Constitutional Law Commons^™

Shooting Down Hijacked Airplanes? Sorry, We’Re Humanists. A Comment On The German Constitutional Court Decision Of 2.15.2006, Regarding The Luftsicherheitsgesetz (2005 Air Security Act), Miguel Beltran De Felipe, Jose Maria Rodriguez De Santiago

ExpressO

The article analyzes a very remarkable decision of the Constitutional Court of Germany that struck down a law (2005 Air Security Law) that expressly authorized the federal government to shoot down hijacked airplanes, in case they were likely to be crashed against a target on the ground. The Court ruled that deliberately killing innocent people on board is incompatible with the right to human dignity, as established in the Basic Law. The article focuses on some of the main issues addressed by the Court (among others, the absolutization of human dignity, which makes unconstitutional for the legislature and for the …

Hudson And Samson: The Roberts Court Confronts Privacy, Dignity, And The Fourth Amendment, John D. Castiglione

ExpressO

This article critically analyzes Samson v. California and Hudson v. Michigan, which were the Roberts Court's first major Fourth Amendment decisions. In Samson, the Court upheld a California law allowing government officials to search parolees without any suspicion of wrongdoing. In Hudson, to the surprise of almost every observer, the Court held that knock-and-announce violations do not carry with them a remedy of exclusion. What was most notable about Hudson was not only that it rejected what every state and every federal court, save one, believed to be the proper remedy for knock-and-announce violations, but that it called into question …

Petitioner's Observations (February 2007) For The Redress Of Violations Of Human Rights Guaranteed By The American Declaration Of The Rights And Duties Of Man, Inter-American Commission On Human Rights, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

Recognizing The Grey: Toward A New View Of The Law Governing Digital Music Sampling Informed By The First Amendment, William Y. Durbin

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Stop Restricting Speech And Educate The Public: A Review Of The Aba's Proposed Campaign Activity Canon Of The Model Code Of Judicial Conduct, Tiffany L. Carwile

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Twins Or Triplets?: Protecting The Eleventh Amendment Through A Three-Prong Arm-Of-The-State Test, Héctor G. Bladuell

Michigan Law Review

In 1999, the Supreme Court held that the common law principle that the sovereign cannot be sued in its own courts without its consent was embedded in the Constitution's structure when it was ratified. The Court, however, has not always adhered to this view. In 1793, when a citizen of South Carolina sued the State of Georgia to enforce a debt arising from the sale of Revolutionary War supplies, the Court ordered the State to fulfill its obligation even though the State had not consented to the suit. Alarmed by the sudden opening of their treasuries to federal courts over …

A Vote For Clarity: Updating The Supreme Court's Severe Burden Test For State Election Regulations That Adversely Impact An Individual's Right To Vote, Joshua A. Douglas

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The presidential election on November 2, 2004, was perhaps one of the most watched and contentious elections in recent memory. Both major parties knew that the race would come down to several battleground states, including Ohio. The real battle in Ohio, however, began a day or two before Election Day, when several federal judges clashed over whether to allow partisan challengers at the polls.

On October 31, 2004 and November 1, 2004, two separate district court judges ruled that an Ohio election statute allowing political parties and groups of five or more candidates to place challengers at election precincts to …

Saving Massiah From Elstad: The Admissibility Of Successive Confessions Following A Deprivation Of Counsel, James K. Tomkovicz

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

An International Human Right To Keep And Bear Arms, Christopher J. Schmidt

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Standing Room Only: Why Fourth Amendment Exclusion And Standing Can No Longer Logically Coexist, Sherry F. Colb

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Mostly Harmless: An Analysis Of Post-Aedpa Federal Habeas Corpus Review Of State Harmless Error Determinations, Jeffrey S. Jacobi

Michigan Law Review

Sixty years ago, in Kotteakos v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that a small class of so-called harmless errors committed by courts did not require correction. The Court acknowledged that some judicial errors, though recognizable as errors, did not threaten the validity of criminal convictions and therefore did not quite require reversal. Specifically, the Court held that errors that violated federal statutes should be deemed harmless unless they had a "substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict." While Kotteakos represented the Supreme Court's first treatment of the concept of harmlessness, other courts had a …

Standing Room Only: Why Fourth Amendment Exclusion And Standing Can No Longer Logically Coexist, Sherry F. Colb

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Tool Of The Trademark: Brand Criticism And Free Speech Problems With The Trademark Dilution Revision Act Of 2006, Jesse A. Hofrichter

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Son Of Sam Resurrected: Did Greedy Criminals Unwittingly Give New Life To The “Son Of Sam” Laws?, Arthur M. Ortegon

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Presidential Signing Statements Under The Bush Administration: A Threat To Checks And Balances And The Rule Of Law?: Hearing Before The H. Comm. On The Judiciary, 110th Cong., Jan. 31, 2007 (Statement Of Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Prof. Of Law, Geo. U. L. Center), Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Jutstice Kennedy And The Environment: Property, States' Rights, And The Search For Nexus, Michael Blumm

ExpressO

Justice Anthony Kennedy, now clearly the pivot of the Roberts Court, is the Court’s crucial voice in environmental and natural resources law cases. Kennedy’s central role was never more evident than in the two most celebrated environmental and natural resources law cases of 2006: Kelo v. New London and Rapanos v. U.S., since he supplied the critical vote in both: upholding local use of the condemnation power for economic development under certain circumstances, and affirming federal regulatory authority over wetlands which have a significant nexus to navigable waters. In each case Kennedy’s sole concurrence was outcome determinative.

Justice Kennedy has …

The Solomon Amendment, Expressive Associations, And Public Employment, Paul Secunda

ExpressO

Rumsfeld v. FAIR apparently concedes that public employers, in the guise of public law school members of the FAIR association, have expressive association rights. This state of affairs could now mean that public employers could gain constitutional rights at the expense of pubic employees. Thus, to the extent that public employers are considered expressive associations, public employees may see their free speech and other constitutional rights diminished (even more so than they recently have been by the Garcetti v. Ceballos decision).

Thankfully, I cannot imagine that the Court, if faced with the question directly, would find that public employers have …

Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. V. White, Christian J. Brann

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

On June 22, 2006, the United States Supreme Court broadened the purview of the anti-retaliation provision of Title VII in all circuits but one when it held that the provision prohibits those employer actions that would be considered materially adverse by a reasonable employee, regardless of whether such actions occurred at the workplace or were related to employment. In so holding, the Supreme Court did three things worthy of comment. First, the Court expunged the confusion caused by disparate and incompatible treatments of the anti-retaliation provision by the circuit courts. Second, by subjecting all employer action to review, the Court …

Eminent Domain After Kelo V. City Of New London: Compensating For The Supreme Court’S Refusal To Enforce The Fifth Amendment, Scott D. Mikkelsen

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Governments, both state and federal, have the right to take private property for public use, provided that just compensation is paid. The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution sets the legal standard for these propositions; this power is known as the right of eminent domain. In the landmark decision, Kelo v. City of New London, the Supreme Court held that the taking of a citizen’s private property for economic development qualified as a public use within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment. Several scholars, legislatures, and individuals, have objected to Kelo’s extension of the power of eminent …

Lopez V. Gonzales & Toledo-Flores V. United States: State Felony Drug Convictions Not Necessarily Aggravated Felonies Requiring Deportation, Ryan Wagner

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The United States Courts of Appeals split over whether state felony drug convictions, which were punishable only as misdemeanors under federal law, constituted aggravated felonies under immigration law. The controversy was based upon the interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”). Under the Act, an alien who is convicted of an “aggravated felony” is automatically deported from the United States. According to the INA, an aggravated felony includes “illicit trafficking in a controlled substance . . . including a drug trafficking crime (as defined in section 924(c) of Title 18).” Although the INA does not define “illicit trafficking,” Title …

The Legality Of The Use Of White Phosphorus By The United States Military During The 2004 Fallujah Assaults, Roman O. Reyhani

ExpressO

The assaults on Fallujah by the United States military in April and November 2004 involved the use of white phosphorus. White phosphorus has extremely damaging effects on the health of victims, including severe burns and irritation of the respiratory system. This article examines whether the use of white phosphorus was a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention, Protocol III to the Convention on Conventional Weapons and international humanitarian law. It concludes that the use of white phosphorus was illegal as it could be argued to be a chemical weapon, a riot control agent, or incendiary weapon. Furthermore, the methods and …

Surfing Past The Pall Of Orthodoxy: Why The First Amendment Virtually Guarantees Online Law School Graduates Will Breach The Aba Accreditation Barrier, Nicholas C. Dranias

ExpressO

The impact of the constitutional dilemma created by the ABA’s aversion to Internet schooling is widespread. Currently, 18 states and 2 U.S. territories restrict bar exam eligibility to graduates of ABA-accredited law schools. Additionally, 29 states and 1 U.S. territory restrict admission to practice on motion to graduates of ABA-accredited law schools.

Although numerous lawsuits have been filed in ultimately failed efforts to strike down bar admission rules that restrict eligibility to graduates of ABA-accredited law schools, none has challenged the ABA-accreditation requirement based on the First Amendment’s prohibition on media discrimination. This Article makes that case.

Despite accelerating technological …

Dialogic Allocution, Felix Valenzuela

ExpressO

This Article argues in favor of increasing the scope of the national sentencing dialogue in order to remedy the current sentencing defects. The increase in scope hinges on expanding the role of allocution within criminal sentencing. By treating allocution as seriously as the Federal Rules do, new discussants will contribute creative solutions for the defects, while at the same time enhancing institutional and ontological legitimacy. To achieve that end, the Article proposes a modified view of allocution. This dialogic allocution unifies the judge and defendant as co-discussants in the national debate, rather than pitting them against each other. The Article …

Put That In Your Thurible And Smoke It: Religious Gerrymandering Of Sacramental Intoxication, Mark A. Levine

ExpressO

In February 2006, the Supreme Court ruled on the case Gonzales v. O Centro Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, granting an injunction permitting the use of ayahuasca, a plant containing the Schedule I substance Dimethyltryptamine, for sacramental intoxication purposes. The unanimous Court justified this injunction by comparing the Uniao do Vegetal's use of the illegal substance with the Native American Church's use of peyote, which contains another Schedule I substance, mescaline. This ruling is incomptabile with lower court rulings rejecting the Ethiopian Zion Coptic Church use of marijuana, consistently stating that the Native American Church has rights beyond those of other …

Bridging The Divide Between Justice Breyer’S Progressivism And Justice Scalia’S Textualism: Introducing The Concept Of “Negative Originalism” To Guide Constitutional Interpretation In “Values Based” Adjudication, Adam Lamparello

ExpressO

This Article examines the United States's Supreme Court's reliance upon foreign sources of law when adjudicating "values based" cases. In particular, the Article analyzes the Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas, with particular emphasis upon the interpretive approaches utilized by Justices Breyer ("progressivism") and Scalia ("originalism") in arriving at their respective decisions. Based upon such examination, including the efficacy of relying upon foreign sources of law to support domestic constitutional decisions, this Article proposes a new interpretive paradigm, entitled "negative originalism", which strives to ensure fidelity to the Constitution's original purposes and objectives, while allowing courts sufficient flexibility to fashion …

Of Elephants And Embryos: A Proposed Framework For Legal Personhood, Jessica Berg

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

The Constitutionality Of The President To Hold Another Office Act, 2004: A View From India, Shubhankar Dam

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

No abstract provided.

How Do We Deal With This Mess? A Primer For State And Local Governments On Navigating The Legal Complexities Of Debris Issues Following Mass Disasters, Ryan M. Seidemann, Megan K. Terrell, Christopher D. Matchett

ExpressO

The devastation wrought by the 2005 hurricane season brought into bold relief the need for comprehensive debris management plans in the United States. As cleanup efforts commenced following Hurricane Katrina, it became abundantly apparent that the local governments were not prepared to deal with the massive scope of the debris problem.

Disasters will occur. It is not a matter of if, but a matter of when. The entire nation is at risk of being struck by some type of disaster at some time. The best way to deal with the outfall from these disasters is to be prepared for them …

Combating The Ramifications Of The Usa Patriot Act: The Standing Doctrine And The Judiciary’S True Role In The Separation Of Powers Scheme , Anthony Michael Stella

ExpressO

History has told that when the United States is in a state of war, laws—especially laws pertaining to individual liberty interests—will bend. During the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln ordered a blockade of the southern ports and suspended the right of habeus corpus. Then again, during World War II, the United States Government sacrificed the freedom of many American citizens by ordering the internment of Japanese Americans on the West Coast. And most recently, during the war on terrorism, several American citizens were indefinitely detained by the military as “enemy combatants” without due process of the law. However, national security …

Doomsday: A Look At The Ethical Issues Behind The Government's Coercive Powers In Response To A Public Health Nightmare., Jacob M. Chapman

ExpressO

This article posits a hypothetical scenario in which a deadly pandemic is unleashed upon the United States and the several individuals whom appear to have a natural immunity refuse to participate in necessary research. The article then examines the possible legal and ethical approaches available for reacting to the pandemic.

The hypothetical scenario addressed in this article highlights a gap in current public health law. While various states have laws and procedures relating to quarantine and forced inoculation, these laws and procedures do not suggest whether the state may or may not coerce non-threatening individuals into participating in potentially dangerous …