Constitutional Law Commons^™

Restricting Prisoners' Equal Access To The Federal Courts: The Three Strikes Provision Of The Prison Litigation Reform Act And Substantive Equal Protection, Randal S. Jeffrey

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Recognizing Schools' Legitimate Educational Interests: Rethinking Ferpa's Approach To The Confidentiality Of Student Discipline And Classroom Records, Lynn M. Daggett, Dixie Snow Huefner

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional And Family Law—Grandparent Visitation In The Face Of The Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause: Parental Or Grandparental Rights? Troxel V. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000)., Oliver G. Hahn

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Felons, Firearms, And Federalism: Reconsidering Scarborough In Light Of Lopez, Brent E. Newton

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

The application of the federal prohibition of felons possessing firearms is a stretch of the Commerce Clause. Most cases involve a felon who merely happened to be in possession of a firearm. The only relationship to interstate commerce in these cases is that the firearms found were usually manufactured in another state. The application of this prohibition leaves the future of federalism in question.

Can Process Theory Constrain Courts?, Michael C. Dorf, Samuel Issacharoff

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The political process theory introduced by the Carolene Products footnote and developed through subsequent scholarship has shaped much of the modern constitutional landscape. Process theory posits that courts may justifiably intervene in the political arena when institutional obstacles impede corrective action by political actors themselves. Judged by this standard, the United States Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore was a failure, because the majority could not explain why its interference was necessary. More broadly, Bush v. Gore points to a central deficiency in process theory: it relies upon the Justices to guard against their own overreaching, but does not …

The Long Distance Remand: Florida V. Bostick And The Re-Awakened Bus Search Battlefront In The War On Drugs, Dennis J. Callahan

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Race To The Stars: A Federalism Argument For Leaving The Right Of Publicity In The Hands Of The States, Usha Rodrigues

Scholarly Works

This Note will argue that, given the variation in the right of publicity from state to state, and the relative newness of this property right, Congress should refrain from passing a law to federalize it. Although there are sound arguments for adopting this right, there are also reasons to hesitate. Given that only half of the states have adopted it, federalization seems premature. This Note will only obliquely address the main objection usually leveled at a robust right of publicity, namely that it stifles creativity and implicates First Amendment concerns. The focus instead will be on the right of individual …

The Constitution In Exile: Is It Time To Bring It In From The Cold?, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Dissing Congress, Ruth Colker, James J. Brudney

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court under Chief Justice Rehnquist's recent leadership has invalidated numerous federal laws, arguably departing from settled precedent to do so. The Rehnquist Court has held that Congress exceeded its constitutional authority in five instances during the 2000-01 Term, on four occasions during the 1999-2000 Term and in a total of twenty-nine cases since the 1994-95 Term. Commentators typically explain these decisions in federalism terms, focusing on the Court's use of its power to protect the States from an overreaching Congress. That explanation is incomplete and, in important respects, unpersuasive. The Rehnquist Court has not been as solicitous of …

When Constitutional Worlds Colide: Resurrecting The Framers' Bill Of Rights And Criminal Procedure, George C. Thomas Iii

Michigan Law Review

For two hundred years, the Supreme Court has been interpreting the Bill of Rights. Imagine Chief Justice John Marshall sitting in the dim, narrow Supreme Court chambers, pondering the interpretation of the Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process in United States v. Burr. Aaron Burr was charged with treason for planning to invade the Louisiana Territory and create a separate government there. To help prepare his defense, Burr wanted to see a letter written by General James Wilkinson to President Jefferson. In ruling on Burr's motion to compel disclosure, Marshall departed from the literal language of the Sixth Amendment - …

Race-Based Affirmative Action In American Legal Education, Adrien Katherine Wing

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

A Measure Of Freedom, James W. Nickel

Articles

No abstract provided.

A Claim For Third Party Standing In America's Prisons, N. Jeremi Duru

Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Has The Supreme Court Created A Constitutional Shield For Private Discrimination Against Homosexuals - A Look At The Future Remifications Of Boy Scouts Of America V. Dale, Erica L. Stringer

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Stare Decisis As A Constitutional Requirement, Thomas Healy

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Applying Mcintyre V. Ohio Elections Commission To Anonymous Speech On The Internet And The Discovery Of John Doe's Identity, Caroline E. Strickland

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Constitutional Law Can Learn From The Ali Principles Of Family Dissolution, David D. Meyer

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Very Faithless Elector, Vasan Kesavan

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Balancing "Parents Are" And "Parents Do" In The Supreme Court's Constitutionalized Family Law: Some Implications For The Ali Proposals On De Facto Parenthood, David M. Wagner

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

How To Apply The Religious Freedom Restoration Act To Federal Law Without Violating The Constitution, Gregory P. Magarian

Michigan Law Review

Learned commentators have called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 ("RFRA" or "the Act") "perhaps the most unconstitutional statute in the history of the nation" and "the most egregious violation of the separation of powers doctrine in American constitutional history." In the 1997 case of City of Boerne v. Flores, the Supreme Court struck down the Act in its applications to state and local governments, declaring that "RFRA contradicts vital principles necessary to maintain separation of powers and the federal balance." The Act's applications to federal law, however, survived Boerne, which means that plaintiffs with religious freedom claims against …

Integration Without Classification: Moving Toward Race-Neutrality In The Pursuit Of Public Elementary And Secondary School Diversity, Paul Diller

Michigan Law Review

Ever since the Supreme Court's invalidation of racially segregated public schools in Brown v. Board of Education, America has wrestled with the challenge of successfully dismantling educational apartheid. In recent years, the federal judiciary has largely retreated from enforcing desegregation in school districts that were once under court supervision for engaging in intentional racial discrimination, finding that the vestiges of past discrimination have been satisfactorily ameliorated. In some such unitary school districts, as well as in districts in which no intentional segregation was ever identified by the courts, boards of education, have voluntarily implemented student assignment plans designed to increase …

The Irs As Super Creditor, Steve R. Johnson

Scholarly Publications

The IRS is a super creditor in the sense that its efforts to collect tax debts are free of restrictions imposed by state law on other creditors. This principle is no novelty. Several recent developments, though, have involved interesting applications of it. Part I of this article explains the principle. Part II examines recent applications of it.

Association For Civil Rights In Israel V. State Of Israel, Itzchak Zamir, Mishael Cheshin, Dorit Beinisch

Translated Opinions

Facts: In this petition, the petitioner, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, asked the Court to direct the Government of Israel, the Minister of National Infrastructures, and the Minister of Finance to nullify the appointment of some of the representatives on behalf of the Government in the Israel Lands Council and to appoint in their stead, Arabs as members of the Council.

Held: The court analyzed the substance and applicability of the principle of equality and decided that given that the Government is to appoint an additional six representatives on its behalf as members of the Council, the order …

Supreme Court Takes A Look At Takings, John R. Nolon

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In the case of Pazzalo v. Rhode Island the United States Supreme Court reversed a determination by the Rhode Island Supreme Court which held that land owners had no right to sue for a regulatory taking if the land owners purchased title to land on which a preexisting restriction existed. Before this case, the rule in New York also precluded landowners from challenging land use regulations that existed at the time they purchased land. After holding that a regulatory takings challenge existed, the Supreme Court remanded the case back to Rhode Island to decide whether the preexisting regulations affected the …

Constitutional Criminal Procedure, James P. Fleissner, Sarah B. Mabery, Jeanne L. Wiggins

Mercer Law Review

This Article surveys noteworthy 2000 decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in the field commonly known as Constitutional Criminal Procedure. As in past years, the survey focuses on significant decisions concerning the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures; the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination, prohibition against double jeopardy, and guarantees of due process and grand jury screening; and the Sixth Amendment's procedural protections, including the right to counsel and the right of confrontation. Of course, most of these rights, with few exceptions, such as the right to have charges approved by a …

Constitutional Civil Rights, John Sanchez

Mercer Law Review

The 2000 survey period was an active year for constitutional civil rights litigation in the Eleventh Circuit. All eighteen cases examine thorny issues arising under the First Amendment. Thirteen cases address free speech issues while five cases touch on religion. Two cases deal with zoning ordinances that regulate adult businesses. Two cases address the constitutionality of zoning ordinances that regulate nude dancing. Two apply the test in Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission ("Central Hudson") for regulating commercial speech. Two cases analyze the law of prior restraints when it comes to licensing access to traditional public …

The Declaration Of Independence: A 225th Anniversary Re-Interpretation, Carlton F.W. Larson

Washington Law Review

The importance of the Declaration of Independence to American law has been obscured by dubious associations with natural rights jurisprudence. Legal scholars have therefore overlooked the numerous ways in which the Declaration is relevant to a host of legal issues. Ample textual and historical evidence demonstrates that the Declaration, not the Articles of Confederation or the Constitution, legally constituted the United States of America as a distinct nation in the world community. The Declaration was not the act of thirteen states declaring their individual independence, but the act of one American people announcing the birth of an American nation. Nor …

You've Taken An Oath To Support The Constitution, Now What? The Constitutional Requirement For A Congressional Oath Of Office, Vic Snyder

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rendering Unto Caesar Or Electioneering For Caesar--Loss Of Church Tax Exemption For Participation In Electoral Politics, Alan L. Feld

Faculty Scholarship

The restriction on church participation in political campaigns contained in the Internal Revenue Code operates uneasily. It appears to serve the useful purpose of separating the spheres of religion and electoral politics. But the separation often is only apparent, as churches in practice signal support for a particular candidate in a variety of rays that historically have not cost them their exemptions. Although the limited enforcement by the Internal Revenue Service has reflected the sensitive nature of the First Amendment values present, the federal government should provide more formal elaboration by statute or regulation. Focus on the use of funds …

Were There Adequate State Grounds In Bush V. Gore?, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Few Supreme Court decisions provoke the immediate and intensely negative verdict that law professors passed on Bush v. Gore. Some of the criticism is deserved. Others have questioned whether the ruling rests on any general principle at all, given the care the Court took to limit its reasoning to the extraordinary circumstances of the Florida presidential election.

It is all too easy to leap from this well-founded critique of the Court's reasoning to the conclusion that the majority – all of whom were appointed by Republican presidents – were bent on installing George W. Bush in the White House by …