Constitutional Law Commons^™

Qualified Immunity: Protecting All But The Plainly Incompetent (And Maybe Some Of Them, Too), Susan Bendlin

Faculty Scholarship

Public officials can be more certain than ever before that qualified immunity will shield them from suits for money damages even if their actions violate the constitutional rights of another. In the October 2011 Term the Supreme Court granted qualified immunity to government officials in four significant cases and denied it to none. Troublesome aspects of the Supreme Court’s current approach include (1) the failure to clarify important Constitutional questions; and (2) the blurring of the distinction between absolute and qualified immunity for all practical purposes by assuring state officials that they can be certain of the shield from liability. …

Kiss The Book...You're President...: "So Help Me God" And Kissing The Book In The Presidential Oath Of Office, Frederick B. Jonassen

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Constructing The Other: U.S. Muslims, Anti-Sharia Law, And The Constitutional Consequences Of Volatile Intercultural Rhetoric, Carlo A. Pedrioli

Faculty Scholarship

Recently, legislators have proposed, discussed, and passed various laws that aimed to limit the use of foreign law, international law, and Sharia (a branch of Islamic law) in state court systems. Because it became law, one proposed state constitutional amendment that rhetorically linked Sharia to foreign and international law is of particular note. In the 2010 midterm elections, Oklahoma passed State Question 755 (SQ 755), a constitutional amendment that aimed to place restrictions on the use of foreign law, international law, and Sharia in Oklahoma courts. Laws like Oklahoma’s State Question 755 are problematic for a variety of reasons. One …

The Coordination Conundrum, Catherine A. Hardee

Faculty Scholarship

Justice Souter's oft-repeated quote aptly summarizes the function of strict standards of review in constitutional jurisprudence to protect unpopular speech from restrictions based on content-laden value judgments. While strict standards have their advantages, commentators have found fault with their rigidity and have questioned whether any decision-making process can, or should, be free of pragmatic considerations. This doctrinal discussion has been reinvigorated by two recent United States Supreme Court opinions. At the root of both cases was the Court's reliance on the distinction between coordinated and independent speech. This Article examines the validity of this divide and challenges the foundation upon …

Funding Port-Related Infrastructure And Development: The Current Debate And Proposed Reform, Christopher T. Cook

Fordham Urban Law Journal

Given the lack of consensus and certainty in how funding should best be generated to meet critical infrastructure and development needs, this Note proposes an amendment to the Shipping Act to provide port authorities with the express power to impose fees for the construction, operation, and maintenance of qualifying port-related infrastructure and development initiatives. The amendment would effectively spread the costs specific to qualifying initiatives over the useful life of the project. Part I discusses the relevant provisions and judicial standards associated with the Tonnage Clause and Shipping Act. Part II addresses the efforts by both Congress and port authorities …

Whistleblowing And Freedom Of Conscience: Towards A New Legal Analysis, Richard Haigh, Peter Bowal

Comparative Research in Law & Political Economy

Most of us have an instinctive understanding of what “whistleblowing” is: the act of alerting the public to scandal, danger, malpractice, corruption or other immoral or unethical behaviour. For a long time, whistleblowers were treated poorly – today, they are now acknowledged, and sometimes even admired, but there is still some way to go. We believe that a strongly developed and distinct freedom of conscience, as expressed in s. 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, could go some way towards achieving that goal. In law, however, conscience is often treated as inseparable from religion, without any meaningful …

Constitutional Cases And The Four Cardinal Virtues, R. George Wright

Cleveland State Law Review

In addressing constitutional cases, judges face no shortage of legal rules, tests, principles, doctrines, and policies upon which to draw. In those cases, the challenge is assumed to be to identify and apply the most relevant such legal rules, tests, principles, doctrines, and policies. An accompanying judicial opinion tries to articulate this process, partly to legitimize the outcome, partly to provide guidance, and perhaps partly for purposes of civic education and inspiration. This Article recommends a somewhat different approach to constitutional adjudication. Specifically, this Article recommends supplementing the above standard forms of constitutional adjudication with appropriate and legitimate attention to …

The Constitutional Foundation For Federal Medical Liability Reform, Mark A. Behrens, Cary Silverman

Journal of Health Care Law and Policy

No abstract provided.

United States V. Stevens: Win, Loss, Or Draw For Animals?, David N. Cassuto

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Robert J. Stevens, proprietor of “Dogs of Velvet and Steel,” was indicted for marketing dog-fighting videos in violation of 18 U.S.C. §48, a law criminalizing visual or auditory depictions of animals being “intentionally mutilated, tortured, wounded, or killed” if such conduct violated federal or state law where “the creation, sale, or possession [of such materials]” takes place.” The law aimed principally at makers and distributors of “crush videos” wherein women wearing high heels and depicted from the waist down, grind small animals to death. However, the language of 18 U.S.C. §48 extended to dog-fighting as well. Stevens challenged the law …

Regulatory Takings And Property Rights Confront Sea Level Rise: How Do They Roll?, John R. Nolon

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Under the Beach and Shore Preservation Act, the State of Florida is authorized to conduct extraordinarily expensive beach renourishment projects to restore damaged coastal properties. The statute advances the State’s interest in repairing the damage to the coastal ecosystem and economy caused by hurricanes, high winds, and storm surges. The effect of a renourishment project conducted under the statute is to fix the legal boundary of the littoral property owner at an Erosion Control Line. Plaintiffs in Walton County v. Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. claimed that the statute took their common law property rights to their boundary, which would, …

The Constitutionality Of Citizen Suit Provisions In Federal Environmental Statutes, Jeffrey G. Miller

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court’s decisions under the pollution control statutes administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reach startlingly anti-environmental results, but they are explained more by the Court’s overwhelming hostility toward the private enforcement of statutes, rather than an anti-environmental bias. Adding insult to injury, in one of the rare victories for private environmental plaintiffs in those decisions, Justice Kennedy queried whether citizen suits intrude on the President’s Article II executive power and violate the separation of power principles. While other Justices have raised the same concern, Justice Kennedy’s invitation is particularly significant because he is a swing vote in …

The Health Care Cases And The New Meaning Of Commandeering, Bradley W. Joondeph

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Litigation

The Supreme Court’s decision in the Health Care Cases to sustain the central provisions of the Affordable Care Act (or ACA) was hugely important in several ways. Most commentators have focused on the Court’s upholding of the ACA’s minimum coverage provision. But the Court’s Medicaid holding—that the ACA coerced (and thus commandeered) the states by making their preexisting Medicaid funds contingent on the states’ expanding their programs—may actually be more significant as a matter of constitutional law.

The basic thesis of this article is that, in finding the ACA’s Medicaid expansion provisions coercive, the Court has re-conceptualized what constitutes a …

Freedom Struggles And The Limits Of Constitutional Continuity, Aziz Rana

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Michigan V. Bryant: Returning To An Open-Ended Confrontation Clause Analysis, Shari H. Silver

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Surviving The Commerce Clause: How Maryland Can Square Its Renewable Energy Laws With The Federal Constitution, Anne Havemann

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Crisis In Federal Habeas Law, Eve Brensike Primus

Reviews

Everyone recognizes that federal habeas doctrine is a mess. Despite repeated calls for reform, federal judges continue to waste countless hours reviewing habeas petitions only to dismiss the vast majority of them on procedural grounds. Broad change is necessary, but to be effective, such change must be animated by an overarching theory that explains when federal courts should exercise habeas jurisdiction. In Habeas for the Twenty-First Century: Uses, Abuses, and the Future of the Great Writ, Professors Nancy King and Joseph Hoffmann offer such a theory. Drawing on history, current practice, and empirical data, King and Hoffmann find unifying themes …

Obligatory Health, Noa Ben-Asher

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court will soon rule on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed in March 2010. Courts thus far are divided on the question whether Congress had authority under the Commerce Clause to impose the Act's "Individual Mandate" to purchase health insurance. At this moment, the public and legal debate can benefit from a clearer understanding of the underlying rights claims. This Article offers two principal contributions. First, the Article argues that, while the constitutional question technically turns on the interpretation of congressional power under the Commerce Clause, underlying these debates is a tension between …

Chopping Down The Rainforest: Finding A Solution To The "Amazon Problem", Eric Andrew Felleman

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat

Current economic conditions in the United States have led to a dramatic decrease in state tax revenue. Without these funds, states will be unable to support important public services, and hundreds of thousands of jobs in the public and private sectors are at risk of being cut, as states work to close $103 billion in budget gaps. Accomplishing that will involve overcoming many hurdles, such as the unpopularity of raising taxes during times of economic trouble, but one largely untapped source could provide a significant amount of income to states. States currently lose around $23 billion annually in uncollected use …

The Death Penalty And The Mentally Ill: A Selected And Annotated Bibliography, Jean Mattimoe

Articles

The United States Supreme Court over the last decade has selectively whittled away at the scope and availability of the death penalty by exempting certain groups from execution under the Eighth Amendment. In 2002 the court ruled that executing mentally retarded criminals violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. In 2005 the court ruled that the Constitution forbids the execution of individuals who were under the age of 18 when they committed their crimes. Currently there is an active debate on whether to extend the categorical exemptions created by the Court to the mentally ill. At the forefront …

Forfeitures Revisited: Bringing Principle To Practice In Federal Court, David Pimentel

Articles

No abstract provided.

Chief Justice Roberts And The Changing Conservative Legal Movement, Joel Alicea

Scholarly Articles

At the sprightly age of 57 and less than seven years into his term as chief justice, John Roberts looks like a man whom time has left behind. The reaction among legal conservatives to the Roberts opinion in National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius (the healthcare case) has been brutal. Many have accused the chief justice of exchanging the black robes of the jurist for the trappings of the politician. The chief justice is said to have “blinked” and “failed [his] most basic responsibility.” Noted originalist scholar Mike Rappaport strongly implied that Roberts is “both a knave and a …

Stare Decisis In An Originalist Congress, Joel Alicea

Scholarly Articles

The concern here is with the normative status of legislative precedents for an originalist Congress: Should an originalist legislator give any weight to previous legislative constitutional judgments? This Note does not attempt to articulate the specific criteria an originalist legislator (or judge, for that matter) should use in deciding whether to retain a particular precedent. That question is a distinct inquiry for another day. Part I briefly reviews the literature on originalist extrajudicial constitutional interpretation as well as the scholarship on legislative stare decisis. Part II examines five common arguments for adherence to precedent in a judicial setting and analyzes …

Response: There Is No New General Common Law Of Severability, Kevin C. Walsh

Law Faculty Publications

In this solicited response to The New General Common Law of Severability, I first offer an interpretation of Ayotte and subsequent Supreme Court decisions as continuous with existing doctrine instead of a departure from it. I then suggest that much of Scoville’s evidence for a federalization of severability doctrine is better viewed as evidence of doctrinal looseness rather than of doctrinal change. I conclude by returning to the lessons of severability’s doctrinal history, suggesting that the prehistory of severability doctrine may supply a better guide for how courts should deal with problems of partial unconstitutionality in the future.

Second Things First: What Free Speech Can And Can’T Say About Guns, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Blocher responds to Gregory Magarian’s article on the implications of the First Amendment for the Second.

The Future Interpretation Of The Constitution As A Result Of The Re-Election Of President Barack Obama, Wilson Huhn

Akron Law Faculty Publications

On November 6, 2012, Barack Obama was reelected President of the United States. What effect will this have on the future interpretation of the Constitution? This article identifies 19 areas of constitutional law that would likely change if one more liberal justice is appointed to the Supreme Court.

Rights To And Not To, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

When and why should a “right to” include a “right not to”? If a person has a right to engage in an activity or to receive a particular form of procedural protection, under what circumstances should he also have a right not to engage in that activity or to refuse that process? The basic project of this Article is to show why these questions are important in American constitutional law, to explore how doctrine and scholarship have implicitly and sometimes awkwardly dealt with them, and to suggest normative frameworks with which they can be answered.

The Right Not To Keep Or Bear Arms, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

Sometimes a constitutional right to do a particular thing is accompanied by a right not to do that thing. The First Amendment, for example, guarantees both the right to speak and the right not to speak. This Article asks whether the Second Amendment should likewise be read to encompass both the right to keep or bear arms for self-defense and the inverse right to protect oneself by avoiding them, and what practical implications, if any, the latter right would have. The Article concludes - albeit with some important qualifications - that a right not to keep or bear arms is …

“Early-Bird Special” Indeed!: Why The Tax Anti-Injunction Act Permits The Present Challenges To The Minimum Coverage Provision, Neil S. Siegel, Michael C. Dorf

Faculty Scholarship

In view of the billions of dollars and enormous effort that might otherwise be wasted, the public interest will be best served if the Supreme Court of the United States decides the present challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) during its October 2011 Term. Potentially standing in the way, however, is the federal Tax Anti-Injunction Act (TAIA), which bars any “suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax.” The dispute to date has turned on the fraught and complex question of whether the ACA's exaction for being uninsured qualifies as a …

Not The Power To Destroy: An Effects Theory Of The Tax Power, Neil S. Siegel, Robert D. Cooter

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s “new federalism” decisions impose modest limits on the regulatory authority of Congress under the Commerce Clause. According to those decisions, the Commerce Clause empowers Congress to use penalties to regulate interstate commerce, but not to regulate noncommercial conduct. What prevents Congress from penalizing non-commercial conduct by calling a penalty a tax and invoking the Taxing Clause? The only obstacle is the distinction between a penalty and a tax for purposes of Article I, Section 8. In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (NFIB), the Court considered whether the minimum coverage provision in the Patient …

Historical Gloss And The Separation Of Powers, Curtis A. Bradley, Trevor W. Morrison

Faculty Scholarship

Arguments based on historical practice are a mainstay of debates about the constitutional separation of powers. Surprisingly, however, there has been little sustained academic attention to the proper role of historical practice in this context. The scant existing scholarship is either limited to specific subject areas or focused primarily on judicial doctrine without addressing the use of historical practice in broader conceptual or theoretical terms. To the extent that the issue has been discussed, most accounts of how historical practice should inform the separation of powers require “acquiescence” by the branch of government whose prerogatives the practice implicates, something that …