Constitutional Law Commons^™

December 31, 2009: Predictions For The Next Decade, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Predictions for the Next Decade“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Padilla V. Kentucky: Immigration Consequences Due To The Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel, Evangeline Pittman

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

A.I.M.D. Ltd. V. Mordechai, Edna Arbel, Edmond E. Levy, Hanan Melcer

Translated Opinions

Facts: This is a petition to quash the decision of the Diamonds Supervisor to seize and confiscate goods imported by the petitioner. In February 2007, the petitioner – a company that imports and exports diamonds – imported into Israel a diamond weighing 14.32 carats from the African state of Mali. Mali is not a member of the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme, in which Israel is a participant. The imported diamond was not accompanied by a “Kimberley Process Certificate,” as required under the Israeli legislation implementing the Kimberley Process. Therefore, the Supervisor did not issue an import license for the diamond, …

Abu Safiyeh V. Minister Of Defense, Uzi Vogelman, Dorit Beinisch, Edmond E. Levy

Translated Opinions

Facts: This is a petition to allow free movement of Palestinian vehicles and pedestrians along Road 443 and on the Beituniya Road. In 2002, Road 443, which served as the main traffic artery for the Palestinian residents of the area between the villages in the area and Ramallah, was closed to all Palestinian traffic. This closure was ordered following the numerous terrorist attacks that were perpetrated along the Road. The arguments related to the question of the authority of the military commander to order the restriction of traffic on the Road in general, and closure of the Road to Palestinians …

December 27, 2009: As Christmas Goes, So Goes The Nation, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “As Christmas Goes, So Goes the Nation“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Summary Of Stephens Media V. Dist. Court, 125 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 63, John L. Ward

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Review of a motion regarding two issues of first impression: (1) determining whether petitioners met the proper procedure whereby the press may file a motion to intervene in a criminal case when seeking access to juror questionnaires, and (2) whether district courts must publicly disclose juror questionnaires.

Brief For The Respondants, Holder V. Humanitarian Law Project, Nos. 08-1498, 09-89 (U.S. Dec. 22, 2009), Neal K. Katyal

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

December 20, 2009: Does A Hallowed Secularist Send Chanukah Gifts?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Does a Hallowed Secularist Send Chanukah Gifts?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

December 18, 2009: Outrageous Breach Of Wall Of Separation As Rabbis Urge Lieberman To Support Health Care Reform, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Outrageous Breach of Wall of Separation as Rabbis Urge Lieberman to Support Health Care Reform“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

December 16, 2009: The Fight For Chanukah, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The Fight for Chanukah“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Unto This Very Purpose, Neal A. Maxwell

Vol. 2: Service & Integrity

This Founders Day address was given to the J. Reuben Clark Law Society at Little America Hotel in Salt Lake City on September 4, 2003.

December 13, 2009: Time To Buy An American Car, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Time to Buy an American Car“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

December 10. 2009: The New Weirdness, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The New Weirdness“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Kiyemba V. Obama: Brief Of Amici Curiae Law Professors In Support Of Petitioners, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah

Appellate Briefs

Amici curiae are the immigration and constitutional law professors whose individual names appear in the Appendix to this Brief. Amici have expertise in the constitutional law of the United States relating to immigration and due process, as well as the statutes and rules governing entry, admission, detention and parole of non-citizens in the United States. With the consent of the parties, we offer our views on the historical and contemporary meaning of several major decisions of this Court, including Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel. Mezei ("Mezei"), 345 U.S. 206 (1953), Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 …

Carr V. United States: Brief Of Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, J. J. Prescott

Appellate Briefs

Amici curiae are law professors who specialize in constitutional law, substantive criminal law, and criminal procedure. As law professors, amici have a particular interest in ensuring that the Ex Post Facto Clause of Article I of the United States Constitution is enforced in a manner consistent with its core historic goals and principles. The judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit violated these goals and principles, and it prescribed a peculiar new test for application of the Clause that significantly deviates from this Court's settled jurisprudence.

In this brief, amici explore the critical structural role of …

December 8, 2009: Are Religious Politics “Undemocratic”?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Are Religious Politics “Undemocratic”?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

A Potent Federal Prosecutorial Tool: Weyhrauch V. United States, James T. Van Strander

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

The Lodestar Ranger: Calculating Attorneys’ Fee Awards In Perdue V. Kenny A., Rebecca Friedman

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

December 5, 2009: Charles Taylor And The Future Of Secularism, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Charles Taylor and the Future of Secularism“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

December 2, 2009: Is Islam Different?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Is Islam Different?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Mapp V. Ohio'S Unsung Hero: The Suppression Hearing As Morality Play, Scott E. Sundby

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The exclusionary rule is back under the judicial magnifying glass. Recent opinions, most notably by Justice Scalia, have sparked speculation that the Roberts Court is inclined to overrule Mapp v. Ohio and send Fourth Amendment disputes back to the realm of civil suits and police disciplinary actions. As the Court's rulings have made clear, any reevaluation of the exclusionary rule's future will be conducted under the now familiar rubric of whether the rule's "benefit" of deterring police misbehavior outweighs the "cost" of lost evidence and convictions.

This essay argues that if any such reevaluation does occur, the Court must take …

The Irrelevancy Of The Fourth Amendment In The Roberts Court, Thomas K. Clancy

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Since John Roberts Jr. became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, there has been a measurable decline in the number of cases addressing Fourth Amendment questions. This article examines the reasons for that decline and predicts the substantial elimination of Fourth Amendment litigation in the Roberts Court. The prediction is based on several premises, including the lack of interest of the Justices on the Court concerning search and seizures principles and two significant recent cases, Pearson v. Callahan and United States v. Herring, which presage a significant decline in the number of lower court cases addressing the merits of …

Fourth Amendment Federalism And The Silencing Of The American Poor, Andrew E. Taslitz

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In Virginia v. Moore, police officers searched Moore incident to an arrest for a minor traffic infraction for which Virginia statutory law in fact prohibited arrest. The officers found cocaine on Moore's person, arresting him for that crime too. The United States Supreme Court ultimately found that the arrest for the traffic infraction and the subsequent search were valid under the federal Constitution's Fourth Amendment. Central to the Court's reasoning was its insistence that the state statute was irrelevant. Any contrary conclusion, explained the Court, would wrongly make the Fourth Amendment's meaning vary from place to place. Professor Taslitz …

Replacing The Exclusionary Rule: Fourth Amendment Violations As Direct Criminal Contempt, Ronald J. Rychlak

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The exclusionary rule, which bars from admission evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures, is a bedrock of American law. It is highly controversial, but there seems to be no equally effective way to protect citizens' rights. This paper proposes that an admissibility standard be adopted that is in keeping with virtually every jurisdiction around the world other than the United States. Thus, before ruling evidence inadmissible, the court would consider the level of the constitutional violation, the seriousness of the crime, whether the violation casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the …

Melendez-Diaz And The Right To Confrontation, Craig M. Bradley

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court overruled Ohio v. Roberts and adopted new law concerning the use of hearsay testimony at criminal trials. This was based on the Sixth Amendment's command that "In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him .. " On its face this provision seems to say that the accused has the right to cross-examine anybody who testifies for the prosecution at trial, whether as a live witness or through hearsay. The Supreme Court acknowledged much of this in Crawford, but …

The Fourth Amendment, The Exclusionary Rule, And The Roberts Court: Normative And Empirical Dimensions Of The Over-Deterrence Hypothesis, Donald Dripps

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This essay engages in the risky business of predicting future Supreme Court developments. In the first part, I analyze the evidence suggesting that the Roberts Court might abolish the exclusionary rule. The critique of exclusion in Hudson v. Michigan is both less and more probative than appears at first blush. Part II turns to some less obvious evidence pointing in the direction of retaining the exclusionary rule. First, abolition of the exclusionary rule is inconsistent with the Hudson majority's apparent content with prevailing police behavior. Second, abolition of the exclusionary rule would curtail the power of the Supreme Court. Part …

Separating Church And State: Transfers Of Government Land As Cures For Establishment Clause Violations, Paul Forster

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The note examines one of the issues currently before the Supreme Court in Salazar v. Buono, the case concerning a Latin cross war memorial in the Mojave desert. The issue is whether the government may, by transferring land to private parties, cure Establishment Clause violations caused by permanent displays that contain religious imagery. The article surveys the Court's Establishment Clause jurisprudence as it applies to permanent displays, discussing the sometimes-used and sometimes-ignored Lemon-endorsement standard and the potential shift to a coercion standard. It concludes by arguing that even under the Lemon-endorsement standard, courts should often allow the …

The Constitutional Canon As Argumentative Metonymy, Ian Bartrum

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

A Promise The Nation Cannot Keep: What Prevents The Application Of The Thirteenth Amendment In Prison?, Raja Raghunath

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The walls of the prison are not solely physical. The doctrine of judicial deference to prison officials, which compels courts to defer to the discretion of those officials in almost all instances, obstructs the effective scrutiny of modern practices of punishment. Since its ratification, the Thirteenth Amendment—which prohibits slavery or involuntary servitude anywhere within the United States or its jurisdiction, except where imposed “as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted”1—has been seen by courts as one brick in this wall. This Article makes the novel argument that, properly read, the amendment should function instead …

Turning The Faucet Back On: The Future Of Mccain-Feingold's Soft-Money Ban After Davis V. Federal Election Commission, Kevin J. Madden

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.