Constitutional Law Commons^™

Symbolic Counter-Speech, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Federalism And The Federal Prosecution Of State And Local Corruption, Peter J. Henning

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Avoidable Due Process Confusion: Special Use Hearings In Illinois After Klaeren, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 609 (2004), James C. Munson, Christi J. Guerrini

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

State V. Colosimo: Minnesota Anglers’ Freedom From Unreasonable Searches And Seizures Becomes “The One That Got Away”, Edwin J. Butterfoss, Joseph L. Daly

William Mitchell Law Review

This article examines the various opinions in the Colosimo case, including the opinion of the Minnesota Court of Appeals (which was reversed by the supreme court), as well as the majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions of the supreme court. The article provides a brief background of how the issue of stops and inspections by conservation officers has been dealt with in other jurisdictions before turning to a critique of the Minnesota Supreme Court's decision in Colosimo, which the authors consider far too expansive. The decision in Colosimo undermines the right of citizens of Minnesota to be free from invasions of …

The Foggy Road For Evaluating Punitive Damages: Lifting The Haze From The Bmw/State Farm Guideposts, Steven L. Chanenson, John Y. Gotanda

Working Paper Series

In light of increasing punitive damages awards, the United States Supreme Court formulated criteria for evaluating whether a punitive damages award is so unreasonably large that it violates substantive due process. Unfortunately, these "guideposts," which were first erected in BMW v. Gore and applied last term in State Farm v. Campbell, are difficult to use and have resulted in inconsistent decisions. Indeed, Justice Scalia stated that they "mark a road to nowhere." The authors argue that the problems with the guideposts can be fixed by refining the third guidepost, which compares the punitive damages award to the criminal (or civil) …

The Pace And Cause Of Change, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 357 (2004), Larry D. Kramer

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

How Much Protection Do Injunctions Against Enforcement Of Allegedly Unconstitutional Statutes Provide?, Vikram David Amar

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This essay addresses the unresolved effects of preliminary injunctions issued by federal district courts in response to legislation that is possibly unconstitutional. More problematically, set against the backdrop of the "Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003," the essay asks whether an individual who violates the contested statute after receiving a preliminary injunction from a federal district court may be prosecuted if the statute is later upheld as constitutional. The essay analyzes competing arguments by Justice Stevens and Justice Marshall in Edgar v. MITE Corp., which involved a federal preliminary injunction against enforcement of a state statute. Siding with Justice …

Lethal Experimentation On Human Beings: Roe's Effect On Bioethics, William L. Saunders, Jr.

Fordham Urban Law Journal

Beginning with the assumption that human life begins at conception, this article explores the problematic terrain accompanying embryonic stem cell research and human cloning. "Lethal Experimentation on Human Beings," as enumerated in the article's title, refers to experimentation on and the removal of stem cells from human embryos, both of which "kill" a human being. The article warns that the holding in Roe v. Wade, which recognizes only a qualified government interest in unborn life, has obscured a pressing need for proponents of embryonic stem cell research to prove why society's interest in this research outweighs the rights of the …

Judicial Abstinence: Ninth Circuit Jurisdictional Celibacy For Claims Brought Under The Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, Steven Plitt, Joshua D. Rogers

Seattle University Law Review

This Article focuses upon abstention in the context of the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act ("FDJA"). Part I will discuss the various forms of abstention and the historical progression and development of the abstention doctrine in federal case law, setting the background for the expansive holding in Huth v. Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest. Part II of the article will discuss the procedural history of Huth and the respective rulings of the district court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as it relates to their application of the abstention doctrine. Part III will then analyze the numerous, and potentially …

Foreword, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 317 (2004), Samuel R. Olken

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Province Of The Judiciary, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 325 (2004), William E. Nelson

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Secret Life Of The Political Question Doctrine, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 441 (2004), Louis Michael Seidman

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Ironies Of Marbury V. Madison And John Marshall's Judicial Statesmanship, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 391 (2004), Samuel R. Olken

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Marbury V. Madison As The First Great Administrative Law Decision, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 481 (2004), Thomas W. Merrill

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Family Leave Policies Trump States Rights: Nevada Department Of Human Resources V. Hibbs And Its Impact Of Sovereign Immunity Jurisprudence, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 599 (2004), Jana L. Tibben

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Domestic Security Enhancement Act Of 2003: A Glimpse Into A Post-Patriot Act Approach To Combating Domestic Terrorism, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 327 (2004), Timothy Scahill

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Boundary Of Personal Jurisdiction: The "Effects Test" And The Protection Of Crazy Horse's Name, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 381 (2004), Scott Fruehwald

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Racial Profiling Of African-American Males: Stopped, Searched, And Stripped Of Constitutional Protection, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 439 (2004), Floyd D. Weatherspoon

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Finding Religion For The First Amendment, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 469 (2004), Troy L. Booher

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Sovereign Immunity And The Plaintiff State: Does The Eleventh Amendment Bar Removal Of Actions Filed In State Court?, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 513 (2004), Virginia F. Milstead

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rethinking Campaign-Finance Reform: The Pressing Need For Deregulation And Disclosure, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 633 (2004), Cecil C. Kuhne Iii

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Remaining Silent: A Right With Consequences, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 649 (2004), Jeffrey D. Waltuck

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Unknown Past Of Lawrence V. Texas, Dale Carpenter

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This Article is an attempt to fill in some of the gaps in the public's knowledge of the case Lawrence v. Texas. Much of the rich post-arrest history of the case has been ignored. But for the courage, insight, and initiative of three men in particular, the arrest might have been another forgotten episode in what the author calls the under history of the Texas sodomy law, the history not told in appellate opinions or in most other accounts.

Section II reviews the "somewhat known" past, tracing the evolution of the Texas sodomy law from a statute so facially …

Cross Burning – Hate Speech As Free Speech: A Comment On Virginia V. Black, Roger C. Hartley

Scholarly Articles

This Article concerns the criminalization of cross burning. This act of symbolic expression sometimes communicates hate, inspires fear of impending bodily harm, expresses an ideology and solidarity with others, or encompasses combinations of these. In 1991, Edward Cleary defended a White juvenile, known in court documents as R.A.V., who had burned a cross on the lawn of a Black family. In that litigation, Cleary began his oral argument to the Supreme Court by posing this question: To what degree does abhorrence of cross burning justify banning it? That question still baffles us. Establishing appropriate boundaries for the protection of speech …

When Yasir Esam Hamdi Meets Zacarias Moussaoui, Frank Durham

Richmond Journal of Global Law & Business

No abstract provided.

The New Post 9/11 America Or The Making Of King George: A Review Of Executive Power In The Effort To Combat Global Terrorism As It Relates To The Power Of The Purse, Woodrow E. Turner

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Lawrence V. Texas Says About The History And Future Of Reproductive Rights, Cynthia Dailard

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This article explores the ways in which the court's recognition of a broad zone of personal liberty in Lawrence v. Texas may serve to strengthen a woman's constitutionally protected reproductive rights in future Supreme Court decisions. Part of the author's analysis focuses on using particular Justices' opinions (and dissents) to predict the direction of future challenges to abortion rights in front of the Supreme Court.

Winter Count: Taking Stock Of Abortion Rights After Casey And Carhart, Caitlin E. Borgmann

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This article outlines the current landscape of the constitutional right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade. Analyzing the court's holdings in Planned Parenthood v. Casey and Stenberg v. Carhart, the author details the ways in which recognition of a government interest in potential life at any stage in a pregnancy, as well as the lofty "undue burden" standard in analyzing policies that hinder access to abortion, have eroded this right. Finally, the author stresses the Supreme Court cases' disparate impact on the abortion rights of low-income and rural dwelling women.

Casey And Its Impact On Abortion Regulation, Michael F. Moses

Fordham Urban Law Journal

Given the Supreme Court's shift from a strict scrutiny standard to an "undue burden" standard in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, this article advocates for application of the standard in a way that is deferential to state legislatures. The author finds a number of problems with the holding in Casey for which it seeks judicial and legislative action: the undue burden standard is vague; it is unclear whether the burden should be upon everyone or "some people"; and the holding allows court to strike laws that have not gone into effect, therefore evidence of their impact is "speculative."

Writing On The Wall Of Separation: Understanding The Public Posting Of Religious Duties And Sectarian Versions Of Sacred Texts As An Establishment Clause Violation In Ten Commandment Cases, David C. Pollack

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Note seeks an answer to the question of whether public displays of the Ten Commandments violate the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. In analyzing this question the author first explains the language of the traditional and American hybrid form of the Decalogue. From there, the author describes the three part standard the Supreme Court adopted in Lemon v. Kurtzman to analyze possible violations of the Establishment Clause. Once this framework is in place, the Note lays out how courts have split in their determinations of whether public displays of the Ten Commandments, both the traditional and hybrid models, is …