer, Neil Vidmar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Six Degrees Of Separation: Attribution Under The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act In Obb Personenverkehr Ag V. Sachs, Daniel R. Echeverri

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) generally prevents foreign sovereigns from falling within the jurisdiction of U.S. courts, subject to exceptions the FSIA lists. This commentary analyzes BB Personenverkehr AG v. Sachs, a case before the Supreme Court on the question of whether the commercial activities exception of the FSIA applies when only one element of a plaintiff's claim is based upon commercial activity occurring in the United States and whether that sale can be attributed to a foreign sovereign. In this case, the plaintiff purchased a rail pass through an online, third-party travel agent. While traveling abroad and …

Noriega V. Activision/Blizzard: The First Amendment Right To Use A Historical Figure's Likeness In Video Games, Joshua Sinclair

Duke Law & Technology Review

Panama’s former dictator, Manuel Noriega, recently sued Activision Blizzard in the California Superior Court for using his likeness and image in the popular video game “Call of Duty: Black Ops II.” In his complaint, Noriega alleged that the use of his likeness violated his right of publicity. Former New York Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, came to Activision’s defense, and filed a motion to dismiss, which was granted. In granting Activision’s motion, the court held that Activision’s use of Noriega’s likeness was transformative and did not violate his right of publicity. This Issue Brief argues that the California Superior Court should not …

The Constitutionality And Legality Of Internet Voting Post-Shelby County, Logan T. Mohs

Duke Law & Technology Review

The technological and electoral landscapes have changed drastically since the turn of the century. While it once might have made sense to view voting online as unconstitutional, as opposed to merely impractical, the expanded range of Internet access for minority communities has made that argument tenuous at best. While there still may exist practical and political reasons to avoid Internet voting, the Constitution no longer stands as an effective wall against the practice. Furthermore, the primary statutory obstacle to the implementation of Internet voting on a local level, the Voting Rights Act, has been greatly weakened by the recent Supreme …

Ohio V. Clark: Testimonial Statements Under The Confrontation Clause, Mesha Sloss

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court declared that an accused right under the Constitution to confront the witnesses against him applied only to “testimonial statements.” That decision, however, did not attempt to fully define the scope of testimonial statements. This commentary analyzes Ohio v. Clark, a case which will decide the question of whether statements made by a child to a person with a duty to report allegations of child abuse are testimonial statements. In this case a young child was questioned at school by a teaching assistant about his injuries. This statement was then offered in …

Hiding In Plain Sight: Jesinoski And The Consumer’S Right Of Rescission, Milan Prodanovic

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Keeping Civil Rights Debates Civil: Removing Opportunities For Prejudice, Steven Saracco

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion in employment decisions made by private employers. This commentary analyzes Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch, a case before the Supreme Court on the issue of whether a job applicant bears the burden of expressly notifying an employer of a conflict between the applicant’s religious beliefs and the employer’s policies before the employer must offer a reasonable accommodation. This case deals with a Muslim woman who was denied employment at a clothing store because her headdress was deemed to be a …

Violently Possessed: Johnson As The Vehicle For Limiting Sentencing Enhancement Under The Armed Career Criminals Act, Jonathan Robe

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Johnson v. United States in which the Court will decide whether conviction for mere possession of a short-barreled shotgun qualifies as a "violent felony" that warrants sentence-enhancement under the Armed Career Criminals Act. The Author argues that he plain text of the statute and the Court's prior cases on the issue suggest tat convictions for "mere possession" do not satisfy the definition of "violent felony" and that the Court should overturn the Eighth Circuit's ruling upholding Johnson's sentence enhancement.

Is That A Threat?: Elonis V. United States And The Standard Of Intent For True Threat Convictions, Peter S. Larson

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary analyzes the Supreme Court case Elonis v. United States where the Court will determine the applicable criminal-intent standard required to convict a defendant for threatening speech. After a series of violent Facebook posts against coworkers and his estranged wife, Petitioner Elonis was convicted for making so-called "true threats" of violence--speech not granted First-Amendment protection. Elonis argues that the prosecution should have been required to prove that he actually had the intent to threaten people when he wrote the posts, not simply that a reasonable person would find the posts threatening. The Author argues that the Court should rule …

Up In The Air: Department Of Homeland Security V. Maclean And The Whistleblower Protection Act, Mike Brett

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary analyzes the Supreme Court case Department of Homeland Security v. MacLean deciding whether an employee of the Department of Homeland Security comes under the protection of the Whistleblower Protection Act when they release potentially sensitive information to the media. Generally, the Act protects whistleblowers unless the information they release is not allowed "as specified by law." The particular statutory question in this case is whether the "law" prohibiting release must be contained in a statute, or can include the Department of Homeland Security's own promulgated regulation. The Author profiles the background of the case, applicable legal precedent, and …

Zivotofsky V. Kerry: Of Passports, Politics, And Foreign Policy Powers, Cara J. Grand

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary profiles the upcoming Supreme Court decision in Zivotofsky v. Kerry, which will decide, for the first time in United States history, the dividing line between legislative and executive authority to recognize foreign nations. Though it emanates from a seemingly-benign passport disagreement about a place-of-birth designation, this case will address an unprecedented and extremely controversial issue about separation of powers that has somehow evaded a Supreme Court decision. The Author profiles the case history and applicable legal precedent and analyzes the arguments for both sides before recommending that the Court should not find the President's power in this …

Jennings V. Stephens And Judicial Efficiency In Habeas Appeals, Eric O'Brien

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary previews the Supreme Court case Jennings v. Stevens which deals with several areas of federal habeas corpus law and procedure. The Court will consider, inter alia, whether a habeas petitioner who succeeds in federal district court nevertheless needs to request a certificate of appealability to bring an alternate grounds for habeas relief at the appellate level. Further, the Court can resolve a major circuit split on whether a court considering an ineffective assistance of counsel claim should consider each instance of ineffective assistance as a single claim or as all parts of one claim. Eric O'Brien suggests …

Resisting Wholesale Electronic Invasion Of The Fourth Amendment, Michael E. Tigar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Professor Greenawalt's Unfashionable Idea, H. Jefferson Powell

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Voting Rights In Winter: The Death Of A Superstatute, Guy-Uriel Charles, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Faculty Scholarship

The Voting Rights Act (“VRA”), the most successful civil rights statute in American history, is dying. In the recent Shelby County decision, the U.S. Supreme Court signaled that the anti-discrimination model, long understood as the basis for the VRA as originally enacted, is no longer the best way to understand today’s voting rights questions. As a result, voting rights activists need to face up to the fact that voting rights law and policy are at a critical moment of transition. It is likely the case that the superstatute we once knew as the VRA is no more and is never …