Constitutional Law Commons^™

State Funding Of Nontherapeutic Abortions; Medicaid Plans; Equal Protection; Right To Choose An Abortion; Beal V. Doe, Maher V. Roe, Poelker V. Doe, Constance Leistiko

Akron Law Review

In Beal v. Doe the United States Supreme Court held that Title XIX of the Social Security Act permits but does not require states participating in the Medicaid program established by that Act to fund nontherapeutic abortions. In the companion cases of Maher v. Roe and Poelker v. Doe, the same majority held in Maher that the Equal Protection Clause does not require a state that funds childbirth and therapeutic abortions to also fund the costs of nontherapeutic abortions, and in Poelker, that the Constitution does not prohibit a state or city from forbidding the performance of elective …

A Jurisprudence Of Equality: The Fourteenth Amendment And School Desegregation, Stewart Graham

Akron Law Review

This paper will deal with the meaning of equality in legal discourse and the social context which underlies that meaning.

The Control Of Seditious Libel As A Basis For The Development Of The Law Of Obscenity, Ronald W. Eades

Akron Law Review

In the United States there are government controls of at least two types of press, seditious libel and obscenity. Even though the first amendment protects speech and press, libels against the government and obscenity have not been given free reign, and have been consistently controlled. Although the conflicts over seditious libel aided the development of current standards of freedom of the press, the controls of obscenity have not yet completed that development and are inconsistent with those first amendment standards.

Sixth Amendment; Right Of Confrontation; Unavailalbe Witness; State V. Roberts, Christopher C. Manthey, Carol G. Simonetti

Akron Law Review

"THE SIXTH AMENDMENT to the Constitution states that "[iln all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him .... ." This seems simple and absolute, but case law has proven it to be neither; almost every phrase has been dissected and interpreted by courts and commentators. In fact, there may be more law review articles on this subject than there are cases.1 Some of the questions that could be asked are: What is meant by "all criminal prosecutions?" Does this require confrontation in preliminary hearings? Does "shall enjoy the …

Equal Protection; Sex Discrimination; Veterans' Preference Statutes, Feeney V. Massachusetts, Eloise Taylor

Akron Law Review

"Historically, the armed services have been predominantly male. The result has been that the operation of veterans' preferences has placed women as a class at a particular disadvantage in comparison to men when in or entering into civil service.' To nullify this stigma, the first successful challenge to veterans' preference, Feeney v. Massachusetts,' was litigated."

Death Penalty; Cruel And Unusual Punishment; Individualized Sentencing Determination; Lockett V. Ohio; Bell V. Ohio, James C. Ellerhorst

Akron Law Review

“In Bell v. Ohio and Lockett v. Ohio the United States Supreme Court found the sentencing provisions of the Ohio capital punishment statute to be incompatible with the eighth and fourteenth amendments which prohibit cruel and unusual punishment. These two opinions represent the most recent attempt by the Supreme Court to explain what elements must be included in a constitutionally valid capital punishment statute.”

Commerce Clause; Privileges And Immunities Clause; State Hiring; Discrimination Against Nonresidents; Hicklin V. Orbeck, Donna N. Kemp

Akron Law Review

"In Hicklin v. Orbeck, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held' that Alaska's statute entitled "Local Hire Under State Leases"' violates the Constitution due to its discriminatory effect on nonresidents. Basing its decision on the Privileges and Immunities Clause,' the Court found that there was insufficient justification for the extensive discrimination against nonresidents required by the Act because the unemployment problem to be alleviated by the legislation was not due to a great influx of nonresident jobseekers. Rather, the Court attributed the problem to the fact that a large percentage of the unemployed in Alaska lack sufficient education and job …

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Obscenity; Pinkus V. United States, Cary Douglass Caesa

Akron Law Review

“In its latest attempt to define a workable standard for obscenity rulings, the United States Supreme Court has held that children may not be included in a court's instruction as to the social group to whom the material would or would not be obscene. However, the Court held that sensitive persons and deviant groups may be included without unduly lowering the threshold of a finding of obscenity. Thus, Pinkus v. United States clarified the "community" whose judgment should define obscenity.”

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Commerical Speech And Advertising; Metpath, Inc. V. Imperato, Sheryl S. Kantz

Akron Law Review

"The decision of Metpath, Inc. v. Imperato is indicative of the growing trend of the judiciary toward affording "commercial speech" the protective shield of the first amendment. As shown by Metpath, where the concern is advertising by a medical clinic, speech with commercial overtones is afforded protection where a public interest in the subject and content of the speech is demonstrated. However, the perimeters of such protection have not been defined by this or previous decisions."

First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Access Of News Media To County Jail; Houchins V. Kqed, Inc., Thomas W. Renwand

Akron Law Review

"Although United States history is replete with struggles over the rights and prerogatives of the press, until recently these disputes rarely made their way to the nation's highest court.' In the last several years the Supreme Court has been confronted with a number of important, complex questions dealing with the role of a free press in a free society.'"

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Broadcasting; Obscenity; Fcc V. Pacifica Foundation, James E. Moliterno

Akron Law Review

“ ‘I was thinking about the curse words and the swear words, the cuss L words and the words you can't say . . .the words you couldn't say on the public, ah, airwaves... the ones that will curve your spine [and] grow hair on your hands ....’ While this is the satiric opinion of George Carlin, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and a bare majority of the United States Supreme Court have embraced it as their genuine opinion.' They have decided to protect the public from the fate of hearing Carlin's social criticism regarding seven ‘dirty’ words.”

The Supreme Court And The Press: Freedom Or Privilege?, Sandra Bradley

Akron Law Review

This comment will examine the Supreme Court's spring, 1978 decisions as they affected first amendment rights, and will assess their impact upon the press. Particular emphasis will be placed on Zurcher v. Stanford Daily as it affects first amendment, as well as fourth amendment, protections.

Unwanted Publicity, The News Media, And The Constitution: Where Privacy Rights Compete With The First Amendment, Ernest D. Giglio

Akron Law Review

It is ironic that while recent legal history records the emergence of a constitutional right to privacy, the Supreme Court, in a line of cases from New York Times to Firestone, has restricted the common law tort of privacy. The legal issues are particularly complex and admittedly difficult to reconcile when the public disclosure tort comes in conflict with first amendment privileges. Expansion of the privacy tort need not necessarily impose an unreasonable burden on the news media, provided the Supreme Court distinguishes between defamation and privacy invasion and establishes and applies to the latter wrong its own legal principles.

The Effect Of Jackson V. Virginia On Federal Habeas Corpus Review Of State Convictions, David R. Parker

Akron Law Review

This comment will attempt to demonstrate that the faults complained of by the dissent are not substantial. On the contrary, the decision gives much-needed interpretation to an important aspect of federal habeas corpus jurisdiction. However, the practical consequences of the employment of the Jackson standard are problematic.

Obscenity Law In Ohio, Richard H. Harris

Akron Law Review

Ohio's new obscenity statutes enacted in 1972 and made effective on January 1, 1974 are interesting to examine in light of recent Supreme Court holdings. The changes made in Ohio's obscenity statutes over the years reflect the Supreme Court's guidelines in varying degrees. Before looking at some of these recent statutes, as well as the present one in effect today, it is necessary to review the major Supreme Court decisions which have set these guidelines.

First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Erosion Of New York Times Co. V. Sullivan; Herbert V. Lando, Edward Howlett

Akron Law Review

In Herbert v. Lando the Supreme Court announced that the first amendment does not require a constitutional privilege foreclosing direct inquiry into the editorial process. While the decision may seem correct in its overturning of the absolute privilege afforded to the editorial process by the Second Circuit, nevertheless, by refusing to grant even a qualified privilege to the editorial process the Court may have upset the delicate balance between an individual's interest in his reputation and society's interest in a free flow of information recognized in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.

Sixth Amendment; Right Of Confrontation Limitations On The Bruton Rule; Parker V. Randolph, Edward P. Mazak

Akron Law Review

In some joint criminal trials the right of one defendant to refrain from self incrimination may come into conflict with the right of another defendant to confront the witnesses against him. The problem arises when one defendant refuses to testify at trial after having made a voluntary, out of court statement which tends to implicate a second defendant. The rules of evidence allow the statement to be introduced at trial only against the party making it; its use against the implicated defendant is excluded as hearsay.' The rules also provide for the court to instruct the jury on the limited …

Equal Protection; State Alimony Statutes; Sex Discrimination; Orr V. Orr, David A. Detec, Jane L. Thomas-Moore

Akron Law Review

In Orr v. Orr the United States Supreme Court held unconstitutional the Alabama alimony statutes which provided that husbands, but not wives, may be required to pay alimony upon divorce. The Court's principal reason for so holding was the statutes' violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the fourteenth amendment on the basis of sex discrimination.

The Role Of Courts In Government Today, James L. Oakes

Akron Law Review

It is elementary constitutional law that American courts have the power of judicial review. While a case can be made (and is still sometimes made by critics of too much judicial intervention) against the courts' power to review federal actions against the Constitution or state actions contrary to the Federal Constitution or statutes, the principle of judicial review is so well ingrained in the American system that it need not be reargued here. Rather I shall examine the principal arguments counseling caution and restraint in the exercise of the power, even though some of these arguments seem to run against …

Sixth Amendment; Right To Counsel; Multiple Representation; Cuyler V. Sullivan, Howard S. Essner

Akron Law Review

In Cuyler v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court finally resolved two important issues in the areas of criminal law and the sixth amendment right to counsel. In this case, the Court is faced with a situation with which it has dealt but twice before: joint representation of criminal defendants. Cuyler represents the culmination of the legal inquiry into the problems inherent whenever a single attorney represents more than one defendant in a criminal proceeding.

Sixth Amendment; Right To Counsel; Use Of Prior Uncounseled Convictions; Lewis V. United States And Baldasar V. Illinois, Rita Marks

Akron Law Review

Once again the Supreme Court has spoken on the issue of the right to counsel. Within three months the Court rendered two decisions which appear to be inconsistent, not only with one another, but with prior decisions of the Court

Conscientious Objection And The First Amendment, Gail White Sweeney

Akron Law Review

This comment will examine the possible constitutional consequences of the three other probabilities. 1) that Congress will revive the previous C.O. exemption without amendment; 2) that Congress will amend the statute to narrow the exemption; and, 3) that Congress will eliminate the C.O. exemption altogether. An analysis of earlier statutes is necessary to this end.

Second Amendment Right To Bear Arms, Quilici V. Village Of Morton Grove, Mark Benedic

Akron Law Review

From the colonial firelock to today's inexpensive handgun, the United States has toiled over the right to keep and bear arms. In 1981, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois addressed this recurring issue in Quilici v. Village of Morton Grove. The arguments espoused in Quilici consisted of both traditional and novel hypotheses on this uncertain subject. Delivered within an atmosphere of renewed concern over the use and possession of firearms, the arguments in Quilici provide insight into the reasoning on both sides of the gun-control issue.

The following note reviews the potential ramifications of the …

Federal Communications Commission, Administrative Law, Cbs, Inc. V. F.C.C., Rochelle K. Seide

Akron Law Review

The broadcast media has an obligation to permit a legally qualified candidate for federal office to purchase reasonable amounts of time on behalf of his candidacy. In so holding, the Supreme Court went beyond a mere codification of the public interest standard. Pursuant to section 312(a)(7) of the Communication Act of 1934, as amended, candidates for federal office have an affirmative right of reasonable access to the broadcast media. In addition, the Court found that the statutory right of access provided by section 312(a)(7), as defined and applied by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), was not violative of the first …

Right To Privacy; Removal Of Life-Support Systems; Leach V. Akron General Medical Center, Stephanie Zembar

Akron Law Review

The decision in Leach v. Akron General Medical Center, marked Summit County's acceptance of the trend allowing the removal of life support systems from an incompetent terminally ill patient. Technological advancements have enabled the medical profession to maintain a person indefinitely in a chronic vegetative state. These advancements have blurred traditional definitions of death and have raised legal, medical and ethical questions to be resolved within our court system. The Leach case was one of first impression in Ohio, and the decision should aid in establishing a framework from which members of the legal and medical professions, as well …

Constitutional Amendment; Rescission Of Ratification; Extension Of Ratification Period, State Of Idaho V. Freeman, John Carrol

Akron Law Review

The court's ruling in Freeman is in conflict with both the Supreme Court's apparent trend involving article V issues, and most of the recent scholarly opinion on point. As a result of this departure, and the fact that the ERA failed to be adopted, this decision is likely to have slight precedential value. Nonetheless, the district court's discussion of the ERA in light of recent changes in the political question doctrine has significance in interpreting article V.

"The Monster Approaching The Capital:" The Effort To Write Economic Policy Into The United States Constitution, Maryanne R. Rackoff

Akron Law Review

It is not within the scope of this comment to answer all the above issues. The focus of this paper will be a review of solutions suggested by Constitutional scholars with an emphasis on current proposed legislation. The Constitutional Implementation Act of 198116 (hereinafter S.817) and S.J. Res. 58.17 The current Congressionally-proposed amendment will be discussed in relation to the state applications. A brief review of the legislative history behind Article V will highlight the current efforts by Congress to provide some procedural guidelines for a state-summoned convention. Finally, the provisions of the various state applications will be compared. As …

Fifth Amendment, Double Jeopardy In Capital Sentencing, Bullington V. Missouri, Patrick J. Keating

Akron Law Review

In Bullington v. Missouri the Supreme Court marked a significant departure from previous principles of double jeopardy. The Court, for the first time, applied the Double Jeopardy clause to a criminal sentence. By prohibiting the state from seeking the death penalty at retrial, the case also casts important implications on capital punishment.

Container Legislation, Equal Protection, Commerce Clause, Minnesota V. Clover Leaf Creamery Company, Craig B. Paynter

Akron Law Review

The problems of litter, solid waste, and natural resource depletion are often inexorably linked to the liquid manufacturing and packaging industry. Legislative efforts to ameliorate these problems may therefore involve various controls of containers. When states enact container legislation, however, terms must be carefully chosen to avoid conflict with both state and federal constitutions.

Sixth Amendment, Televising Trials, Chandler V. Florida, Paul A. Patterson

Akron Law Review

The Supreme Court recently handed down a unanimous decision dealing with the respective rights of the press and defendants in regard to the televising of criminal trials. The case, Chandler v. Florida, while explicitly stated to be consistent with the Court's earlier decision in Estes v. Texas, has expanded the realm of media coverage of criminal trials beyond what apparently was permissible under Estes. The Court attempted to balance the competing constitutional guarantees of freedom of the press and the sixth amendment right to a fair trial. It held that while the presence of television cameras in …