Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Heroes Of The First Amendment, Frederick Schauer

Michigan Law Review

In 1950, Felix Frankfurter famously observed that "[i)t is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people." The circumstances of Justice Frankfurter's observation were hardly atypical, for his opinion arose in a Fourth Amendment case involving a man plainly guilty of the crime with which he had been charged - fraudulently altering postage stamps in order to make relatively ordinary ones especially valuable for collectors. Indeed, Fourth Amendment cases typically present the phenomenon that Frankfurter pithily identified, for most of the people injured by an …

Formalism, Pragmatism, And The Conservative Critique Of The Eleventh Amendment, Michael E. Solimine

Michigan Law Review

For many years the Second Amendment to the constitution was construed by most authorities to grant a communal right to bear arms, through state militias and the like. Some years ago Sanford Levinson labeled this interpretation "embarrassing" to liberal scholars. That characterization was deserved, Levinson argued, since liberal academics had been eager to defend expansive interpretations of other rights-granting provisions of the Constitution. But they failed to do so when it came to language in the Second Amendment, which could be plausibly construed to grant an individual right to bear arms. The failure might be attributed, in part, to the …

Reconstructing The Public Square, Robert Justin Lipkin

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Narcissism, Generation X, The Corporate Elite, And The Religious Right Within The Modern Republican Party: A Set Of "Friendly" Observations For President Bush, R. Randall Kelso

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Punishing The Faithful: Freud, Religion, And The Law, Davida A. Williams

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Justice Scalia's Tax Jurisprudence, Stephen T. Black, Katherine D. Black

Law Faculty Scholarship

Justice Scalia is an outspoken conservative acclaimed for his remarkable intellect and scholarship, and is noted for his adherence to the principle of judicial restraint. He pursues what he insists is an "originalist" path that relies on the Constitution's actual text in decision-making. He works hard to try to maintain constitutional interpretation that does not change from case to case.

So what happens when an "originalist"--concerned that Congress writes imprecise legislation and then leaves its interpretation and application in the hands of administrative agencies or, worse yet, the courts-is forced to deal with tax issues? This article takes a look …

Director General Of The Prime Minister’S Office V. Hoffman, Mishael Cheshin, Aharon Barak, Theodor Or, Izhak Englard, Jacob Turkel, Shlomo Turkel, Eliahu Mazza, Dorit Beinisch, Tova Strasberg-Cohen

Translated Opinions

[This abstract is not part of the Court's opinion and is provided for the reader's convenience. It has been translated from a Hebrew version prepared by Nevo Press Ltd. and is used with its kind permission.]

A group of Jewish women (hereinafter: the Women of the Wall) sought to pray together in the Western Wall Plaza while wrapped in tallitot [prayer shawls] and reading the Torah. The possibility of praying at the Wall in accordance with their practice was prevented due to the violent objection of other worshippers at the site. The Women of the Wall petitioned the High Court …

Constitutional Purpose And Inter-Clause Conflict: The Constraints Imposed On Congress By The Copyright Clause, Andrew M. Hetherington

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The argument that the preamble of the Copyright Clause provides a strict constraint on congressional intellectual property legislation has met with broad support among legal academics, but it is viewed with some skepticism by the judiciary. The Supreme Court did acknowledge in Eldred that intellectual property legislation must, in at least some sense, promote the progress of science, but stressed that it is for Congress, not the courts, to decide what does and does not promote progress. The Court specifically rejected a "stringent" form of rational basis review for Copyright Clause enactments proposed in Justice Breyer's dissent, noting that the …

The Canon That Tax Penalties Should Be Strictly Construed, Steve R. Johnson

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

A Matter Of Constitutional Luck: The General Applicability Requirement In Free Exercise Jurisprudence, Christopher C. Lund

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

"Don't Bother Knockin' ... Come On In!:" The Constitutionality Of Warrantless Searches As A Condition Of Probation, Matthew S. Roberson

Campbell Law Review

This note will examine the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Knights. Part II presents factual background and the basis for the district court's decision to suppress evidence seized during the search of Knight's home, as well as the Ninth Circuit's affirming opinion. The note then presents the Supreme Court's analysis and reasoning for reversing the lower court. Part III discusses the jurisprudence leading to the Court's decision and part IV addresses the impact of the Court's decision.

The Revival Of "Privileges Or Immunities" And The Controversy Over State Bar Admission Requirements: The Makings Of A Future Constitutional Dilemma?, Wilson Pasley

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Supreme Court's 1999 decision in Saenz v. Roe relied upon the long ignored Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which had laid dormant since the Slaughter-House Cases of more than a century ago. The Saenz decision sparked considerable debate as to the meaning of the Privileges or Immunities Clause and caused speculation as to the statutes vulnerable to a constitutional challenge under the Clause. This Note examines the potential impact of the Privileges or Immunities Clause on state bar admission requirements and other restrictions on the practice of law. It concludes that the Clause does not create …

Mandatory Fingerprinting Of Public School Teachers: Fascilitating Background Checks Or Infringing On Individuals' Constitutional Rights?, Christina Buschmann

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

With the continuing growth of governmental intrusions into the private lives of its citizens, critics increasingly have taken aim at state actions which unnecessarily burden an individual's right to be let alone. One group in particular - public school teachers - often endure tedious examinations of their private affairs as a condition of employment. This Note examines the current state of privacy concerns, specifically in the realm of public school teachers, and argues that a compromise must be struck that better balances the public's need to protect children from dangerous teachers with the individual teacher's right to privacy. The Note …

Federalism And Formalism, Allison H. Eid

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Many commentators have criticized the Supreme Court's New Federalism decisions as "excessively formalistic. " In this Article, Professor Eid argues that this "standard critique" is wrong on both a descriptive and normative level. Descriptively, she argues that the standard critique mistakenly downplays the extent to which the New Federalism decisions consider the values that federalism serves, and contends that they employ the same sort of formalism/functionalism blend that is found in the Court's separation of powers jurisprudence. Professor Eid then contends that the standard critique's normative prescription - a case-by-case balancing test that would weigh the federal interest against the …

The Federalist Papers As Reliable Historical Source Material For Constitutional Interpretation, Seth Barrett Tillman

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rule 9(J) - Is Requiring A Plaintiff In A Medical Malpractice Action To Certify His Or Her Claim Before Filing Unconstitutional? - The Issue In Anderson V. Assimos, Levonda Wood

Campbell Law Review

This note will examine the North Carolina Court of Appeals' decision in Anderson v. Assimos. Part II of the note presents the factual background, the issue raised, and the holding in the Anderson decision. Part III analyzes the decision and discusses why the court's holding is correct. This note concludes that the North Carolina Supreme Court should hold that Rule 9(j) unconstitutionally infringes upon rights guaranteed by both the federal and state constitutions if asked to addresses the issue in the future.

Loose Lips Won't Sink Ships: Federal Education Rights To Privacy Act After Gonzaga V. Doe, D. Martin Warf

Campbell Law Review

No abstract provided.

Establishment And Disestablishment At The Founding, Part I: Establishment Of Religion, Michael W. Mcconnell

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—First Amendment And Freedom Of Speech—"It's Ok—She's A Pixel, Not A Pixie": The First Amendment Protects Virtual Child Pornography. Ashcroft V. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234 (2002)., Gary D. Marts Jr.

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—Privacy And Equal Protection—Arkansas Joins Other States In A Revival Of State Constitutions As Guardians Of Individual Rights, Establishing New Protections For Arkansas Gays And Lesbians. Jegley V. Picado, 349 Ark. 600, 80 S.W.3d 332 (2002)., Bonnie Johnson

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Regulating Political Parties Under A "Public Rights" First Amendment, Gregory P. Magarian

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Treating The Pen And The Sword As Constitutional Equals: How And Why The Supreme Court Should Apply Its First Amendment Expertise To The Great Second Amendment Debate, David G. Browne

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Modest Promise Of Children’S Relationship Rights, David D. Meyer

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Missing Selves In Constitutional Self-Government, James E. Fleming

Faculty Scholarship

Both Christopher Eisgruber and Jed Rubenfeld have written important books developing sophisticated theories of constitutional self-government. Eisgruber's Constitutional Self-Government' and Rubenfeld's Freedom and Time: A Theory of Constitutional SelfGovernment2 join issue in significant ways, and therefore a dialogue concerning them should prove illuminating. Rubenfeld says his book and Eisgruber's book are somewhat similar, but very different.' Eisgruber says his book and Rubenfeld's book are fairly similar, yet also somewhat different-and where they differ, they sometimes complement one another, or perhaps supply the deficiencies in the other.4 I say the books are very similar-more similar than either recognizes or concedes-and that …

The War On Terror: Constitutional Governance In A State Of Permanent Warfare, W. Wesley Pue

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

This article assesses Canada's principal legal responses to the challenge presented by terrorism in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. A review of major federal "anti-terrorism" legislation reveals a legislative response that fundamentally violates core constitutional principles while failing to significantly enhance public safety.

The Federal Court System: A Principal-Agent Perspective, Tracey E. George, Albert H. Yoon

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Professor Merrill ably demonstrates that Supreme Court decisions should be examined as the product of an inherently political institution. Observers who assert that Justices are best understood as prophets of the law are practicing an intellectual sleight of hand that allows them to ignore the non­ doctrinal factors that affect judicial behavior. Such an effort is understandable. The Court is a much more complicated subject if its rulings reflect nonlegal factors as well as legal ones. The desire, however, to ignore the true character of the Court produces accounts of its behavior that are inadequate, incorrect, or wholly without content. …

Congress, Civil Liberties, And The War On Terrorism, Neal Devins

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In exercising his war-making powers, the President has historically pursued war-related initiatives that implicate civil liberties. Meanwhile, the Congress, with little incentive to resist these initiatives, has played a steadily declining role in warmaking. In this Essay, Professor Devins examines this dynamic, and argues that with Congress largely standing on the sidelines as the President leads the nation in war, it is the American public that has become the principal check on the powers of the President in wartime.

Beyond Tolerance, Milner S. Ball

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

One Strike And You're Out? Constitutional Constraints On Zero Tolerance In Public Education, Eric D. Blumenson, Eva Nilsen

Faculty Scholarship

Various studies reported that juvenile crimes of violence fell in the 1990s by as much as 30%. ¹⁰ In high schools specifically, the incidence of threatening behavior in 1996 changed little from two decades earlier, ¹¹ with the chances of being killed in school far less than being struck by lighting. ¹² The "juvenile crime bomb" proved illusory (as Delulio himself eventually acknowledged ¹³), but the severe measures designed to deal with it remain entrenched. Zero tolerance has taken on a life of its own, partly because public misperception remains high, ¹⁴ and partly because in our hardheaded times …

A Six-Three Rule: Reviving Consensus And Deference On The Supreme Court, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past three decades, the Supreme Court has struck down federal statutes by a bare majority with unprecedented frequency. This Article shows that five-four decisions regularly overturning acts of Congress are a relatively recent phenomenon, whereas earlier Courts generally exercised judicial review by supermajority voting.

One option is to establish the following rule: The Supreme Court may not declare an act of Congress unconstitutional without a two-thirds majority. The Supreme Court itself could establish this rule internally, just as it has created its nonmajority rules for granting certiorari and holds, or one Justice who would otherwise be the fifth …