Constitutional Law Commons^™

Moving The Baseline: The Contradiction At The Core Of Constitutional Discourse Over State Aid To Parochial Schools, Andrew Stark

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Corrective Justice And Constitutional Torts, Bernard P. Dauenhauer, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Tort liability in the private realm may be understood as "an instrument aimed...at deterrence...[and] a way of achieving corrective justice between the parties." Following the common law model, the Supreme Court has borrowed this normative framework for constitutional torts, ruling that the aims of liability for damages are to vindicate constitutional rights and to deter constitutional violations. A recent article by Daryl Levinson takes issue with this approach. Levinson argues that the superficial similarities between public torts and private torts conceal real differences, to which neither the Court nor scholars have paid adequate attention. The main point of his article, …

Foreword: Symposium Re-Examining First Principles: Deterrence And Corrective Justice In Constitutional Torts, Thomas A. Eaton

Scholarly Works

This Symposium provides a forum for a careful and thoughtful consideration of whether constitutional tort law can deter wrongdoing and is consistent with principles of corrective justice.

Section 1983, The First Amendment, And Public Employee Speech: Shaping The Right To Fit The Remedy (And Vice Versa), Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

This Article is not about theories of free speech and how they bear on the public employment context, nor does it contribute to the academic debate over what the aims of public employee speech law ought to be. I take the Court at its word when it says that its aim is to give substantial weight to both the value of speech and the government's interest as an employer. Unlike Massaro and Ingber, I take it as a given that the government may insist on hierarchy and obedience to authority in the workplace. Unlike Rosenthal, I begin from the Court's …

Disarming Canadians, And Arming Them With Tolerance: Banning Firearms And Minimum Sentences To Control Violent Crime--An Essay On An Apparent Contradiction, Helene Dumont

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

In an article published in French in 1997, the author offered reflections on feminism and criminal law that would allow for a better control of violent crime, without Parliament having to resort to excessively severe sentences. In this respect, she argued that there was no contradiction in supporting the radical ban of firearms in Canada, while opposing a minimum sentence of four years under the Firearms Act, which currently affects approximately ten serious Criminal Code offences. After setting out her position in favour of the "disarmament" of Canadians, the author argued that minimum sentences of four years were unconstitutional. Such …

Searching For Smith: The Constitutionality Of Mandatory Sentences, Kent Roach

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

The jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Canada on the constitutionality of mandatory minimum sentences, from R. v. Smith to R. v. Latimer, is reviewed and assessed in light of relevant developments in constitutional law and sentencing. These include the Supreme Courts increasing interest in constitutional minimalism and corresponding reluctance to rely on hypothetical offenders and facial declarations of invalidity. The manner in which the Court's increasing concern for crime victims and fault levels has been used to justify upholding mandatory sentences is examined. The author also relates this jurisprudence to trends in sentencing, including an increasing acceptance of mandatory …

The Death Penalty, Mandatory Prison Sentences, And The Eighth Amendment's Rule Against Cruel And Unusual Punishments, Jamie Cameron

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

The text of section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibit cruel and unusual punishment in language that is similar but not identical. Still, in considering constitutional restrictions on punishment, the deviations of the Supreme Court both focus on the concept of gross disproportionality between the offence committed and the state’s response. Despite the appearance of similarity, this article maintains that differences in the American law of sentencing explain why Canada ought not follow or adopt the United States approach to minimum sentences.

Innocence Protection Act: Death Penalty Reform On The Horizon, Ronald Weich

All Faculty Scholarship

The criminal justice pendulum may be swinging back in the direction of fairness. The Innocence Protection Act of 2001, introduced in both the Senate and the House of Representatives earlier this year, promises meaningful reforms in the administration of capital punishment in the United States.

Unlike previous slabs at reform, the Innocence Protection Act (lPA) has a real chance to become law because it commands unusually broad bipartisan support. The Senate bill (S. 486) is sponsored by Democrat Pat Leahy of Vermont and Republican Gordon Smith of Oregon. The House bill (H.R. 912) is sponsored by Democrat Bill Delahunt of …

Determining Reasonableness Under The Fourth Amendment: Physical Force To Control And Punish Students, Kathryn R. Urbonya

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Fidelity To Natural Law And Natural Rights In Constitutional Interpretation, James E. Fleming

Faculty Scholarship

It is an honor and a pleasure to comment on Professor Robert P. George's elegant and provocative paper.' For one thing, he is a leading proponent of reviving the natural law tradition in political, legal, and constitutional theory.2 For another, he was a reader of my Ph.D. dissertation in constitutional theory at Princeton University over a decade ago. I am happy to have the chance to reciprocate by reading a work of his and providing a critique of it. Fortunately, I learned at Princeton that vigorous criticism and disagreement are fully compatible with friendship and respect.

In Defense Of Making Government Pay: The Deterrent Effect Of Constitutional Tort Remedies, Myriam E. Gilles

Articles

Legal economists are concerned with setting optimal deterrence levels. Armed with information concerning the public and private costs and benefits of a particular harmful activity, the legal economist seeks to set a “price” for the activity which, to some socially optimal extent, minimizes external costs while retaining external benefits. If the economist's information is perfect, he can predict precisely how an economically rational actor will respond to a particular price and achieve optimal deterrence of activities whose costs outweigh their benefits.

Controlling Precedent: Congressional Regulation Of Judicial Decision-Making, Gary S. Lawson

Faculty Scholarship

Modern federal courts scholars have been fascinated by the question of Congress' power to control the jurisdiction of the federal courts.' This fascination is not difficult to explain: the question is theoretically profound and raises fundamental issues about the roles of Congress and the federal courts in the constitutional order.2 As a practical matter, however, the question has proven to be of limited significance. Despite a recent spate of legislation restricting access to courts by prisoners and immigrants,3 people talk about wholesale jurisdiction-stripping far more than they actually do it.

The Natural Rights-Based Justification For Judicial Review, James E. Fleming

Faculty Scholarship

On this panel, we are to consider questions such as "What form should constitutional interpretation by courts take in light of our aspirations to a good society?" For example, should courts engage in "moral readings" of the Constitution by elaborating abstract moral principles of liberty and equality or by making moral arguments about fostering human goods or virtues? In his paper, Justifying the Natural Law Theory of Constitutional Interpretation, Professor Michael Moore defends a sophisticated and powerful version of a moral realist or natural law answer to these questions.2 He confesses that, despite numerous criticisms, his views on the desirability …

Brief Amici Curiae Of Legal Historians Listed Herein In Support Of Respondent, I.N.S. V. St. Cyr, No. 00-767 (U.S. Mar. 27, 2001), ., James Oldham

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Multiple-Choice Exam: Or, The Schoolroom Lessons From Bush V. Gore, Marcella David

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

"Touchy" "Feely" -- Is There A Constitutional Difference? The Constitutionality Of "Prepping" A Passenger's Luggage For A Human Or Canine Sniff After Bond V. United States, David S. Rudstein

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Taking Democracy Seriously, Neil B. Cohen

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

A Constitutional Examination Of The Federal Exemptions For Native American Religious Peyote Use, Christopher Parker

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

Identifying And (Re)Formulating Prophylactic Rules, Safe Harbors, And Incidental Rights In Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Susan R. Klein

Michigan Law Review

The Miranda conundrum runs something like this. If the Miranda decision represents true constitutional interpretation, and all unwarned statements taken during custodial interrogation are "compelled" within the meaning of the Self-Incrimination Clause, the impeachment and "fruits" exceptions to Miranda should fall. If it is not true constitutional interpretation, than the Court has no business reversing state criminal convictions for its violation. I offer here what I hope is a satisfying answer to this conundrum, on both descriptive and normative levels, that justifies not only Miranda but a host of similar Warren, Burger, and Rehnquist Court decisions as well. In Part …

When Private Property Becomes A Public Forum, Becky Pintar

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Filth, Filtering, And The First Amendment: Ruminations On Public Libraries’ Use Of Internet Filtering Software, Bernard W. Bell

Federal Communications Law Journal

Traditionally, whenever the government has sought to regulate speech, analysis of its action focused on conventional issues, such as the type of forum involved, whether the government acted in a regulatory or a proprietary role, and whether the regulation could be defined as a prior restraint. With the advent of the Internet and the opportunity for the widespread dissemination of viewpoints, however, new issues have arisen. This Article focuses on the complex questions public libraries face when filtering material, usually of a sexually explicit nature, from the public using filtering software. This Article contends that public libraries require a unique …

Constitutional Issues Raised By States' Exclusion Of Fertility Drugs From Medicaid Coverage In Light Of Mandated Coverage Of Viagra, Erin L. Connolly

Vanderbilt Law Review

On July 2, 1998, officials at the Health Care Financing Administration ("HCFA"), the federal agency responsible for administering the Medicaid program,' mandated that state Medicaid pro- grams provide coverage for the impotency drug Viagra. The HCFA's announcement has proven very controversial, encountering resistance from many states who view the mandate as financially impairing their ability to provide other Medicaid services. Mandated Medicaid coverage of Viagra is also curious, considering that the Medicaid statute specifically permits states to exclude fertility drugs, a category of drugs into which Viagra falls, from coverage under state Medicaid programs. Moreover, most states do in fact …

Does The Federal Constitution Incorporate The Declaration Of Independence?, Thomas B. Mcaffee

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Ninth Circuit's Exotic Dance With The Commercial Speech Doctrine, Andi Chang

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Religion And The First Amendment: Some Causes Of The Recent Confusion, Carl H. Esbeck

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Free? Exercise, Marci A. Hamilton

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Accommodation And Equal Liberty, Lisa Schultz Bressman

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Accommodation And Equal Liberty, Lisa Schultz Bressman

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

How should legislatures respond to requests from religious individuals or institutions for exemptions to generally applicable laws? In Employment Division v. Smith, the Supreme Court held that the Free Exercise Clause does not require legislatures (federal or state) to honor such requests. The question remains whether they should do so on a voluntary basis. This is the problem of permissive accommodation-that is, accommodation of religious liberty as a matter of political discretion rather than constitutional compulsion. Put in the terms of this Symposium, it is the problem of accommodation in the public square. It is not immediately apparent why permissive …

A Reply To Professor Krotoszynski, Steven H. Shiffrin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

A reply to Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Jr.'s review of the author's book, Dissent, Injustice, and the Meanings of America.

Johnson V. Rodrigues (Ovozco): An Analysis Of The Constitutionality Of Utah's Adoption Statutes, Sarah K.L. Chow

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.