Constitutional Law Commons^™

An Uncertain Future For Section 5 Of The Voting Rights Act: The Need For A Revised Bailout System, Christopher B. Seaman

Scholarly Articles

In Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder ("NAMUDNO"), 129 S. Ct. 2504 (2009), the Supreme Court declined to decide one of last Term's most prominent issues: the constitutionality of the 2006 renewal of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Instead, the Court adopted an unexpected statutory construction permitting the plaintiff to seek an exemption called "bailout" from continued coverage under this provision. But even though the Court avoided directly ruling on its constitutionality, NAMUDNO left little doubt that Section 5 remains on shaky constitutional ground. A revised bailout system is likely the best approach for placing …

Originalism And The Legislature, Joel Alicea

Scholarly Articles

While the extent to which Congress ought to be involved in interpreting the Constitution has been the subject of scholarly debate in recent years, the question of how Congress should interpret the document has been overlooked. This paper examines the justifications underlying several schools of originalist thought to tease out what these schools have to say about congressional constitutional interpretation. When the major originalist theories are scrutinized, the logical conclusion is that Congress ought to be originalist when engaging in constitutional interpretation. The paper thus breaks new ground in pointing out this radical implication of originalist thought, but its novel …

The History And Constitutionality Of Maryland’S Pregnancy Speech Regulations, Mark L. Rienzi

Scholarly Articles

On December 4, 2009, Baltimore, Maryland enacted the nation's first law regulating the speech of individuals and groups who want to talk to pregnant women about whether to have an abortion. Less than two months later, nearby Montgomery County, Maryland enacted the second. These regulations only apply to speakers who want to talk about one particular subject: pregnancy. As a practical matter, the regulations only apply to speakers who oppose abortion. Counselors who work for organizations willing to provide abortions are entirely exempt. Immediately after these laws passed, abortion providers and their allies across the country began plans to pursue …

Partial Unconstitutionality, Kevin C. Walsh

Scholarly Articles

Courts often hold legislation unconstitutional, but nearly always only part of the statute offends. The problem of partial unconstitutionality is therefore pervasive and persistent. Yet the exclusive doctrinal tool for dealing with this problem--severability doctrine-is deeply flawed. To make matters worse, severability doctrine is purportedly necessary for any workable system of judicial review. The accepted view is that severance saves: A court faced with a partially unconstitutional law must sever and excise the unconstitutional provisions or applications so that the constitutional remainder can be enforced going forward. Absent severance and excision, a law must fall in its entirety. This excision-based …

The Lexington Principles On The Rights Of Detainees: A Transnational Legal Process Approach To Due Process, David Alan Jordan, Frederic L. Kirgis, R. Brooke Lewis, Thomas Greenwood, Bennett L. Ross, Kathryn M. Zunich

Scholarly Articles

In Boumediene v. Bush, decided June 12, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court extended the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus to noncitizens detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Courts will now be called upon to assess the propriety of American detainee treatment practices against unclear constitutional standards. The strength and contours of the due process protections the U.S. Constitution will afford these detainees is still an unsettled question. The Lexington Principles are designed to help guide the development of American due process standards as they move outside our borders. These Principles are also intended to serve as a model for those …

Getting The Framers Wrong: A Response To Professor Geoffrey Stone, Samuel W. Calhoun

Scholarly Articles

Professor Geoffrey Stone’s Essay, The World of the Framers: A Christian Nation?, seeks to state “the truth about . . . what [the Framers] believed, and about what they aspired to when they created this nation.” Doing so will accomplish Professor Stone’s main objective, helping us to understand what “the Constitution allows” on a host of controversial public policy issues. Regrettably, Professor Stone’s effort is unsuccessful. Although he clearly tried to be fair in his historical account, the Essay ultimately presents a misleading view of the Framers’ perspective on the proper relationship between religion and the state.

Words "Which By Their Very Utterance Inflict Injury": Evolving Treatment Of Inherently Dangerous Speech In Free Speech Law And Theory, Rodney A. Smolla

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

Smith, Stormans, And The Future Of Free Exercise: Applying The Free Exercise Clause To Targeted Laws Of General Applicability, Mark L. Rienzi

Scholarly Articles

Does the Free Exercise Clause extend to situations where the legislature deliberately targets a religious practice, but does so for neutral reasons and is willing to extend the ban to people who happen to engage in the same practice for non-religious reasons? While one can imagine reasonable arguments on both sides about the constitutionality of the Sunday morning alcohol ban, it seems absurd to say that the Free Exercise Clause is not part of the equation. Yet under the First Amendment analysis presently employed by many courts, that result is entirely likely.

Response, Frames Of Reference And The "Turn To Remedy" In Facial Challenge Doctrine, Kevin C. Walsh

Scholarly Articles

This Symposium on Facial Challenges in the Roberts Court provides an opportunity to chart a path toward greater doctrinal coherence in light of the Court's most recent uses of the distinction between facial and as-applied challenges. In his contribution to this Symposium, David Faigman makes two claims that I address in this response. The first of Professor Faigman's claims is descriptive: "the debate over facial versus as-applied challenges is merely a subcategory of the pervasive issue concerning defining the proper frame of reference for empirical questions arising under the Constitution.'"' As Professor Faigman uses the term, a "frame of reference" …

No Tears For Creon, Marc O. Degirolami

Scholarly Articles

This essay critiques Professor Martha Nussbaum's book, Liberty of Conscience: In Defense of America's Tradition of Religious Equality (2008). Nussbaum's thesis is that the entire tradition of religious liberty in America can be both best understood (as a historical exercise) and justified (as a philosophical one) by recourse to the overarching principle of equal respect-that "[a]ll citizens have equal rights and deserve equal respect from the government under which they live." Nussbaum insists that equal respect pervades the tradition and that all other values of religious liberty are subordinate to it. She examines various free-exercise and establishment issues in light …

The Return Of Reasonableness: Saving The Fourth Amendment From The Supreme Court, Melanie D. Wilson

Scholarly Articles

Although there is no recipe for defining Fourth Amendment reasonableness, the Supreme Court produces its most anomalous Fourth Amendment outcomes when it decides "mixed" questions of reasonableness, assessing issues that turn on how ordinary, prudent citizens think and behave. The Court treats these mixed issues, combinations of fact and law, as if they raise purely legal questions. But mixed issues are more complex and require someone to determine historical facts, apply those facts to principles of Fourth Amendment law, and consider the totality of the circumstances, including taking into account community and cultural influences. The Supreme Court will take its …

The Problem Of Religious Learning, Marc O. Degirolami

Scholarly Articles

The problem of religious learning is that religion-including the teaching about religion-must be separated from liberal public education, but that the two cannot be entirely separated if the aims of liberal public education are to be realized. It is a problem that has gone largely unexamined by courts, constitutional scholars, and other legal theorists. Though the U.S. Supreme Court has offered a few terse statements about the permissibility of teaching about religion in its Establishment Clause jurisprudence, and scholars frequently urge policies for or against such controversial subjects as Intelligent Design or graduation prayers, insuffi- cient attention has been paid …

The American Presidency, The 2008 Election, And The Constitution's Natural Born Citizenship Proviso, Sarah Helene Duggin, Mary Beth Collins

Scholarly Articles

The following discussion describes the historical context of the natural born citizenship clause; explores some of the issues the proviso raises in contemporary American society, particularly its impact on Senator McCain and future presidential hopefuls; and offers a brief reflection on why the United States needs to amend Article II to eliminate natural born citizenship as a qualification for the presidency and vice presidency.

God’S Littlest Children And The Right To Live: The Case For A Positivist Pro-Life Overturning Of Roe, Raymond B. Marcin

Scholarly Articles

For those who understand that God's littlest children have the same right to life that all God's children have, the day on which the United States Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade was a day that echoed the grief and frustration that, more than a century earlier, accompanied the decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford. And the day on which the United States Supreme Court decides to overturn Roe v. Wade and all the other pro-abortion decisions will be a day of heart-felt thanksgiving. From the pro-life perspective, however, it will not be enough, that the Supreme Court merely overturns …

Exercises In The Regulation Of Hate Speech, Rodney A. Smolla

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

Where To Go From Here? The Roberts Court At The Crossroads Of Sentencing, Nora V. Demleitner

Scholarly Articles

As the Supreme Court has turned federal sentencing upside down in Booker, it has left a host of open questions in the wake of that decision. The outcome of these questions is often difficult to predict, for lower courts and commentators alike, as the Court has failed to develop an overarching sentencing philosophy to replace the rehabilitation-focused one that animated sentencing for so long. If the Court were to reach consensus on that issue, it would be better able to speak coherently on unresolved sentencing matters. This introduction to an Issue of the Federal Sentencing Reporter highlights some of the …

The Price Of Pretrial Release: Can We Afford To Keep Our Fourth Amendment Rights?, Melanie D. Wilson

Scholarly Articles

The Fourth Amendment serves an important constitutional function. It protects the privacy of Americans from intrusions on their personal security. Few rights are held more sacred. When a person is arrested and faces the real likelihood of pretrial detention in jail, the person risks not only a reduction in his privacy rights, but also a loss of his liberty. In such circumstances, the arrested person should be able to bargain away some of his Fourth Amendment rights in exchange for the additional freedoms associated with release to home.

Undoubtedly, defendants forced to choose between incarceration and Fourth Amendment rights will …

The Cabining Of Rosenberger: Locke V. Davey And The Broad Nondiscrimination Principle That Never Was, Alan M. Trammell

Scholarly Articles

In Rosenberger (1995), the Supreme Court decided that the University of Virginia could not exclude religious organizations from an activities fund that subsidized student organizations. Nine years later, the Court in Locke v. Davey held that Washington could exclude students of devotional theology from a generally available scholarship program; there was, in the Court’s words, “play in the joints” between what the Establishment Clause forbids and what the Free Exercise Clause requires. The cases seemed to contradict one another.

This Note explores whether Rosenberger announced a broad principle of nondiscrimination with respect to religion and whether Davey reneged on that …

Recoiling From Religion, Marc O. Degirolami

Scholarly Articles

This review offers a critical appraisal of God vs. the Gavel, in particular of Professor Hamilton's discussion of the complicated idea of the public good and how it intersects with religious free exercise interests. In Part II, the review explains the structure of the book and the framework for Hamilton's conclusions about religious accommodation. It emphasizes several instances of Hamilton's use and explanation of the concept of the public good. Part III articulates Hamilton's general theory of the public good, breaking the concept down into several distinct categories suggested by the book itself. The review critiques the book's explanation and …

Moral Communities Or A Market State: The Supreme Court’S Vision Of The Police Power In The Age Of Globalization, Antonio F. Perez, Robert J. Delahunty

Scholarly Articles

In essence, this Article attempts to explain the underlying logic of two intersecting lines of recent Supreme Court decisions. The first line of cases concerns the allocation of constitutional power between the Nation and the States (i.e., cases about "federalism"); the other line concerns claims of individual right against exercises of purported State power (i.e., cases about "individual rights"). The federalism cases deal, respectively, with the powers of the States against Congress in the regulation of domestic matters"' and as against the Executive (and, less often, Congress) in influencing foreign affairs. The individual rights cases deal with equal access to …

A Call To Leadership: The Future Of Race Relations In Virginia, Rodney A. Smolla

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

Cross Burning – Hate Speech As Free Speech: A Comment On Virginia V. Black, Roger C. Hartley

Scholarly Articles

This Article concerns the criminalization of cross burning. This act of symbolic expression sometimes communicates hate, inspires fear of impending bodily harm, expresses an ideology and solidarity with others, or encompasses combinations of these. In 1991, Edward Cleary defended a White juvenile, known in court documents as R.A.V., who had burned a cross on the lawn of a Black family. In that litigation, Cleary began his oral argument to the Supreme Court by posing this question: To what degree does abhorrence of cross burning justify banning it? That question still baffles us. Establishing appropriate boundaries for the protection of speech …

Does The Child Online Protection Act Violate The First Amendment?, Susanna Frederick Fischer

Scholarly Articles

The Supreme Court weighs in for a second time in the more than 5-year-old court battle over whether the Child Online Protection Act drafters have rectified the constitutional defects of the Communications Decency Act, which the Court struck down in 1997 on First Amendment grounds. In an effort to cure the CDA's lack of "narrow tailoring," the drafters of COPA have more narrowly defined the speech that is being regulated and have also narrowed the speakers who are subject to regulation.

Speaking Outdoors, Lewis H. Larue

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

Assassination, The War On Terrorism, And The Constitution, Rodney A. Smolla

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

Balancing As Art: Justice White And The Separation Of Powers, William J. Wagner

Scholarly Articles

In more than one key opinion, Justice Byron White cited Justice Robert H. Jackson's concept of the "art of governing" as the cornerstone of his own approach to separation-of-powers problems.' In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, Justice Jackson had written:

The actual art of governing under our Constitution does not and cannot conform to judicial definitions of the power of any of its branches based on isolated clauses or even single Articles torn from context. While the Constitution diffuses power the better to secure liberty, it also contemplates that practice will integrate the dispersed powers into a workable …

Federalism, Human Rights, And The Realpolitik Of Footnote Four, Robert A. Destro

Scholarly Articles

The burden of this Essay is to argue that the conventional wisdom about the Court's resolution of the crisis of 1937 both begs the question of the Court's jurisdiction to prescribe substantive rules governing our rights,' and misses the point that history proves the Court unfit to be the sole repository of such a sweeping power. Part I will argue that the Founders' vision of a "compound"

American republic was lost when the Supreme Court of the United States used the New Deal controversy over the limits of judicial review to accomplish one of the most far-reaching power grabs in …

Does The Children’S Internet Protection Act Induce Public Libraries To Violate The First Amendment?, Susanna Frederick Fischer

Scholarly Articles

The Children's Internet Protection Act contains filtering provisions for public libraries that condition the receipt of federal assistance for Internet access and related services on libraries' operation of technologi­cal measures that block all patrons' access to obscene and pornographic materials and also block minor patrons' access to material that is "harmful to minors." Now the Supreme Court has agreed to review a trial court's decision that enjoined the government from enforcing these filtering provisions on the basis that they are facially invalid under the First Amendment.

When Can The Government’S Misrepresentations Give Rise To A Constitutional Tort?, Antonio F. Perez

Scholarly Articles

Can allegations that senior State Department and National Security Council officials failed to inform a U.S. citizen that her foreign citizen husband was in foreign custody suffice to allege a denial of access to the courts in violation of the Fifth Amendment so as to give rise to a constitutional tort even absent any allegation that the plaintiff tried to file a lawsuit or was actually hindered in doing so?

If so, was that right clearly established as of the time of the government officials' conduct so as to defeat a defense of qualified immunity?

When Do Claims Challenging A Statute’S Effect On Pre-Existing Contracts Accrue?, Lucia A. Silecchia

Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.