Constitutional Law Commons^™

What States Owe Outsiders, Matthew D. Adler

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Protective Power Of The Presidency, Henry Paul Monaghan

Faculty Scholarship

Walter Bagehot's still-admired study of the English Constitution distinguished between its "dignified" and "efficient" parts. Bagehot argued that the English Constitution's "dignified" theory of parliamentary supremacy masked the (then) dominant reality of cabinet government. Attacking what he described as the "literary" theory of the American Constitution, Woodrow Wilson posited a similar distinction. Writing in 1885, Wilson asserted that the "literary" theory of American government embodied in Federalist's "ideal checks and balances of the federal system" obscured its efficient principle: "government by the chairmen of the Standing Committees of Congress." An ardent admirer of ministerial government, Wilson especially lamented the condition …

The Eclipse Of Reason: A Rhetorical Reading Of Bowers V. Hardwick, Kendall Thomas

Faculty Scholarship

In a careful and compelling reading of the text of the Supreme Court's opinion in Bowers v. Hardwick, Janet Halley provides a meticulous map of the misprisions by which the Hardwick Court "exploit[s] confusion about what sodomy is in ways that create opportunities for the [judicial] exercise of homophobic power." According to Professor Halley, the duplicitous mechanisms the Hardwick Court marshals in reasoning about sodomy entail a mobilization of two "incommensurable articulations": the idea of the sodomitical act, on the one hand, and that of personal identity, on the other.

Professor Halley rightly insists that an anti-homophobic critique …

Natural Rights, Natural Law, And American Constitutions, Philip A. Hamburger

Faculty Scholarship

Natural rights and natural -law are ideas that frequently seem to have something in common with the elusive shapes of a Rorschach test. They are suggestive of well-defined, recognizable images, yet they are so indeterminate that they permit us to see in them what we are inclined to see. Like Rorschach's phantasm-inducing ink blots, natural rights and natural law are not only suggestive but also indeterminate – ideas to which each of us can plausibly attribute whatever qualities we happen to associate with them. For this reason, we may reasonably fear that natural rights and natural law are ideas often …

Thayer Versus Marshall, Gary S. Lawson

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Nagel's intriguing paper1 suggests that James Bradley Thayer's clear error rule of constitutional adjudication 2 is not an effective vehicle for controlling, and indeed may even exacerbate, the tendency toward invective that often characterizes modem court decisions and legal arguments. Professor Nagel is too charitable. To the extent that Thayer's article has had an influence on either the style or substance of modem constitutional law, that influence has been even more pernicious than Professor Nagel lets on. The source of that problem, however, is less the clear error rule itself than the premises that generate and, in Thayer's view, …

Anti-Lesbian And -Gay Right Wing Initiatives: A Strategy For Response, Mary Newcombe, Suzanne B. Goldberg

Faculty Scholarship

The increasing visibility and political activism of the lesbian and gay community in this country has sparked a vicious backlash intended to reinforce restrictive notions of social morality and to stifle expressions of lesbian and gay identity. While this backlash has flourished in mainstream institutions, as in the U.S. Senate's hearings on lifting the military's ban against lesbians and gay men, it has also been incited on a grassroots level across the country by the Christian right wing, which has involved itself intimately in exploiting popular inclinations and reinforcing discrimination at the federal and local levels.

The Incompleat Burkean: Bruce Ackerman's Foundation For Constitutional History, Eben Moglen

Faculty Scholarship

With this book, the first in a projected series of at least three volumes, Bruce Ackerman confirms what attentive readers of his law review articles of the past ten years have already known-he is the most original and important writer on constitutional theory in the contemporary English-speaking world. We the People: Foundations, despite its informal, sometimes overly talky style, is not an easy book. Filled to the brim, even to overflowing, and containing many gestures in the direction of arguments to be made in future volumes rather than the substance of the arguments themselves, it presents both the casual reader …

Constitutional Identity, George P. Fletcher

Faculty Scholarship

The aim of this Article is to introduce and clarify a new way of thinking about decisions in close cases, particularly those that address basic issues of constitutional law. When constitutional language fails to offer an unequivocal directive for decision, the recourse of the judge is not always to look "outward" toward overarching principles of political morality. In an illuminating array of cases, the acceptable way to resolve the disputes and to explain the results is to turn "inward" and reflect upon the legal culture in which the dispute is embedded. The way to understand this subcategory of decisions is …

The Supreme Court, Abortion, And The Jurisprudence Of Class, Wendy K. Mariner

Faculty Scholarship

The US Supreme Court's decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v Casey both protects a woman's liberty to choose to terminate her pregnancy and permits the state to make it more difficult for her to exercise her choice. In their opinion on the case, Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter eloquently defend constitutional protection of the right to make intimate decisions like continuing or ending a pregnancy. At the same time, they permit the state to try to persuade pregnant women not to have abortions and to make abortion harder to obtain and more costly, as long as the state's …

An Essay On The Ninth Amendment: Interpretation For The New World Order, Phoebe A. Haddon

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Civil Actions For Emotional Distress And R.A.V. V. City Of St. Paul, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

The law of emotional distress is characterized by judicial reluctance to create and expand remedies for emotional injuries. The issue here is whether the Court's decision in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul will impose further limitations on the right to recover civil damages for the intentional infliction of emotional injury, particular emotional injuries resulting from hate speech. This symposium first examines the applicability of the tort to redress claims based on abusive epithets based on the victim's race, gender, or sexual orientation. The symposium then argues that using this tort in cases involving hate speech should not create constitutional …

Deconstitutionalizing Justiciability: The Example Of Mootness, Evan Tsen Lee

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Tail That Wagged The Dog: Bifurcated Factfinding Under The Federal Sentencing Guidelines And The Limits Of Due Process, Susan Herman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

On The Brink: The First Amendment In The Rehnquist Court, 1990-91 Term, Joel Gora

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Beyond The Second Amendment: An Individual Right To Arms Viewed Through The Ninth Amendment , Nicholas J. Johnson

Faculty Scholarship

Traditionally, the debate over the individual right to possess firearms has focused on the origins and meaning of the Second Amendment. Some constitutional scholars have dismissed the idea that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to arms. They argue that it only prevents the federal government from disarming states. Other scholars, focusing on the language of the amendment and its historical context, conclude that it does indeed establish an individual right to firearms. This article examines whether, even absent the Second Amendment, the Constitution restrains government from taking away what may be individuals' best tools of self-defense. The foothold …

Lethal Fiction: The Meaning Of "Counsel" In The Sixth Amendment , Bruce A. Green

Faculty Scholarship

Charles Bell, Donald Paradis, and Shirley Tyler were tried in different states for murder. Each was convicted and sentenced to death. Charles Bell was represented at trial by a recent law school graduate who had never before tried a criminal case to completion. Donald Paradis's lawyer had passed the bar exam six months earlier, had never previously represented a criminal accused, and had not elected courses in criminal law, criminal procedure, or trial advocacy while in law school. Shirley Tyler's trial lawyer was also a member of the bar for only a few months. He had defended one previous assault …

Introduction: The Duty Of Keeping Political Power Separated, Calvin R. Massey

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Foreword: The Constitution Of Responsibility, Steven G. Calabresi, Gary S. Lawson

Faculty Scholarship

The American legal academy is decidedly nationalistic. Comparative law tends to be a minor part of the law school curriculum, and discussion of alternative legal systems almost never finds its way into mainstream courses like constitutional law. As a result, much that is distinctive about American constitutionalism, and the American legal system in general, is often taken for granted. The federal Constitution, for example, says much about governmental structure, power, and limitations, but virtually nothing about the obligations of citizens to one another or to the government.' This feature of the American Constitution starkly sets it apart from many of …

The Role Of Institutional Factors In Protecting Individual Liberties, Thomas W. Merrill

Faculty Scholarship

Questions about the efficacy of the Bill of Rights cry out for serious comparative legal scholarship. Robert Ellickson and Frank Easterbrook suggest that one might approach these questions by looking at different state constitutions. One might also look more seriously at the different constitutional regimes around the world, and try to draw some judgments about what impact, if any, different types of constitutional arrangements have on individual rights. We have heard expressions of skepticism about this approach, but there has been very little serious comparative scholarship by constitutional law scholars in this country. The scholarly tradition in America has been …

A Constitutional Right Of Religious Exemption: An Historical Perspective, Philip A. Hamburger

Faculty Scholarship

Did late eighteenth-century Americans understand the Free Exercise Clause of the United States Constitution to provide individuals a right of exemption from civil laws to which they had religious objections? Claims of exemption based on the Free Exercise Clause have prompted some of the Supreme Court's most prominent free exercise decisions, and therefore this historical inquiry about a right of exemption may have implications for our constitutional jurisprudence. Even if the Court does not adopt late eighteenth-century ideas about the free exercise of religion, we may, nonetheless, find that the history of such ideas can contribute to our contemporary analysis. …

Natural Rights And Positive Law: A Comment On Professor Mcaffee's Paper, Philip A. Hamburger

Faculty Scholarship

Were the rights retained by the people defined by positive law? This is the issue explored by Professor McAffee and various other scholars who dispute the history of the Ninth Amendment. Surveying the work of these other historians, Professor McAffee distinguishes between those who argue that the framers and ratifiers were "positivists" and those who attribute to the framers and ratifiers a so-called "natural-law" or "natural-rights" perspective-the latter being the view that the rights retained by the people included rights not delineated by the United States Constitution. McAffee rejects this latter point of view in favor of the positivist interpretation …

Apocalypse Next Time?: The Anachronistic Attack On Habeas Corpus/Direct Review Parity, James S. Liebman

Faculty Scholarship

Today, a district court's habeas corpus review of the constitutionality of a state criminal conviction and the Supreme Court's direct review of the same question are nearly identical. Last Term, in Wright v. West, an otherwise mundane criminal procedure case, the Supreme Court rewrote the question presented to ask whether the parity between federal habeas corpus and direct appellate review should be destroyed. The Court proposed abandoning in habeas corpus an important trait shared by the two modes of review – de novo consideration of legal and mixed legal-factual questions.

To those who value meaningful habeas corpus review, the …

The Individualized-Consideration Principle And The Death Penalty As Cruel And Unusual Punishment, Ronald J. Mann

Faculty Scholarship

The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits infliction of "cruel and unusual punishments." The Supreme Court established the basic principles applying this amendment to the death penalty during a six-year period in the 1970's. First, in 1972, in Furman v. Georgia, the Court invalidated all then-existing death penalty statutes. Second, in 1976, in Gregg v. Georgia and its companions, the Court upheld some of the statutes promulgated in response to Furman but invalidated others. Finally, in 1978, in Lockett v. Ohio, the Court invalidated an Ohio statute because it failed to give the sentencer a sufficient …

Zero-Sum Madison, Thomas W. Merrill

Faculty Scholarship

Has the fabric of American constitutional law been permanently "distorted" by the Framers' preoccupation with protecting private property against redistribution? Jennifer Nedelsky thinks so. In this provocative study of how the idea of property shaped the political thought of the Framers and the institutions they designed, she argues that James Madison's constitutional philosophy was driven by fear that a future propertyless majority would seek to expropriate the holdings of a minority. To combat this danger, Madison sought to create a structure of government that would ensure the dominance of the propertied elite. Madison's obsessive fear of redistribution spread to the …

The Constitutional Principle Of Separation Of Powers, Thomas W. Merrill

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court has had many occasions in recent years to consider what it calls "the constitutional principle of separation of powers." The principle in question has been effusively praised and on occasion vigorously enforced. But just what is it? The Court clearly believes that the Constitution contains an organizing principle that is more than the sum of the specific clauses that govern relations among the branches. Yet notwithstanding the many testimonials to the importance of the principle, its content remains remarkably elusive.

The central problem, as many have observed, is that the Court has employed two very different conceptions …

Beyond The Privacy Principle, Kendall Thomas

Faculty Scholarship

In Bowers v. Hardwick, the U.S. Supreme Court was asked to ad-dress the constitutionality of a Georgia criminal statute prohibiting certain private sexual practices by consenting adults. The Georgia citizens who brought the suit sought a judgment regarding the constitutionality of the statute on its face, but the Court resolutely avoided consideration of that issue. The Court took the view that the only federal question properly before it was the constitutional validity of the law as applied to private, sexual activity by consenting adults of the same gender, or what it called "homosexual sodomy." Having thus limited the scope …

The End Of New York Times V Sullivan: Reflections On Masson V New Yorker Magazine, Lee C. Bollinger

Faculty Scholarship

Virtually every year since New York Times v Sullivan, the Supreme Court has decided at least one or two First Amendment cases involving the press. This now seemingly permanent, annual pageant of media cases undoubtedly has significance for the development of both constitutional law and the character of American journalism, though oddly that significance has been little explored in the scholarly literature. This past year the Court had two cases, both of which received an unusual amount of discussion within the press. It is, of course, understandable, even if not wholly defensible, for the press to give disproportionate coverage …

Rouge Et Noir Reread: A Popular Constitutional History Of The Angelo Herndon Case, Kendall Thomas

Faculty Scholarship

In 1932, Eugene Angelo Braxton Hemdon, a young Afro-American member of the Communist Party, U.S.A., was arrested in Atlanta and charged with an attempt to incite insurrection against that state's lawful authority. Some five years later, in Herndon v. Lowry, Herndon filed a writ of habeas corpus asking the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the constitutionality of the Georgia statute under which he had been convicted. Two weeks before his twenty-fourth birthday, the Court, voting 5-4, declared the use of the Georgia political-crimes statute against him unconstitutional on the grounds that it deprived Herndon of his rights to freedom …

Hungarian Legal Reform For The Private Sector, Cheryl W. Gray, Rebecca J. Hanson, Michael A. Heller

Faculty Scholarship

Hungary is in the midst of a fundamental transformation toward a market economy. Although Hungary has long been in the forefront of efforts to reform socialism itself, after 1989 the goals of reform moved from market socialism toward capitalism, as the old Communist regime lost power and the idea of widespread private ownership gained acceptance. The legal framework – the "rules of the game – is now being geared toward encouraging, protecting, and rewarding entrepreneurs in the private sector.

This Article describes the evolving legal framework in Hungary in several areas: constitutional, real property, intellectual property, company, foreign investment, contract, …

Equity And Hierarchy: Reflections On The Harris Execution, Steven G. Calabresi, Gary S. Lawson

Faculty Scholarship

The legal controversy surrounding the execution of Robert Alton Harris is only one in a series of cases over the past few months testing the proper relationship between the Supreme Court and the inferior federal courts. Controversy over inferior federal court grants or denials of injunctions concerning Haitian refugees1 and the French abortion pill2 have starkly raised, as does the Harris case3, profound questions concerning Supreme Court review of inferior court rulings on issues involving equitable relief. The Harris case did not display the American legal system at its finest. None of the participants in the process distinguished themselves-not the …