Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Assumptions Of Federalism, Erwin Chemerinsky

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Loaded Dice And Other Problems: A Further Reflection On The Statutory Commander In Chief, Christopher H. Schroeder

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Kelo’S Moral Failure, Laura S. Underkuffler

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Grand Visions In An Age Of Conflict, H. Jefferson Powell

Faculty Scholarship

Last spring Professor Laurence H. Tribe commented that federal constitutional law is in a state of intellectual disarray: "[I]n area after area, we find ourselves at a fork in the road--a point at which it's fair to say things could go in any. of several directions" and we have "little common ground from which to build agreement." No doubt fortuitously, two of our most formidable constitutional scholars, Akhil R. Amar and Jed Rubenfeld, have recently published systematic studies that implicitly challenge Tribe's conclusion that "ours [is] a peculiarly bad time to be going out on a limb to propound a …

Selling The Name On The Schoolhouse Gate : The First Amendment And The Sale Of Public School Naming Rights, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Context Is King: A Perception-Based Test For Evaluating Government Displays Of The Ten Commandments, Nathan P. Heller

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Jurisdiction Stripping In Three Acts: A Three String Serenade, Caprice L. Roberts

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Uniform Laws Or State Immunity? The Constitutionality Of Section 106(A) After Seminole, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 969 (2006), John F. Hiltz

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Limiting The Presidency To Natural Born Citizens Violates Due Process, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1343 (2006), Paul A. Clark

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Disparate Impact And The Adea: So, Who Is Going To Be In The Comparison Group?, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1475 (2006), Timothy Tommaso

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Maryland/Georgetown Constitutional Law Schmooze - Foreword: From The Countermajoritarian Difficulty To Juristocracy And The Political Construction Of Judicial Power, Mark A. Graber

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Beyond Manicheanism: Assessing The New Constitutionalism, Lisa Hilbink

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judges, Legislators, And Europe's Law: Common-Law Constitutionalism And Foreign Precedents, Noga Morag-Levine

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Sequencing The Dna Of Comparative Constitutionalism: A Thought Experiment, Gordon Silverstein

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Juristocracy In The American States?, Robert F. Williams

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Smoke, Not Fire, Neal Devins

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Freedom Of Dress: State And Private Regulation Of Clothing, Hairstyle, Jewelry, Makeup, Tattoos, And Piercing, Gowri Ramachandran

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dickerson V. United States: The Case That Disappointed Miranda's Critics - And Then Its Supporters, Yale Kamisar

Book Chapters

It is difficult, if not impossible, to discuss Dickerson1 intelligently without discussing Miranda whose constitutional status Dickerson reaffirmed (or, one might say, resuscitated). It is also difficult, if not impossible, to discuss the Dickerson case intelligently without discussing cases the Court has handed down in the five years since Dickerson was decided. The hard truth is that in those five years the reaffirmation of Miranda's constitutional status has become less and less meaningful. In this chapter I focus on the Court's characterization of statements elicited in violation of the Miranda warnings as not actually "coerced" or "compelled" but obtained merely …

Evolving Objective Standards: A Developmental Approach To Constitutional Review Of Morals Legislation, Christian J. Grostic

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues that the Supreme Court's recent jurisprudence regarding morals legislation mirrors the findings of empirical research on moral and psychological development. Specifically, the Supreme Court upholds morals legislation only if it is justified by stage five reasoning. Part I examines significant Supreme Court cases related to morals legislation over the last 50 years and argues that the Supreme Court has consistently upheld morals legislation that is justified by stage five reasoning, while consistently striking down as unconstitutional morals legislation that is not. Part II argues that a developmental approach to constitutional review of morals legislation, while consistent with …

When Is Two A Crowd: The Impact Of Federal Action On State Environmental Regulation, Jonathan H. Adler

Faculty Publications

This article seeks to identify the ways in which federal actions can influence state regulatory choices in the context of environmental policy. The federal government may directly influence state policy choices by preempting state policies or by inducing state cooperation through the use of various incentives and penalties for state action. The federal government may indirectly, and perhaps unintentionally, influence state policy choices as well. Federal policies may encourage greater state regulation by reducing the costs of initiating regulatory action or by placing issues on state policy agendas. Federal regulation may also discourage or even "crowd-out" state-level regulatory action by …

A Right To No Meaningful Review Under The Due Process Clause: The Aftermath Of Judicial Deference To The Federal Administrative Agencies, Ruqaiijah Yearby

Faculty Publications

The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment has been perverted in the federal administrative system. For example, federal agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), regularly deprive individuals of liberty and property with little to no review. In its regulation of the health care industry through the Medicare program, HHS often turns a blind eye to procedural Due Process protections, such as providing individuals an opportunity to challenge the deprivation of property at a hearing, even though the Constitution, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Medicare Act grant these protections. The Medicare compliance hearing …

Science, Politics, And Reproductive Rights Introduction, Health Matrix: Journal Of Law-Medicine - Introduction, B. Jessie Hill

Faculty Publications

Introduction to the Symposium: Science, Politics, and Reproductive Rights, Cleveland, Ohio.

Supermajoritarianism And The American Criminal Jury, Ethan J. Leib

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

In Apodaca v. Oregon and Johnson v. Louisiana, the Supreme Court allowed the relaxation of the decision rule most commonly associated with criminal jury felony verdicts and held that unanimity in state criminal cases is not constitutionally required. The Court announced that states were allowed to use 10-2 and 9-3 verdicts in non-capital state cases in contravention of the traditional rule requiring unanimity. The Court argued that the essential function of the jury is to place between the accused and the state a commonsense group of laymen representing a cross-section of the community-and that relaxation of the unanimity requirement would …

A No Moderator Needed: A Liberty Tradition Right To Broadcast Advertorials, Daniel Matheson

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

Civic republicans have famously noted that the exclusion of relevant viewpoints from public debate undermines the process of democratic deliberation, a concern directly implicated by commercial broadcasters' well-publicized refusals to transmit controversial issue advertisements. Unfortunately, simply noting the failure of our current broadcasting regime to appropriately inform the public does not provide an actionable First Amendment objection. Current doctrine focuses primarily on preserving individual liberty, presupposing that protection of individuals' rights will prove sufficient to safeguard the speech necessary for participatory democracy and leaving little room for active state direction of the proverbial town meeting. If the liberty tradition is …

The Court Of Disbelief: The Constitution's Article Vi Religious Test Prohibition And The Judiciary's Religious Motive Analysis, Francis J. Beckwith

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

In several federal cases concerning whether particular statutes or policies violate the First Amendment's prohibition of religious establishment, both the United States Supreme Court and other federal courts have rejected the constitutionality of these laws and policies on the grounds that they have an exclusively religious purpose. Part of the courts' analyses in some of these cases rely on the apparent religious motives of the statute's or policy's sponsors and/or citizen-supporters as the basis by which the courts infer that the law or policy in question has a religious purpose.

I argue in this paper that this sort of analysis …

When The Meaning Of Plain Error Isn't So Plain: Deciphering Plain Error In The Context Of Booker, John Jay Stein

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

In United States v. Booker, the Court declared that the sentencing judge's ability under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines to enhance a sentence based on facts found by the bench, and not the jury, ran afoul of the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial. With this dramatic shift in the sentencing sphere, courts are being forced to deal with the question of what is to be done with the criminal defendants who were subject to unconstitutional judicial fact-finding prior to Booker. Courts have particularly struggled when face with defendants convicted prior to, but appealing after Booker. The Supreme Court has …

Deliberate Indifference Or Not: That Is The Question In The Third Circuit Jail Suicide Case Of Woloszyn V. Lawrence County, Shevon I. Scarafile

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Conference Report: The New York City Housing Court In The 21st Century: Can It Better Address The Problems Before It?

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

On October 28-29, 2004, the Justice Center of the New York County Lawyers' Association (NYCLA), chaired by former Dean of Fordham University School of Law, John Feerick, hosted a conference on the New York City Housing Court, "The New York City Housing Court in the Twenty-First Century: Can It Better Address the Problems Before It?" (the "Conference"). The Conference, occasioned by the court's 30th anniversary, considered how the Housing Court is facing the challenges of the new century, in light of ever-changing social and economic conditions, and whether it is well prepared to meet these challenges in the coming decades. …

Leave Those Kids Alone: Why The First Amendment Does Not Protect The Boy Scouts Of America In Its Discrimination Against Gay Youth Members, Sean Griffith

The Modern American

No abstract provided.

The Intergration Myth: America's Failure To Produce Equal Education Outcomes, Samuel E. Brown

The Modern American

No abstract provided.