Constitutional Law Commons^™

Gonzales, Casey And The Viability Rule, Randy Beck

Scholarly Works

Gonzales v. Carhart upheld a federal ban on intact D&E abortions. The dissenters in Gonzales accused the majority of ignoring the rule that a state may only prohibit abortion of a viable fetus, one capable of life outside the womb. The continuing discord over the viability rule highlights an issue that remains unsettled 34 years after Roe: Why may a state protect the life of a fetus after it reaches viability, but not before? Professor John Hart Ely long ago noted Roe's failure to justify the viability rule, observing that the Court's defense seems to mistake a definition for a …

The Supreme Courts Municipal Bond Decision And The Market-Participant Exception To The Dormant Commerce Clause, Dan T. Coenen

Scholarly Works

Does it violate the dormant Commerce Clause for a state to exempt interest earned on its own bonds, but no others, from income taxation? In a recent decision, the Supreme Court answered this question in the negative. Six members of the Court found the case controlled by the state-self-promotion exception to the dormancy doctrine's antidiscrimination rule. Three of those Justices, however, went further by also invoking the longstanding market-participant exception to sustain the discriminatory state tax break. This Essay challenges that alternative line of analysis. According to the author, the plurality's effort to apply the market-participant principle: (1) invites a …

R. V. Ha: Upholding General Warrants Without Asking The Right Questions, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

To date, in considering general warrants, courts have been failing even to think about a distinction which ought to be seen as essential. The distinction arises in connection with the requirement in section 487.01 (l)(c) of the Criminal Code that a general warrant is only available when no other provision in any statute could authorize the search. In R. v. Ha, reported ante p. 24, the Ontario Court of Appeal notes that: The simple fact is that there is no provision in the Code, the CDSA, or in any other federal statute that would authorize an unlimited number of covert …

Understanding The New Virtualist Paradigm, Jonathon Penney

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

This article discusses the central ideas within an emerging body of cyberlaw scholarship I have elsewhere called the "New Virtualism". We now know that the original "virtualists"- those first generation cyberlaw scholars who believed virtual worlds and spaces were immune to corporate and state control - were wrong; these days, such state and corporate interests are ubiquitous in cyberspace and the Internet. But is this it? Is there not anything else we can learn about cyberlaw from the virtualists and their utopian dreams? I think so. In fact, the New Virtualist paradigm of cyberlaw scholarship draws on the insights of …

Extending Charter Benefits To Canada’S Poor, A. Wayne Mackay

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

While the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has had a major impact on Canada’s political landscape in its first 25 years, its impact on social and economic rights has been minimal. The courts should assume a larger role in advancing the rights of the many Canadians living in poverty and despair.

Judges have traditionally regarded matters of social and economic policy as falling within the expertise of the legislative and executive branches of the state. The Charter has done little to dispel that view. The elected branches of the state must continue to play a major role, but the …

The Political Morality Of Public Sex, Elaine Craig

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

In deciding cases that involve the intersection of criminal law and sexual mores, the courts are faced with the challenge of determining the appropriate moral framework from which to approach simultaneously pri- vate and social concerns. In indecency cases, Canadian courts historically employed a communitarian model of sexual morality based on the community’s standard of tolerance. However, the Supreme Court of Canada’s recent jurisprudence affirms a harm-based test, which relies upon and protects the fundamental values en- shrined in the Canadian constitution. This article ana- lyzes the Court’s decisions in R. v. Labaye and R. v. Kouri and demonstrates that …

From Judging Culture To Taxing 'Indians': Tracing The Legal Discourse Of The 'Indian Mode Of Life', Constance Macintosh

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

In this article I consider how judicial decision making characterizes Indigenous peoples’ culture outside the context of determinations under section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. I am concerned with how contemporary jurisprudence sometimes subjects Indigenous people to stereotyped tests of Aboriginality when they seek to exercise legislated rights. These common law tests of Aboriginality tend to turn on troubling oppositional logics, such as whether or not the Indigenous person engages in waged labour or commercial activities. These tests arose in historic legislation and policy that were premised on social evolutionary theory and were directed at determining whether an Indigenous …

Privacy And The New Virtualism, Jonathon Penney

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

First generation cyberlaw scholars were deeply influenced by the uniqueness of cyberspace, and believed its technology and scope meant it could not be controlled by any government. Few still ascribe to this utopian vision. However, there is now a growing body of second generation cyberlaw scholarship that speaks not only to the differential character of cyberspace, but also analyzes legal norms within virtual spaces while drawing connections to our experience in real space. I call this the New Virtualism. Situated within this emerging scholarship, this article offers a new approach to privacy in virtual spaces by drawing on what Orin …

Understanding The New Virtualist Paradigm, Jonathon Penney

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

This article discusses the central ideas within an emerging body of cyberlaw scholarship I have elsewhere called the "New Virtualism". We now know that the original "virtualists"- those first generation cyberlaw scholars who believed virtual worlds and spaces were immune to corporate and state control - were wrong; these days, such state and corporate interests are ubiquitous in cyberspace and the Internet. But is this it? Is there not anything else we can learn about cyberlaw from the virtualists and their utopian dreams? I think so. In fact, the New Virtualist paradigm of cyberlaw scholarship draws on the insights of …

Reforming The State Secrets Privilege, Amanda Frost

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

The Problem Of Jurisdictional Non-Precedent, Stephen I. Vladeck

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Most critiques of the Supreme Court's June 2008 decision in Boumediene v. Bush (including Justice Scalia's dissent in the same) have at their core the argument that Justice Kennedy's majority opinion is inconsistent with prior precedent, specifically the Supreme Court's 1950 decision in Johnson v. Eisentrager. A closer read of Eisentrager, though, reveals a surprisingly unclear opinion by Justice Jackson, that seems to go out of its way to reach various issues on the merits even after suggesting that the federal courts lacked jurisdiction over habeas petitions filed by 22 Germans convicted of war crimes by a U.S. military tribunal …

Adding Social Condition To The Canadian Human Rights Act, A. Wayne Mackay, Natasha Kim

Reports & Public Policy Documents

Almost a decade ago, in June 2000, the Canadian Human Rights Act Review Panel conducted a comprehensive review of the Canadian Human Rights Act [CHRA] and recommended that “social condition” be added as a prohibited ground of discrimination. Since then, no action has been taken to implement this recommendation, despite calls for action from international bodies, political actors, human rights agencies and organizations, and academic commentators to provide protections from discrimination for those suffering from social and economic disadvantage. The authors analyze the experiences at the provincial level with socio-economic grounds of discrimination, jurisprudential developments under the Canadian Charter of …

Ashcroft V. Iqbal Crashes Rule 8 Pleading Standards On To Unconstitutional Shores, Kenneth S. Klein

Faculty Scholarship

Since the early nineteenth century, the interpretation of the Seventh Amendment preservation of the right to a civil trial by jury has remained static and become increasingly anachronistic. Over the same period of time, the evolution of modern civil procedure pleading standards has been on a collision course with that interpretation. The penultimate 2007 Supreme Court opinion in this field, Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, raised the specter of an impending impasse between pleading standards and the Seventh Amendment. The 2009 opinion in Ashcroft v. Iqbal is the point of impact. While the Iqbal opinion fails to even acknowledge …

Constitutional Borrowing, Robert L. Tsai

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Borrowing from one domain to promote ideas in another domain is a staple of constitutional decisionmaking. Precedents, arguments, concepts, tropes, and heuristics all can be carried across doctrinal boundaries for purposes of persuasion. Yet the practice itself remains underanalyzed. This Article seeks to bring greater theoretical attention to the matter. It defines what constitutional borrowing is and what it is not, presents a typology that describes its common forms, undertakes a principled defense of borrowing, and identifies some of the risks involved. The authors' examples draw particular attention to places where legal mechanisms and ideas migrate between fields of law …

Rights, Remedies And Facial Challenges, Maya Manian

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

In a few short years, the Roberts Court has managed to severely restrict the use of facial challenges across substantive areas of constitutional law. Caitlin Borgmann's article, Holding Legislatures Constitutionally Accountable Through Facial Challenges, provides a compelling analysis of the vexing distinction between as applied and facial challenges in constitutional litigation and the impact that limiting facial challenges has on constitutional rights. Borgmann argues that facial challenges are necessary to keep legislatures in check, particularly when legislatures "deliberately or recklessly infringe individual rights" of those who lack political power. Facial challenges are needed in this context not only to protect …

Avoiding Wrongful Convictions: Re-Examining The "Wrong-Person" Defense, Lissa Griffin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Article reviews the history of the right to present a defense and closely examines the United States Supreme Court's modern analysis of that right. Part III analyzes the emergence of the right to present a defense that a third party committed the crime and concludes with a discussion of the Supreme Court's recent decision in South Carolina v. Holmes. Part IV then describes the current restrictive implementation of the wrong-person defense by the lower courts. Part V argues that the constitutional right to present a wrong-person defense is being insufficiently protected under current, arbitrary standards, and prescribes a constitutional …

Preemption By Stealth, Sandra B. Zellmer

Faculty Law Review Articles

By making federal law supreme to state law, the U.S. Constitution gives Congress "an extraordinary power." Perhaps the extraordinarily powerful nature of the Supremacy Clause is the reason for its checkered treatment by the Supreme Court. Recent preemption decisions give lip service to federalism concerns, but in many cases state statutes, regulations, and remedies have been struck down with little regard for either federal-state comity or institutional competence. If federal regulatory regimes always accomplished optimal regulation perfect equipoise between protecting human health and promoting economic development while fostering innovation by governments and regulated entities-preemption of state law would be far …

Is The Constitution Libertarian?, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Ever since Justice Holmes famously asserted that “the Constitution does not enact Mr. Herbert Spencer’s Social Statics,” academics have denied that the Constitution is libertarian. In this essay, I explain that the Constitution is libertarian to the extent that its original meaning respects and protects the five fundamental rights that are at the core of both classical liberalism and modern libertarianism. These rights can be protected both directly by judicial decisions and indirectly by structural constraints. While the original Constitution and Bill of Rights provided both forms of constraints, primarily on federal power, it left states free to violate the …

Against Textualism, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Modern textualists have assumed that careful attention to constitutional text is the key to the recovery of the Constitution's original public meaning. This article challenges that assumption by showing the importance of nontextual factors in early constitutional interpretation. The Founding generation consistently relied on structural concerns, policy, ratifiers' and drafters' intent, and broad principles of government. To exclude such nontextual factors from constitutional interpretation is to depart from original public meaning because the Founders gave these factors great weight in ascertaining meaning. Moreover, for a modern judge seeking to apply original public meaning, the threshold question is not simply; "How …

Supreme Neglect Of Text And History, William Michael Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article reviews Supreme Neglect: How to Revive Constitutional Protection for Private Property by Richard A. Epstein (2008).

In Supreme Neglect, Professor Richard Epstein has produced a clear and elegant synthesis for the general reader of his lifetime of thinking about the Takings Clause and, more broadly, about the role of property in our constitutional system. Appealing to both history and constitutional text, Epstein argues that the Takings Clause bars government regulations that diminish the value of private property (with the exception of a highly constrained category of police power regulations). This essay shows that neither the text of the …

Postracial Discrimination, Girardeau A. Spann

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Claims of racial injustice can be challenged by arguing that the culture makes it possible for minorities to compete with whites on a level playing field. Under this reasoning, racial disparities that continue to inhere in the allocation of societal benefits and burdens must be caused by the attributes of individual minority group members themselves, rather than by any invidious consideration of their race. The election of President Obama now gives this argument more apparent plausibility than it has had in the past. Indeed, if one were inclined to preserve the nation’s tradition of privileging white interests over the interests …

District Of Columbia V. Heller And Originalism, Lawrence B. Solum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

On June 26, 2008, the United States Supreme Court handed down its 5-4 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, striking a District of Columbia statute that prohibits the possession of useable handguns in the home on the ground that it violated the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. Justice Scalia's majority opinion drew dissents from Justice Stevens and Justice Breyer. Collectively, the opinions in Heller represent the most important and extensive debate on the role of original meaning in constitutional interpretation among the members of the contemporary Supreme Court.

This article investigates the relationship between originalist constitutional …

Less Than Zero?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Medellin v. Texas is the first case in which the Supreme Court has denied a treaty-based claim solely on the ground that the treaty relied upon was non-self-executing. In Foster v. Neilson, the only other case in which the Court had denied relief on this ground, the Court offered its view that the treaty was non-self-executing as an alternative ground for denying relief. The Court soon thereafter disavowed its conclusion that the treaty involved in Foster was non-self-executing, and, in the intervening years, it repeatedly declined invitations to deny relief on this or related grounds. Many observers thought that the …

Is Law? Constitutional Crisis And Existential Anxiety, Alice G. Ristroph

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In the recurring discussions of constitutional crises, one may find three forms of existential anxiety. The first, and most fleeting, is an anxiety about the continued existence of the nation. A second form of anxiety—to my mind, the most interesting form—is an anxiety about the possibility of the rule of law itself. Third, and most solipsistically, references to crisis in constitutional law scholarship could be the product of a kind of professional anxiety in the legal academy. We may be asking ourselves, “Constitutional theory: what is it good for?” and worrying that the answer is, “Absolutely nothing.” And yet, I …

Selling Originalism, Jamal Greene

Faculty Scholarship

Justice Scalia has described an originalist approach to interpretation as a prerequisite to faithful application of a written Constitution. If, says he, constitutional judicial review is implicit in the notion that the Constitution is paramount law, as has been settled in this country at least since Marbury v. Madison, then that review must be guided by the ordinary tools of legislative interpretation. In a democracy, serious legislative interpretation requires that judges keep faith with the meaning of the text as understood at the time of enactment, not as desired by those judges or by anyone else who does not, …

An Originalist Defense Of Substantive Due Process: Magna Carta, Higher-Law Constitutionalism, And The Fifth Amendment, Frederick Mark Gedicks

Faculty Scholarship

A longstanding scholarly consensus holds that the Due Process Clause of the FifthAmendment protects only rights to legal process. Both this consensus and the occasional challenges to it have generally overlooked the interpretive significance of the classical natural law tradition that made substantive due process textually coherent, andthe emergence of public-meaning originalism as the dominant approach to constitutional interpretation. This Article fills those gaps.

One widely shared understanding of the Due Process Clause in the late eighteenth century encompassed judicial recognition of unenumerated substantive rights as a limit on congressional power. This concept of substantive due process originated in Sir …

"We Reserve The Right To Refuse Service To Anyone.", Jennifer S. Hendricks

Publications

This essay is based on remarks at the 2008 teaching conference of the Society of American Law Teachers, on the theme Teaching for Social Change When You're Not Preaching to the Choir. It reflects on my experience as a liberal/progressive teaching constitutional law in a conservative southern state. It also explores the importance of not just training students in the skills of a junior lawyer but also preparing them for their long-term obligations as citizens and members of the bar.

The Courts Under President Obama, Scott A. Moss

Publications

No abstract provided.

Telluride's Tale Of Eminent Domain, Home Rule, And Retroactivity, Richard B. Collins

Publications

Telluride, Colorado, won an eminent domain battle with San Diego billionaire Neal Blue, but only after paying his price and his attorney's fees. The town passed a condemnation ordinance by popular initiative to take 572 acres adjacent to the town. The landowner obtained a state statute intended to forbid the town's action. The trial judge held the statute invalid under Colorado's constitutional home rule amendment. Town officials negotiated a compromise with the landowner, but its voters rejected it. The valuation trial was moved to a neighboring county much more favorable to the landowner, and the jury gave him his full …

Commentary: Was The Bill Of Rights Irrelevant To Nineteenth-Century State Criminal Procedure?, Carolyn B. Ramsey

Publications

No abstract provided.