Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Dream Of Equal Educational Opportunity Deferred, Giovanni Luciano Escobedo

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Religion-Based Claims For Impinging On Queer Citizenship, Bruce Macdougall, Donn Short

Dalhousie Law Journal

Competing claims for legal protection based on religion and on sexual orientation have arisen fairly frequently in Canada in the past decade or so. The authors place such competitions into five categories based on the nature of who is making the claim and who is impacted, the site of the competition, and the extent to which the usual legal and constitutional norms applicable are affected. Three of the five categories identified involve a claim that a religion operate in some form in the public area so as to impinge on the usual protection of equality on the basis of sexual …

The Associated Dangers Of "Brilliant Disguises," Color-Blind Constitutionalism, And Postracial Rhetoric, André Douglas Pond Cummings

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Religious Exemption Or Exceptionalism? Exploring The Tension Of First Amendment Religion Protections & Civil Rights Progress Within The Employment Non-Discrimination Act, Richael Faithful

Celebrating WCL Student Authors

The District of Columbia (D.C.) marked a landmark civil rights achievement in December 2009 when the city passed the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act. The law’s enactment allowed D.C. to become the sixth jurisdiction to sanction same-sex marriage in the United States. Supporters hailed the law as a victory for lesbian and gay equality, while detractors vowed that their efforts to traditionally define marriage would continue.

Among the most public opponents of the law was the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, which operates Catholic Charities, a leading service provider to low-income residents in the metropolitan area. The Catholic …

Aliens On The Bench: Lessons In Identity, Race And Politics From The First "Modern" Supreme Court, Lori A. Ringhand

Scholarly Works

Every time a Supreme Court vacancy is announced, the media and the legal academy snap to attention. Even the general public takes note; in contrast to most of the decisions issued by the Court, a majority of Americans are aware of and have opinions about the men and women who are nominated to sit on it. Moreover, public opinion about the nominee has a strong influence on a senator's vote for or against the candidate. If the confirmation hearing held before the Senate Judiciary Committee is largely an empty ritual, why do so many people seem so enthralled by it? …

Originalism And Summary Judgment, Brian T. Fitzpatrick

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Over the last several years, the Supreme Court has revolutionized modern criminal procedure by invoking the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial to strike down several sentencing innovations. This revolution has been led by members of the Supreme Court who follow an "originalist" method of constitutional interpretation. Recent work by the legal historian Suja Thomas has raised the question whether a similar "originalist" revolution may be on the horizon in civil cases governed by the Seventh Amendment’s right to a jury trial. In particular, Professor Thomas has argued that the summary judgment device is unconstitutional because it permits judges …

The First Amendment Degraded: Milkovich V. Lorain And A Continuing Sense Of Loss On Its 20th Birthday, Richard H. Weisberg

Articles

The article critiques the Supreme Court's decision in Milkovich v. Alabama, arguing that it undermines First Amendment protections by narrowing the distinction between fact and opinion in defamation cases. The Court's ruling, led by Chief Justice Rehnquist, held that statements implying false facts are actionable, even if framed as opinions. This decision, the article contends, reverses the constitutional logic of earlier precedents like New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, which trusted audiences to discern fact from opinion. The article warns that Milkovich erodes the First Amendment's faith in audience discernment, fostering a paternalistic judicial approach that stifles public debate.

From Harmelin To Graham - Justice Kennedy Stakes Out A Path To Proportional Punishment, Eva Nilsen

Faculty Scholarship

Graham v. Florida³ is a groundbreaking decision because it revives punishment doctrine on two issues that have lain dormant since Harmelin v. Michigan⁴: proportionality and individualized sentencing. Although it doesn't overrule Harmelin, by recognizing the continued vitality of Weems⁵ and Solem ⁶ the Graham decision appears to acknowledge that the Court's approach to proportionality since Harmelin may be too restrictive for the U.S. justice system today. In Solem, the Court affirmed its Constitutional role in ensuring just punishment; in Graham, the Court reaffirms that role.

Harmelin has had an enormous and regrettable impact …

September 30, 2010: Ignorant Of Religion But Believing In God, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Ignorant of Religion but Believing in God“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Salazar V. Buono: The Perils Of Piecemeal Adjudication, Lisa Shaw Roy

NULR Online

The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Salazar v. Buono, a case involving a Latin cross placed on federal land in the Mojave Desert by the Veterans of Foreign Wars, approaches what many would assume to be the central issue in the case from an oblique. Does the Mojave Desert cross, sitting atop Sunrise Peak in a federal park preserve, violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment? Neither Justice Kennedy’s plurality opinion nor any of the concurring or dissenting opinions in Salazar answers that question. Salazar’s complicated web of facts and procedural history precluded the Court from …

September 25, 2010: The Religious Person Is One Who Is Open To The Call Of History, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The Religious Person is One who is Open to the Call of History“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Filling The Criminal Liability Gap For Private Military Contractors Abroad: U.S. V. Slough And The Civilian Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act Of 2010, Missye Brickell

Legislation and Policy Brief

To ensure that all contractors who commit crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan can be prosecuted effectively in the United States, Congress must pass legislation to update Federal criminal law and fill the gaps that may leave certain types of contractors free from any criminal liability. The Civilian Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 2010 (CEJA) attempts to do just that, and while it may deter some PMCs from participating in the U.S. military and security contracting market, the benefits of having a fully accountable U.S. legal system outweigh the drawbacks for individual contracting companies.

“Bring[Ing] Our Enemies To Justice”: Terrorism And The Court, Anna Elazan

Legislation and Policy Brief

This article focuses on the venue of Mohammad’s trial and is broken into three sections. The first section reviews the historical use of military tribunals. This section begins by looking at the basis for Presidential authority to authorize the use of military commissions. This section then outlines the first use of military commissions since World War II. President George W. Bush’s authorization parallels the provisions in President Franklin Roosevelt’s authorization of the use of commissions in the 1940s. However, following authorization, the military commissions were subject to judicial challenges and significant revision by Congress. Finally, this section tracks recent developments …

“For Any Reason”: Paper Promises To Protect Service Members, Tami Martin

Legislation and Policy Brief

In short, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) is the law that prohibits lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals from serving openly in the military. Despite the fact that the Obama Administration has yet to fulfill the campaign promise of ending DADT, many believe the question is more "when" than "if" it will be repealed. Much attention has focused on ending the policy, but it is also important to consider what might happen after repeal. This article briefly examines the history of DADT, major policies meant to protect service members from harassment they experience because of their actual or perceived sexual …

The Limits Of Presidential Recess Appointment Power, Michael Mcnerney

Legislation and Policy Brief

The purpose of this article is to examine the constitutional, legislative, and traditional authority of the President to make recess appointments. The second section discusses the background of the current debate by framing the issue in the context of recent controversial appointments. The third section examines the constitutional language and common law interpretation of the President’s authority. The fourth section looks at appointment power legislation passed by Congress. The fifth section provides parliamentary and legislative recommendations for Congress to act upon to keep its authority. The article concludes by providing a final examination of the reason for a limited presidential …

Section 8: Federalism, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 7: Individual Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

September 23, 2010: Why Global Warming Cannot Be Happening, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Why Global Warming Cannot be Happening“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

The Holocaust Insurance Accountability Act Of 2010: Hearing Before The United States House Of Representatives, Committee On The Judiciary, Subcommittee On Commercial And Administrative Law. 111th Congress, 2nd Session, Michael P. Van Alstine

Congressional Testimony

The testimony explores the essential legal issue of the extent to which executive agreements related to H.R. 4596 have any force as law in the United States. The agreements made it clear that they did not, by themselves, “provide an independent legal basis for dismissal” of claims of Holocaust victims filed in any courts of the United States. Instead, the executive branch simply agreed to file a “statement of interest” in such lawsuits to the effect “that U.S. policy interests favor dismissal on any valid legal ground.” Some lower courts have nonetheless given the statements of interest preemptive effect as …

Balanced Budget Amendment Is Dangerous Gimmick, Not Solution, Nathan B. Oman

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Salazar V. Buono And The Future Of The Establishment Clause, Christopher C. Lund

NULR Online

Commentators often complain that Establishment Clause jurisprudence is incoherent and unprincipled. That accusation usually seems overwrought—perhaps we should not expect so much consistency from a Court that decides only the cases that come before it, holds multiple values, operates with continually changing personnel, and gives significant but unquantifiable weight to precedent. Yet of the areas of Establishment Clause litigation, this complaint carries the most force in the context of passive-display cases—cases where the government passively displays a religious symbol, like a cross or a crèche, a Ten Commandments monument, or an illuminated Bible. Here the critics have a point.

September 18, 2010: How Should A Hallowed Secularist Live: Like A Believer, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “How Should a Hallowed Secularist Live: Like a Believer“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Right Labels, Wrong Categories: Some Comments On Steven D. Smith's, 'Why Is Government Speech Problematic?', Alan K. Chen

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

This essay is a response to a paper presented by the noted First Amendment scholar, Steven D. Smith, at the 17th Ira C. Rothgerber, Jr. Constitutional Law Conference, “Government Speech in Transition.” In his thoughtful paper, Professor Smith addresses the theoretical underpinnings of free speech analysis as applied to the confounding problem of government speech. He argues that much of the confusion surrounding government speech can be addressed by reaching a clearer understanding of three problems – the unnecessary problem (a misguided commitment to government neutrality), an unnoticed problem (the issue of institutional capture), and the “big” problem (the lack …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Id Software Llc In Support Of Respondents, Paul E. Salamanca, James T. Drakeley, D. Wade Cloud Jr., Kevin J. Keith, J. Griffin Lesher, Amy Yeung

Law Faculty Advocacy

No abstract provided.

September 16, 2010: What Is The Problem With Secularists?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “What is the Problem with Secularists?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Salazar V. Buono: The Cross Between Endorsement And History, Mary Jean Dolan

NULR Online

The striking image of a white cross on stark rock, silhouetted against the desert sky, now symbolizes not only Christianity and, arguably, World War I military sacrifice, but also the equally dramatic, prolonged saga of the Salazar v. Buono litigation. The photos invoke the most recent Supreme Court battle in the legal and cultural war to define religion’s role in the public square. Competing approaches stress either preserving history or avoiding government endorsement of religion; this brief article analyzes a potential new synthesis suggested by Buono.

The original cross war memorial was erected in 1934 by a local group …

September 11, 2010: What Did Rick Santorum Mean?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “What Did Rick Santorum Mean?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

September 8, 2010: How Is Forgiveness Possible?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “How is Forgiveness Possible?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

September 6, 2010: George F. Will As A Know-Nothing, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “George F. Will as a Know-Nothing“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

September 4, 2010: The Reaction To Daniel Quinn, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

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