Constitutional Law Commons^™

Legalism And Decisionism In Crisis, Noa Ben-Asher

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In the years since September 11, 2001, scholars have advocated two main positions on the role of law and the proper balance of powers among the branches of government in emergencies. This Article critiques these two approaches-which could be called Legalism and Decisionism-and offers a third way. Debates between Legalism and Decisionism turn on (1) whether emergencies can be governed by prescribed legal norms; and (2) what the balance of powers among the three branches of government should be in emergencies. Under the Legalist approach, legal norms can and should guide governmental response to emergencies, and the executive branch is …

“Hard Strikes And Foul Blows”: Berger V. United States 75 Years After, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

My essay examines one of the most iconic decision of the Supreme Court seventy five years later. Berger v. United States is the most eloquent and authoritative description of the prosecutor's duty "not that it shall win a case but that justice shall be done." My essay looks at why the Court decided to take up the case then, and why it has become so prominent in criminal law and ethics.

Untangling Double Jeopardy In Mixed-Verdict Cases, Lissa Griffin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Article attempts to describe and untangle the confusion leading up to and resulting from the Yeager decision. Part II examines the four distinct double jeopardy areas presented in Yeager, with particular emphasis on the two conflicting precedents of collateral estoppel and the non-finality of a hung jury. Part III closely examines the Yeager decision itself. Part IV analyzes Yeager in light of its tangled doctrinal history and places it in the context of the Court's several other short-lived and rapidly reversed precedents. The Article concludes that the Court's holding in Yeager is neither justified by its precedent nor adequately …

What Would The Delegates Talk About - A Rough Agenda For A Constitutional Convention, Darien Shanske

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

This short Article outlines a possible agenda for a California Constitutional Convention. The goal is not to achieve originality in the substance of each proposal so much as to propose reasonable compromises that might ameliorate California's chronic fiscal woes. At the moment, the prospects for such a convention have dimmed considerably, but the compromises outlined below could still be reached through legislative action and/or voter referenda. The proposals, in brief, are:

Proposal 1: More Local Control and Likely Greater Resources, but Accepting More Disparity in Resources; Proposal 2: Split the Property Tax Roll and Impose (Gradually) a Statewide Tax on …

Judicial Independence And Accountability In An Age Of Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendments, Teresa Stanton Collett

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

An Analysis Of South Africa’S Mental Health Legislation, Natalie Latoya Mccrea

Legal Writing Competition Winners

If one were to measure a society’s health by its historical environment, then something can indeed be said of South Africa. This nation is known for its long abhorrent history with apartheid entrenched with a political and human rights struggle. In 1995, the world witnessed the evisceration of apartheid and the birth of a new democratic South Africa. In light of the struggle endured by a visible portion of the South African population, a question asked is, what about the forgotten and somewhat invisible individuals, those who suffer with mental illness. The purpose ­of this work is to discuss South …

Forfeiture Of The Right To Counsel: A Doctrine Unhinged From The Constitution, Stephen A. Gerst

Cleveland State Law Review

The author contends that the doctrine of forfeiture of the right to assistance of counsel as a sanction for misconduct by a defendant towards the court or his counsel has no constitutional support in the principles that have defined the Sixth Amendment, is arbitrary in its application within the judicial system, and has become a refuge for courts, which have inadequately complied with established principles to protect fundamental rights.

Intended And Unintended Consequences: The 2006 Fair Minimum Wage Amendment Of The Ohio Constitution , Jason R. Bristol, Ashley A. Weaver, Thomas A. Downie

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article first provides a brief overview of federal and Ohio minimum wage law. The Article then examines the text of the 2006 Amendment. The third section delves into the provisions of HB 690 and the differences between HB 690 and the Amendment. The final section explores litigation issues arising from these differences.

The Police-Prosecutor Relationship And The No-Contact Rule: Conflicting Incentives After Montejo V. Louisiana And Maryland V. Shatzer, Caleb Mason

Cleveland State Law Review

In this paper, I examine the consequences of the divergence of ethical and constitutional rules, with particular attention to the institutional dynamics of criminal investigation and specifically the relationship between police and prosecutors. This relationship is of crucial importance because Montejo and Shatzer create a legal regime in which non-lawyer agents and officers may initiate investigative contact with represented defendants in circumstances in which prosecutors are absolutely forbidden to do so. This situation undermines the ability of prosecutors to effectively supervise the investigation of their cases and puts them in an untenable position when advising agents on the law.

Pluralism In Marbury And Van Gend, Daniel Halberstam

Book Chapters

‘Great cases, like hard cases, make bad law’, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr, famously remarked in his first Supreme Court dissent. For Holmes, ‘great cases are called great, not by reason of their real importance in shaping the law of the future, but because of some accident of immediate overwhelming interest which appeals to the feelings and distorts the judgment’. On this account neither Marbury v Madison70 nor Van Gend en Loos would qualify. Van Gend was a case of great principle without greatly interesting facts. And Marbury was a great political battle that nevertheless produced a case of great principle.

Between Starvation And Globalization: Realizing The Right To Food In India, Lauren Birchfield, Jessica Corsi

Michigan Journal of International Law

This Article evaluates People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India & Others (PUCL) through multiple lenses, examining: (1) the necessary factors that contributed to the success of the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and its enforcement and (2) both the implications and limitations of PUCL as it relates to India's larger economic policy framework. We argue that the development and success of the PUCL litigation have depended in part on provisions of the Indian Constitution amenable to the incorporation and promotion of economic and social rights as well as on a unique relationship between civil society and judicial institutions. …

Federal Governmental Power: Preemption From The October 2008 Term (Twenty-First Annual Supreme Court Review & Selected Excerpts: Practicing Law Institutes Twenty-Sixth Annual Section 1983 Civil Rights Litigation Program), Eileen Kaufman

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

The Death Of Suspicion, Fabio Arcila Jr.

Scholarly Works

This article argues that neither the presumptive warrant requirement nor the presumptive suspicion requirement are correct. Though representative of the common law, they do not reflect the totality of our historic experience, which includes civil search practices. More importantly, modern developments - such as urban life and technological advancements, the rise of the regulatory state, and security concerns post-9/11 - have sufficiently changed circumstances so that these rules are not just unworkable now, they are demonstrably wrong. Worst of all, adhering to them has prevented us from formulating a more coherent Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. A new paradigm confronts us, in …

Executive Activism Not Reciprocated With Judicial Activism: Wyeth V. Levine And Cuomo V. Clearing House Return Preemption To The Legislative Branch, Anthony C. Coveny, Shelly A. Sanford

St. Thomas Law Review

The Supreme Court has taken a strong stand on the preemption issue, with both liberal and conservative justices agreeing to return preemptive authority to Congress. In short, the Supreme Court has properly refused to reward Executive activism with Judicial activism. This article discusses the theoretical foundation of preemption; the requirement of clear Congressional intent; recent Executive Branch attempts to push preemption vis-d-vis agency regulation; the Supreme Court's refusal to reward Executive activism with Judicial activism in Wyeth v. Levine and Cuomo v. Clearing House Ass'n, L.L. C.; and the preemption landscape as it exists in 2009 going forward.

Poison Pens, Intimidating Icons, And Worrisome Websites: Off-Campus Student Speech That Challenges Both Campus Safety And First Amendment Jurisprudence, Kathy Luttrell Garcia

St. Thomas Law Review

As the line between off-campus and on-campus student speech is increasingly blurred by the internet, educators and courts alike are struggling to determine the limits of school authority to restrict student speech that originates off-campus but is directed toward an on-campus audience. Although students retain their First-Amendment-protected rights of free speech and expression on school campuses during school hours, these rights are subject to exceptions. These exceptions are constitutionally permissible, even where the speech could not be restricted off campus, because "student First Amendment rights are 'applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment." Because of these …

A Matter Of Conscience: United States V. Seeger And The Supreme Court's Historical Failure To Define Conscientious Objector Status Under The First Amendment, Claire Marblestone

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

This Note will explore the Supreme Court's 1965 decision addressing conscientious objectors, United States v. Seeger. The Note will argue that the Court should have addressed the First Amendment and Due Process questions presented in Seeger. In the days leading up to the decision, three Supreme Court Justices circulated dissenting and concurring opinions which addressed the constitutional questions before the Court. I will argue that the traditional reasons for invoking the doctrine of constitutional avoidance did not justify issuing a weak test for lower courts and administrative agencies to administer. I will also attempt to explain why the Justices decided …

Elena Kagan Can't Say That: The Sorry State Of Political Discourse Regarding Constitutional Interpretation, Neil J. Kinkopf

Faculty Publications By Year

No abstract provided.

Litigation, Integration, And Transformation: Using Medicaid To Address Racial Inequities In Health Care, Ruqaiijah Yearby

All Faculty Scholarship

Using a public health policy perspective, this article examines the persistence of racial inequities in nursing homes and prescribes a solution to address these inequities. I use empirical data to prove the persistence of racial inequities in health care, analyze the government policies that allow racial inequities to continue, and provide a solution of regulatory integration. Specifically, I propose that civil rights enforcement be integrated with the nursing home enforcement system, which has been aggressively enforced and monitored. There are many strategies that may lead to the adoption of this system. One such strategy is using the Medicaid Act to …

Back To Color Blindness: Recent Developments In Race Discrimination Law In The United States, Marcia L. Mccormick

All Faculty Scholarship

The United States has a long and somewhat conflicted history of espousing egalitarian values and yet tolerating a certain level of subordination of particular groups to a greater or lesser extent at the same time. Like many countries, it struggles with reconciling the goals of equality, pluralism, and liberty, and the balance has been struck differently at different times. In the current wave of such efforts, the Supreme Court is marking an increasingly formalist approach to the question of discrimination, while Congress appears to be pushing a slightly more substantive approach to discrimination. This short paper analyzes the Court’s recent …

Regulatory Adjudication, Marcia L. Mccormick

All Faculty Scholarship

Calls for increased regulation are flying fast and furious these days. We use regulation in the United States to prevent harm that various kinds of activities might cause and also to create positive external benefits that those activities could yield, but might not without incentives. Most regulatory programs in the United States provide a blend of measures designed to create these positive external benefits, promote good practices in the industry, prevent harms, and provide those harmed with remedies. At a time in which we contemplate new ways to regulate to deal with the crises of the day and prevent the …

Equal Access And The Right To Marry, Deborah Widiss, Nelson Tebbe

Articles by Maurer Faculty

How should courts think about the right to marry? This is a question of principle, of course, but it has also become a matter of litigation strategy for advocates challenging different-sex marriage requirements across the country. We contend that courts and commentators have largely overlooked the strongest argument in support of a constitutional right to marry. In our view, the right to marry is best conceptualized as a matter of equal access to government support and recognition and the doctrinal vehicle that most closely matches the structure of the right can be found in the fundamental interest branch of equal …

Is The Pcaob A "Heavily Controlled Component" Of The Sec?: An Essential Question In The Constitutional Controversy, Donna M. Nagy

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, described by D.C. Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh as “the most important separation-of-powers case regarding the President’s appointment and removal powers to reach the courts in the last 20 years.” Established by Congress as the cornerstone of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the PCAOB was structured as a strong, independent board in the private sector, to oversee the conduct of auditors of public companies.

This Article challenges the D.C. Circuit’s depiction of the PCAOB as “a heavily controlled component” of the SEC, and …

Religion, Science And The Secular State: Creationism In American Public Schools, Gene Shreve

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This Article examines the current debate whether creationism may be taught in American schools given the constraints of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The author considers some of the social and political consequences of the U.S. Supreme Court's leading cases. The article concludes by questioning whether the Supreme Court has succeeded in justifying its restrictive decisions in this controversial area.

The Argument For Same-Sex Marriage (Debate), Deborah A. Widiss, Nelson Tebbe, Shannon Gilreath

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Perry v. Schwarzenegger, in which a federal district court held California's ban on same-sex marriages unconstitutional, is set for expedited review in the Ninth Circuit; many argue that the case will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court. The arguments for and against the constitutionality of such statutes are thus at a fever pitch. In an article published earlier this year, Professors Nelson Tebbe and Deborah Widiss argued that marriage rights are best conceived of as an issue of equal access, rather than one of equal protection or substantive due process. Nelson Tebbe & Deborah A. Widiss, Equal Access and …

The Future Of Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act In The Hands Of A Conservative Court, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This Essay argues that the future of the majority-minority district is in peril, as a conservative majority on the Court stands poised to strike down section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. When the Court takes up the constitutionality of Section 2, binding precedent will play a secondary role at best. Instead, the Justices’ policy goals and ideological preferences - namely, their personal disdain for the use of race in public life - will guide the Court’s conclusion. In this vein, Justice Kennedy holds the fate of the Act in his hands. To be clear, this Essay is not trying …

Coercing Voluntariness, Wadie E. Said

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Introduction: Reproductive Rights, Human Rights, And The Human Right To Health, B. Jessie Hill

Faculty Publications

Introduction - Case Western Reserve University Law Review Symposium 2010: Reproductive Rights, Human Rights, and the Human Right to Health

Zoya's Standing Problem, Or, When Should The Constitution Follow The Flag?, Jeffrey D. Kahn

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Some federal courts have devised a new test of prudential standing that they use to dismiss suits filed by foreign plaintiffs alleging unlawful conduct by American officials abroad, even when these cases involve matters that may have nothing to do with foreign affairs, national security, or terrorism. Rather than decide the case on its merits or dismiss it on any number of legitimate grounds, the complaint is dismissed because the plaintiff lacks a “prior substantial connection” to the United States.

I identify and critique this strange but proliferating test of standing. First, it is inconsistent with any theoretical view of …

Supreme Court Voting Behavior: 2007 Term, Richard G. Wilkins, Scott Worthington, Elisabeth Liljenquist, Adam Pomeroy

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

This Study, the twenty-second in a series, tabulates and analyzes the voting behavior of the United States Supreme Court during the 2007 Term. The analysis is designed to measure whether individual Justices and the Court as a whole are voting more "conservatively," more "liberally," or about the same when compared with past Terms. This Study attempts to remove this subjectivity by applying the following consistent classification scheme to ten categories of cases across time: "conservative" votes are those that favor an assertion of governmental power, while "liberal" votes are those that favor a claim of individual liberty.

The voting patterns …

The Guarantee Clause In The States: Structural Protections For Minority Rights And Necessary Limits On The Initiative Power, Anya J. Stein

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

This Note discusses the constitutional significance of the Guarantee Clause of Article IV, Section 4, which states that "[t]he United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union, a Republican Form of Government." For decades, the United States Supreme Court has held that the Guarantee Clause presents a nonjusticiable political question in the federal courts. Notwithstanding this federal doctrine, the Guarantee Clause remains justiciable in the state courts.

State ballot initiatives are vulnerable to uses that violate the Guarantee Clause's protection of the republican form of government. This Note presents a three-part argument. First, the Guarantee Clause provides critical …