Constitutional Law Commons^™

The First Amendment, Equal Protection, And Felon Disenfranchisement: A New Viewpoint, Janai S. Nelson

Faculty Publications

This Article engages the equality principles of the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause to reconsider the constitutionality of one of the last and most entrenched barriers to universal suffrage—felon disenfranchisement. A deeply racialized problem, felon disenfranchisement is additionally and independently a legislative judgment as to which citizen's ideas are worthy of inclusion in the electorate. Relying on a series of cases involving state interests in protecting the ballot and promoting its intelligent use, this Article demonstrates that felon disenfranchisement is open to attack under the Supreme Court's fundamental rights jurisprudence when it is motivated by a desire to …

A Jurisdictional Perspective On New York Times V. Sullivan, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

New York Times v. Sullivan, arguably the Supreme Court's most significant First Amendment decision, marks its fiftieth anniversary next year. Often overlooked in discussions of the case's impact on the freedom of speech and freedom of the press is that it arose from a complex puzzle of constitutional, statutory, and judge-made jurisdictional and procedural rules. These kept the case in hostile Alabama state courts for four years and a half-million-dollar judgment before the Times and its civil rights leader co-defendants finally could avail themselves of the structural protections of federal court and Article III judges. The case's outcome and …

Inside Voices: Protecting The Student-Critic In Public Schools, Josie F. Brown

Faculty Publications

First Amendment doctrine acknowledges the constructive potential of citizens’ criticism of public officials and governmental policies by offering such speech vigilant protection. However, when students speak out about perceived injustice or dysfunction in their public schools, teachers and administrators too often react by squelching and even punishing student-critics. To counteract school officials’ reflexively repressive responses to student protest and petition activities, this Article explains why the faithful performance of public schools’ responsibility to prepare students for constitutional citizenship demands the adoption of a more receptive and respectful attitude toward student dissent. After documenting how both educators and courts have mistakenly …

Defining Religion Down: Hasanna-Tabor, Martinez, And The U.S. Supreme Court, Carl H. Esbeck

Faculty Publications

While two recent Supreme Court cases on religious freedom appear sharply at odds, in one material respect they harmonize around an understanding that religion is fully protected only when exercised in private. CLS v. Martinez involved Hastings College of Law. Hastings' regulation of extracurricular organizations was unusual in requiring that any student can join an organization. This all-comers rule had a discriminatory impact on organizations with exclusionary memberships, such as the Christian Legal Society (CLS) which required subscribing to a statement of faith and conduct. The Court acknowledged the discriminatory effect, but said that the Free Speech Clause protects speech …

Texting While Driving Meets The Fourth Amendment: Deterring Both Texting And Warrantless Cell Phone Searches, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

Recent laws criminalizing texting while driving are under-inclusive, ambiguous, and impose light punishments that are unlikely to deter. At the same time, the laws empower police to conduct warrantless searches of drivers’ cell phones. Texting while driving is dangerous and should be punished with stiff fines, possible jail time, license suspensions, and interlock devices that prevent use of phones while driving. However, more severe punishment will not eliminate police authority to conduct warrantless cell phone searches. This Article therefore proposes that legislatures allow drivers to immediately confess to texting while driving in exchange for avoiding a search of their phones. …

Who Decides On Liberty?, Thomas P. Crocker

Faculty Publications

Whether approached as a matter of executive discretion, judicial role, or individual rights, questions about security are never far removed from questions about liberty. Tradeoffs between liberty and security often seem unavoidable. Defenders of unbounded executive power argue that security relies on experts to whom citizens and courts alike must defer. But, if the tradeoff between security and liberty is to be a real weighing of the risks, costs, benefits, burdens, and consequences of various policy decisions, then who has the necessary expertise to decide on liberty? After all, to make decisions about the appropriate balance between security and liberty …

Federal Constraints: Possible Constitutional Hurdles To Cross-Border Cap-And-Trade,, Shelley Welton

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Democratic Inclusion, Cognitive Development, And The Age Of Electoral Majority, Vivian E. Hamilton

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Indefensible Duty To Defend, Neal Devins, Saikrishna B. Prakash

Faculty Publications

Modern Justice Department opinions insist that the executive branch must enforce and defend laws. In the first article to systematically examine Department of Justice refusals to defend, we make four points. First, the duties to enforce and defend lack any sound basis in the Constitution. Hence, while President Obama is right to refuse to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, he is wrong to continue to enforce a law he believes is unconstitutional. Second, rather than being grounded in the Constitution, the duties are better explained by the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) desire to enhance its independence and status. By …

A (Modest) Separation Of Powers Success Story, Tara Leigh Grove

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Article Ii Safeguards Of Federal Jurisdiction, Tara Leigh Grove

Faculty Publications

Jurisdiction stripping has long been treated as a battle between Congress and the federal judiciary. Scholars have thus overlooked the important (and surprising) role that the executive branch has played in these jurisdictional struggles. This Article seeks to fill that void. Drawing on two strands of social science research, the Article argues that the executive branch has a strong incentive to use its constitutional authority over the enactment and enforcement of federal law to oppose jurisdiction-stripping measures. Notably, this structural argument has considerable historical support. The executive branch has repeatedly opposed jurisdiction-stripping proposals in Congress. That has been true even …

A Modest Experiment In Pedagogy: Lessons On Comparative Constitutional Law, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

This article describes how the author integrated comparative and international law lessons into a first year course on U.S. Constitutional Law. This version of a paper originally submitted to the International Association of Law Schools Conference on Comparative Constitutional Law in 2009, has been enriched by adding citations and references to relevant papers of other conference participants. The article includes a review of the literature on teaching comparative constitutional law, basic pedagogical theory, a bibliography, some practical advice and a set of four lessons on the themes of judicial review, transnational interpretation, affirmative action and reproductive rights, complete with discussion …

Prescriptive Jurisdiction, Adjudicative Jurisdiction, And The Ministerial Exemption, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Judicial Engagement, Written Constitutions, And The Value Of Preservation: The Case Of Individual Rights, Elizabeth Price Foley

Faculty Publications

When judges alter a written constitution because its original meaning is no longer convenient, useful or modern, they engage in judicial activism. They are actively seeking to modify the written social compact to suit their own, or their perception of society’s, current preferences. Judicial activism is a usurpation of the proper judicial role, and it undermines the proper role of We the People. Only the People may amend the written constitution when a sufficiently large number (i.e., a supermajority) believes strongly enough that a formal, written modification of the social charter is necessary. Judicial engagement refers to the need for …

Rejecting Sovereign Immunity In Public Law Litigation, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Balancing Privacy, Autonomy, And Scientific Needs In Electronic Health Records Research, Sharona Hoffman, Andy Podgurski

Faculty Publications

The ongoing transition from paper medical files to electronic health records will provide unprecedented amounts of data for biomedical research, with the potential to catalyze significant advances in medical knowledge. But this potential can be fully realized only if the data available to researchers is representative of the patient population as a whole. Thus, allowing individual patients to exclude their health information, in keeping with traditional notions of informed consent, may compromise the research enterprise and the medical benefits it produces.

This Article analyzes the tension between realizing societal benefits from medical research and granting individual preferences for privacy. It …

What Is The Meaning Of Health? Constitutional Implications Of Defining 'Medical Necessity' And 'Essential Health Benefits' Under The Affordable Care Act, B. Jessie Hill

Faculty Publications

One consequence of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is that government will come to play a more extensive role in healthcare decision-making by individuals and their providers. The ACA does not directly regulate access to health services, but by means of a system of funding, mandates, and penalties, it essentially requires many employers to provide, and most individuals to carry, a certain minimum level of health insurance. Governmental decisions about which medical services qualify as medically necessary and appropriate may take on a new and greater importance, because government officials will be required to decide what sorts of procedures must …

Law Review Symposium 2011: Baker V. Carr After 50 Years: Appraising The Reapportionment Revolution: Introduction, Jonathan L. Entin

Faculty Publications

Introduction to Law Review Symposium 2011: Baker V. Carr after 50 Years: Appraising the Reapportionment Revolution, Cleveland, OH

Does The Lawyer Make A Difference? Public Defender V. Appointed Counsel, Peter A. Joy, Kevin C. Mcmunigal

Faculty Publications

A recent study found that poor criminal defendants in Philadelphia who were represented by court-appointed private lawyers were more often found guilty and sentenced to more time in prison than similarly situated defendants represented by public defenders. In this column, we review the details of the study, its findings, and its ethical and constitutional implications.

The Individual Mandate And The Taxing Power, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

This article, prepared for a symposium at the Salmon P. Chase College of Law, Northern Kentucky University, considers whether the Taxing Clause provides an alternative constitutional basis, as some have recently argued, for the individual mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 21 - the requirement, going into effect in 214, that most individuals acquire satisfactory health insurance or pay a penalty. The article concludes that the Taxing Clause arguments are misguided. At best, the Clause can provide authority for the penalty, not for the mandate as a whole. Furthermore, the article questions whether the penalty will …

Rehnquist's Missing Letter: A Former Law Clerk's 1955 Thoughts On Justice Jackson And Brown, John Q. Barrett, Brad Snyder

Faculty Publications

"I think that Plessy v. Ferguson was right and should be reaffirmed." That's what Supreme Court law clerk William H. Rehnquist wrote privately in December 1952 to his boss, Justice Robert H. Jackson. When the memorandum was made public in 1971 and Rehnquist's Supreme Court confirmation hung in the balance, he claimed that the memorandum reflected Jackson's views, not Rehnquist's. Rehnquist was confirmed, but his explanation triggered charges that he had lied and smeared the memory of one of the Court's most revered justices. This Essay analyzes a newly discovered document—a letter Rehnquist wrote to Justice Felix Frankfurter in 1955, …

Crosses And Culture: State-Sponsored Religious Displays In The Us And Europe, Mark L. Movsesian

Faculty Publications

This article compares the recent jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights on the question of state-sponsored religious displays. Both tribunals insist that states have a duty of religious “neutrality,” but each defines that term differently. For the Supreme Court, neutrality means that government may not proselytize, even indirectly, or appear to favor a particular church; neutrality may even mean that government must not endorse religion generally. For the ECtHR, by contrast, neutrality means only that government must avoid active religious indoctrination; the ECtHR allows government to give “preponderant visibility” to the symbols of …

Obligatory Health, Noa Ben-Asher

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court will soon rule on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed in March 2010. Courts thus far are divided on the question whether Congress had authority under the Commerce Clause to impose the Act's "Individual Mandate" to purchase health insurance. At this moment, the public and legal debate can benefit from a clearer understanding of the underlying rights claims. This Article offers two principal contributions. First, the Article argues that, while the constitutional question technically turns on the interpretation of congressional power under the Commerce Clause, underlying these debates is a tension between …

The Anti-Messiness Principle In Statutory Interpretation, Anita S. Krishnakumar

Faculty Publications

Many of the Supreme Court's statutory interpretation opinions reflect a juisprudential aversion to interpreting statutes in a manner that will prove "messy" for implementing courts to administer. Yet the practice of construing statutes to avoid "messiness" has gone largely unnoticed in the statutory interpretation literature. This Article seeks to illuminate the Court's use of "anti-messiness" arguments to interpret statutes and to bring theoretical attention to the principle of "messiness" avoidance. The Article begins by defining the concept of anti-messiness and providing a typology of common anti-messiness arguments used by the Supreme Court. It then considers some dangers inherent in the …

Contextualizing Disclosure's Effects: Wikileaks, Balancing And The First Amendment, Christina E. Wells

Faculty Publications

This essay responds to Professor Fenster’s article in the Iowa Law Review, Disclosure’s Effects: WikiLeaks and Transparency, assessing the effects of the recent WikiLeaks disclosures. The essay agrees with many of Professor Fenster’s conclusions regarding the promise and peril of those disclosures, especially his concern regarding the problematic balancing approaches used to assess the likely impact when confidential information is revealed. It specifically elaborates on courts’ current application of the Espionage Act, a criminal law likely to be applied to the WikiLeaks disclosures, and the implications of that deferential application for WikiLeaks, Julian Assange and journalists in general.

Rescuing The Dignitary Torts From The Constitution, Cristina Carmody Tilley

Faculty Publications

The rights of individuals to recover for dignitary torts has been withering for the past forty years, since the Supreme Court constitutionalized the state common law tort of defamation in New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964. The Court announced in that case that the First Amendment required it to impose high standards for individual defamation claims in order to protect robust speech. As that principle has taken hold, it has in effect squeezed the rights of individuals to recover for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress as well as defamation. Just last Term, the Court held …

Falsely Shouting Fire In A Global Theater: Emerging Complexities Of Transborder Expression, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

We have entered an era in which potentially harmful expression can be distributed around the world in an instant. In the emerging global theater, speakers and audiences are connected through new and proliferating media; communicative space and time are compressed to an extraordinary degree; domestic expression can implicate national security and foreign affairs concerns; and a new model of global information dissemination is developing in which speakers are sometimes located beyond the jurisdiction of nations that may be harmed by their communications and disclosures.

This Article examines the First Amendment complexities associated with the dissemination of potentially harmful information in …

Recovering The Assembly Clause, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Constitution Of Cádiz In Florida, M C. Mirow

Faculty Publications

The article explores the vibrant constitutional community that existed in St. Augustine and the province of East Florida in the final decade of Spanish control of the area. Based on relatively unexplored primary sources, it reveals a great deal of unknown information about the importance of the Constitution in Florida immediately before the territory was transferred to the United States. The article provides full description of the Constitution's promulgation in 1812 and a second promulgation of the Constitution in 1820 (something unknown in the general literature). It also addresses the construction of the St. Augustine monument to the Constitution erected …

Presidential Power And Constitutional Responsibility, Thomas P. Crocker

Faculty Publications

Some constitutional theorists defend unbounded executive power to respond to emergencies or expansive discretionary powers to complete statutory directives. Against these anti-Madisonian approaches, this Article examines how the textual assignment of republican virtues helps to constitute and constrain the president's power. The Madisonian solution for constitutional constraint both creates institutions for unenlightened statesmen and relies on virtue to make governing possible. Constitutional responsibility is a consistent textual theme found in the command to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," the responsibility to remain faithful to the office of president, and the obligation to preserve the Constitution itself. Although …