Constitutional Law Commons^™

All A Twitter: Social Networking, College Athletes, And The First Amendment, Davis Walsh

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Sacrifice And Sacred Honor: Why The Constitution Is A "Suicide Pact", Peter Brandon Bayer

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Most legal scholars and elected officials embrace the popular cliché that “the Constitution is not a suicide pact.” Typically, those commentators extol the “Constitution of necessity,” the supposition that Government, essentially the Executive, may take any action—may abridge or deny any fundamental right—to alleviate a sufficiently serious national security threat. The “Constitution of necessity” is wrong. This Article explains that strict devotion to the “fundamental fairness” principles of the Constitution’s Due Process Clauses is America’s utmost legal and moral duty, surpassing all other considerations, even safety, security and survival.

The analysis begins with the most basic premises: the definition of …

Campus Citizenship And Associational Freedom: An Aristolelian Take On The Nondiscrimination Puzzle, Chapin Cimino

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Student expressive association on campus is a thorny thicket. Student affinity groups often choose to organize around a shared principle or characteristic of the groups’ members, which, by definition, makes those students different in some way from their peers. In order to preserve the group’s sense of uniqueness, these groups often then wish to control their own membership and voting policies. They feel, in essence, entitled to discriminate—a right arguably embodied by the First Amendment freedom of expressive association. When campus groups actually exercise this right, however, they run into university antidiscrimination policies, which can cost them official campus recognition. …

Iqbal, Al-Kidd And Pleading Past Qualified Immunity: What The Cases Mean And How They Demonstrate A Need To Eliminate The Immunity Doctrines From Constitutional Tort Law, John M. Greabe

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Supreme Court’s decisions in Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Ashcroft v. al-Kidd contain issue-framing statements indicating that a constitutional tort plaintiff is required to plead facts sufficient to establish the inapplicability of the qualified immunity defense. Yet, framing the issue in this way ignores the Court’s earlier decisions in Gomez v. Toledo and Crawford-El v. Britton and is at odds with the established law of pleading; a plaintiff is not required to anticipate an affirmative defense and negate its applicabilityin the complaint. These cases thus raise a number of questions—Does the Court really mean what its issue-framing statements suggest? If …

The Religious Liberty Of Judges, Daniel R. Suhr

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article begins by reviewing the government employee line of cases, starting with United Public Workers v. Mitchell in 1947.29 The first section concludes that the modified Pickering balancing test set forth in United States v. National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) is the appropriate level of scrutiny for judicial conduct rules. The body of this Article reviews ways in which the four canons of the ABA Model Code of Judicial Ethics and official interpretations of and rulings regarding them limit the religious activities of judges. I conclude that numerous applications of the Model Code are unconstitutional infringements on judges’ First …

The Auto-Authentication Of The Page: Purely Written Speech And The Doctrine Of Obscenity, Ryen Rasmus

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Finding Equilibrium: Exploring Due Process Violations In The Whistleblower Provisions Of The Fraud Enforecement And Recovery Act Of 2009, Laura Hough

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Badmouthing Authority: Hostile Speech About School Officials And The Limits Of School Restrictions, Emily Gold Waldman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Federal Law In State Court: Judicial Federalism Through A Relational Lens, Charlton C. Copeland

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Enforcing federalism is most commonly thought to involve the search for a
constitutional delegation of substantive power. Although in modern times the substantive power might be overlapping or shared authority, federalism enforcement proceeds from a determination about the site of substantive power. This conception of federalism enforcement preserves the Constitution’s commitment to fractionated authority by determining whether power is legitimately possessed. Thus we understand significant federalism disputes in our age as framed by whether Congress has the authority to enact comprehensive health care reform legislation, or whether Congress
has exceeded its authority in reenacting the Voting Rights Act’s preclearance requirements. …

The Dark Side Of The Force: The Legacy Of Justice Holmes For First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Modern First Amendment jurisprudence is deeply paradoxical. On one hand,
freedom of speech is said to promote fundamental values such as individual selffulfillment, democratic deliberation, and the search for truth. At the same time, however, many leading decisions protect speech that appears to undermine these values by attacking the dignity and personality of others or their status as full and equal members of the community. In this Article, I explore where this Jekyll-and-Hyde quality of First Amendment jurisprudence comes from. I argue that the American free speech tradition consists of two very different strands: a liberal humanist view that emphasizes …

The Fading Free Exercise Clause, Rene Reyes

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article uses the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Christian Legal Society
v. Martinez as a point of departure for analyzing the current state of free exercise doctrine. I argue that one of the most notable features of the Christian Legal Society (CLS) case is its almost total lack of engagement with the Free Exercise Clause. For the core of CLS’s complaint was unambiguously about the declaration and exercise of religious beliefs: the group claimed that it was being excluded from campus life because it required its members to live according to shared religious principles and to subscribe to a …

Dodging A Bullet: Mcdonald V. City Of Chicago And The Limits Of Progessive Originalism, Dale E. Ho

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Supreme Court’s decision in last term’s gun rights case, McDonald v. City of Chicago, punctured the conventional wisdom after District of Columbia v. Heller that “we are all originalists now.” Surprisingly, many progressive academics were disappointed. For “progressive originalists,” McDonald was a missed opportunity to overrule the Slaughter-House Cases and to revitalize the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In their view, such a ruling could have realigned progressive constitutional achievements with originalism and relieved progressives of the albatross of substantive due process, while also unlocking long-dormant constitutional text to serve as the source of new unenumerated …

The Melendez-Diaz Dilemma: Virginia's Response, A Model To Follow, Anne Hampton Andrews

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Faulty Foundations: How The False Analogy To Routine Fingerprinting Undermines The Argument For Arrestee Dna Sampling, Corey Preston

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Huppert, Reilly, And The Increasing Futility Of Relying On The First Amendment To Protect Employee Speech, John Q. Mulligan

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Constantly Approximating Popular Sovereignty: Seven Fundamental Principles Of Constitutional Law, Wilson R. Huhn

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Hate Speech And Harassment: The Constitutionality Of Campus Codes That Prohibit Racial Insults, Alan E. Brownstein

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Government Identity Speech And Religion: Establishment Clause Limits After Summum, Mary Jean Dolan

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article offers in-depth analysis of the opinions in Pleasant Grove v. Summum. Summum is a significant case because it expands “government speech” to cover broad, thematic government identity messages in the form of donated monuments, including the much-litigated Fraternal Order of Eagles-donated Ten Commandments. The Article explores the fine distinctions between the new “government speech doctrine”— a defense in Free Speech Clause cases that allows government to express its own viewpoint and to reject alternative views—and “government speech” analyzed under the Establishment Clause, which prohibits government from expressing a viewpoint on religion, and from favoring some religions over others. …

The Inherent Structure Of Free Speech Law, Joshua P. Davis, Joshua D. Rosenberg

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

To date no one has discovered a set of organizing principles for free speech doctrine, an area of the law that has been criticized as complex, ad hoc, and even incoherent. We provide a framework that distills free speech law down to three judgments: the first about the role of government; the second about the target of government regulation; and the third a constrained cost-benefit analysis. The framework can be summarized by three propositions: first, the Constitution constrains government if it regulates private speech, but not if government speaks, sponsors speech or restricts expression in managing an internal governmental function; …

Fundamentalism, The First Amendment, And The Rise Of The Religious Right, Randall Balmer

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Nonproblem Of Fundamentalism, Andrew Koppelman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Family Values, Courts, And Culture War: The Case Of Abstinence-Only Sex Education, John E. Taylor

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

God Of Our Fathers, Gods For Ourselves: Fundamentalism And Postmodern Belief, Frederick Mark Gedicks

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Fundamentalist Challenges To Core Democratic Values: Exit And Homeschooling, Catherine J. Ross

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

No Ambiguity Left Behind: A Discussion Of The Clear Statement Rule And The Unfunded Mandates Clause Of No Child Left Behind, Andrew G. Caffrey

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The "Licentiousness" In Religious Organizations And Why It Is Not Protected Under Religious Liberty Constitutional Provisions, Marci A. Hamilton

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Introduction: Perspectives On Religious Fundamentalism And Families In The U.S., Vivian E. Hamilton

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Making Sense Of Facial And As-Applied Challenges, Alex Kreit

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Challenges To State Anti-Preference Laws And The Role Of Federal Courts, Michael E. Rosman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Where Do We Go From Here? Handgun Regulation In A Post-Heller World, Lindsey Craven

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.