Constitutional Law Commons^™

R. V. Oakes 1986-1997: Back To The Drawing Board, Leon E. Trakman, William Cole-Hamilton, Sean Gatien

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

The Supreme Court of Canada, in R. v. Oakes, identified two standards of justification in applying section 1. The first standard was normative. The second was methodological, called the Oakes test. The Court, until recently, applied the Oakes test mechanically and avoided the normative standard. More recently, in Egan v. Canada and RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (A.G.), it resorted to a normative analysis that is indeterminate and unpredictable. This article challenges both the mechanical application of the Oakes test and the Court's new normative approach. It proposes, and illustrates, a preferable alternative that is both determinate and predictable. It is …

Slashing And Burning Prisoners' Rights: Congress And The Supreme Court In Dialogue, Susan Herman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Publicity In High Profile Criminal Cases, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

No abstract provided.

Authorizing Interpretation, Pierre Schlag

Publications

No abstract provided.

Women And The Promise Of Equal Citizenship, Jennifer S. Hendricks

Publications

Anticipating the decision in United States v. Morrison (2000), holding that the civil rights remedy of the Violence Against Women Act was not a legitimate exercise of Congress's power to enforce the Equal Protection Clause, this article argues that the Act could be upheld as an exercise of Congress's authority under the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Congress's authority under the Citizenship Clause is analogous to its authority under the "badges and incidents" doctrine of the Thirteenth Amendment, which allows Congress to provide protection from discriminatory violence. This theory would also guide interpretation of the act to focus on …

Constitutional Law: Racial And Political Gerrymandering--Different Problems Require Different Solutions, Robert Redwine

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Irony Of Harmless Error, Charles S. Chapel

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Law: Kansas V. Hendricks--Warehousing Sex Offenders, Kayci Bair Hughes

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Criminal Procedure: Walker V. State--Dooming Challenges To Appellate Counsel's Effectiveness, Jennifer Golm

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

"The Federal Courts": Constituting And Changing The Topic, Judith Resnik

University of Richmond Law Review

I am honored to write the foreword to this issue of the University of Richmond Law Review dedicated to "The Federal Courts." The editors have asked me to address the question of the role of the federal judiciary today. No issue is more pressing within federal judicial circles. The Congress has, in the last few years, enacted several jurisdictional statutes, some that expand' and others that limit the authority of the federal courts, thereby raising questions about congressional powers over federal jurisdiction. The shape of the appellate structure of the federal courts is now under review pursuant to the congressionally-chartered …

In Memoriam: Ralph Seeley Obscured By Smoke: Medicinal Marijuana And The Need For Representation Reinforcement Review, Aryeh Y. Brown

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment contends that because of the continuing legislative inability to deal adequately with this issue the courts must apply strict judicial scrutiny by way of a representational reinforcement theory to cases concerning the medicinal use of marijuana. Failure to do so perpetuates the dysfunction of the judicial and legislative process. It additionally detracts from the legitimacy of that process by fostering cynicism and contempt toward the legislature that promulgates such oppressive laws and toward the judiciary that allows their enforcement.

The Declaration Of Independence In Constitutional Interpretation: A Selective History And Analysis, Charles H. Cosgrove

University of Richmond Law Review

In 1845, antislavery constitutionalist Lysander Spooner argued that the Declaration of Independence was originally a legal constitution with a direct bearing on how one ought to interpret the status of slavery under the Constitution of 1787. In 1889, the congressional act establishing the states of North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, and Washington required that their state constitutions "not be repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence," as if the two documents were of a piece. In 1995, attorney Christopher Darden argued to the jury in the O.J. Simpson criminal trial that slain victims Nicole …

Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Constitutional Law, Mark J. Yeager

University of Richmond Law Review

On February 27, 1998, the Supreme Court of Virginia rendered its decision in Town of Madison v. Ford. The court invalidated a town zoning ordinance which had been enacted in 1972. This extreme result was due to an insufficiency in the town council's minutes at the meeting when the ordinance in question was enacted. The minutes did not state the names of all the members present nor how they voted. The court, therefore, found that the ordinance was enacted in derogation of the provisions of article VII, section 7 of the Constitution of Virginia ("section 7").

How Does The New York Constitution Compare To The U.S. Constitution? (Annual Issue On New York State Law: Trends And Developments), Eileen Kaufman, Leon Friedman

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Does New York's Death Penalty Statute Violate The New York Constitution? (Symposium: New York State Constitutional Law: Trends And Developments), Richard Klein, Hon. Stewart F. Hancock, Jr., Christopher Quinn

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Tort Law (Symposium: The Supreme Court And State And Local Government Law: The 1996-97 Term), Leon D. Lazer

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Rethinking The Supreme Court’S Hands-Off Approach To Questions Of Religious Practice And Belief, Samuel J. Levine

Scholarly Works

In recent years, the United States Supreme Court has shown an increasing unwillingness to engage in deciding matters that relate to the interpretation of religious practice and belief. While the Justices have articulated valid concerns concerning these cases, courts should not allow these concerns to deter them from making decisions vital to the effective adjudication of Free Exercise and Establishment Clause cases. In fact, it appears that as a result of the Court's increasing refusal to consider carefully the religious questions central to many cases, the Court often tends to group together religious claims and practices, regardless of the relative …

Unenumerated Constitutional Rights And Unenumerated Biblical Obligations: A Preliminary Study In Comparative Hermeneutics, Samuel J. Levine

Scholarly Works

In his 1986 Yale Law Journal article, Robert Cover wrote of an explosion of legal scholarship placing interpretation at the crux of the enterprise of law. As part of the continuing emphasis on hermeneutics in constitutional interpretation, a body of literature has emerged comparing constitutional textual analysis to Biblical hermeneutics. This scholarship has been based on the recognition that, like the Constitution, the Bible functions as an authoritative legal text that must be interpreted in order to serve as the foundation for a living community. Levine looks at a basic hermeneutic device common to both Biblical and constitutional interpretation, the …

Section 1983 Litigation, Martin A. Schwartz, George C. Pratt

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Commandeering, The Tenth Amendment, And The Federal Requisition Power: New York V. United States Revisited, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court's recent Tenth Amendment decisions, New York v. United States and Printz v. United States, have relied on the original understanding to hold that the Congress may not compel state officials to enact or administer federal programs. We present evidence from the field of taxation that raises questions about the Court's originalist approach to the Tenth Amendment. We explain why the results in New York and Printz are superficially supported by the history of the widely discredited system of requisitions that prevailed under the Articles of Confederation: the Constitution created a system of indirect and direct taxation to …

Defining And Punishing Abroad: Constitutional Limits On The Extraterritorial Reach Of The Offenses Clause Note, Zephyr Teachout

Faculty Scholarship

The Offenses Clause of the United States Constitution gives Congress the authority to "define and punish... Offences against the Law of Nations." This Note considers whether Congress must conform to the jurisdictional rules of customary international law when legislating pursuant to the Offenses Clause.

Understanding Mahon In Historical Context, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Despite its enormous influence on constitutional law, Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon is just such an opinion; the primary purpose of the author’s article Jam for Justice Holmes: Reassessing the Significance of Mahon is to clarify Holmes's intent by placing the opinion in historical context and in the context of Holmes's other opinions. While other scholars have also sought to place Mahon in context, his account differs in large part because of its recognition, as part of the background of Mahon, of a separate line of cases involving businesses affected with a public interest.

The author argues that at …

Independent Counsel And Vigorous Investigation And Prosecution, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay draws on the examples of Watergate and Iran-Contra to offer a new perspective on Independent Counsel and their ability to investigate and prosecute high-level wrongdoing. The current consensus is that an Independent Counsel, appointed by judges of the special court pursuant to the Ethics in Government Act, will invariably investigate and prosecute crimes more vigorously than a Special Prosecutor appointed by the President or the Attorney General. Watergate and Iran-Contra suggest, however, that there are institutional and political factors that make analysis of the comparative tendencies of the two types of prosecutors more complex and dependent on circumstance. …

Sovereignty By Subtraction: The Multilateral Agreement On Investment, Robert Stumberg

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAl) represents a major step in the evolution of "sovereignty," which includes the power of a nation-state to govern without external controls. A panelist at the 1998 Cornell International Law journal Symposium introduced the MAl as an example of "multilateral sovereignty" to achieve commonly held goals of global economic integration. This perspective posits that the MAl is an exercise in sovereignty by subtraction, aiming to limit governing power rather than promote its joint exercise.

Its critics call the MAl a "slow motion coup d'etat," a "bill of rights for investors," a threat to sovereignty, …

Congressional Alternatives In The Wake Of City Of Boerne V. Flores: The (Limited) Role Of Congress In Protecting Religious Freedom From State And Local Infringement, Daniel O. Conkle

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This article discusses and analyzes City of Boerne v. Flores, the Supreme Court's 1997 decision invalidating the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) as applied to state and local governments, and it explores a variety of ways in which Congress might respond to Boerne with legislation that might survive constitutional scrutiny. In particular, the article addresses the following statutory possibilities: more narrowly tailored legislation grounded on Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment; RFRA-like legislation grounded on Congress's power over interstate commerce or its power to implement treaties; and spending-power legislation imposing RFRA-like conditions on the receipt of federal funding …

The Brady Act: Shot Down By The Tenth Amendment, Patricia Rooney

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

What's In A Word? A Comparative Analysis Of Article I, § 12 Of The New York State Constitution And The Fourth Amendment To The United States Constitution As Interpreted By The New York Court Of Appeals And The United States Supreme Court, Douglas Holden Wigdor

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process, Court Of Appeals: Daxor Corporation V. New York State Department Of Health

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process, Supreme Court New York County: People V. Julio Batiz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Governmental Takings, Court Of Appeals: Gazza V. New York State Department Of Environmental Conservation

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.