Constitutional Law Commons^™

Validating The Right To Counsel, Brandon L. Garrett

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Gideon Was A Prisoner: On Criminal Defense In A Time Of Mass Incarceration, Abbe Smith

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Knowledge Is Power: The Fundamental Right To Record Present Observations In Public, Travis Gunn

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court's Theory Of Private Law, Nathan B. Oman, Jason M. Solomon

Faculty Publications

In this Article, we revisit the clash between private law and the First Amendment in the Supreme Court’s recent case, Snyder v. Phelps, using a private-law lens. We are scholars who write about private law as individual justice, a perspective that has been lost in recent years but is currently enjoying something of a revival.

Our argument is that the Supreme Court’s theory of private law has led it down a path that has distorted its doctrine in several areas, including the First Amendment–tort clash in Snyder. In areas that range from punitive damages to preemption, the Supreme Court has …

Preemption And Choice-Of-Law Coordination, Erin O'Hara O'Connor, Larry E. Ribstein

Michigan Law Review

The doctrine treating federal preemption of state law has been plagued by uncertainty and confusion. Part of the problem is that courts purport to interpret congressional intent when often Congress has never considered the particular preemption question at issue. This Article suggests that courts deciding preemption cases should take seriously a commonly articulated rationale for the federalization of law: the need to coordinate applicable legal standards in order to facilitate a national market or to otherwise provide clear guidance to parties regarding the laws that apply to their conduct. In situations where federal law can serve a coordinating function but …

Prosecutorial Discretion And The Legal Limits In Singapore, Gary Kok Yew Chan

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Article 35(8) of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore states that the Attorney-General, as the Public Prosecutor, “shall have the power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for any offence”. This prosecutorial discretion, though extremely wide, is not an unfettered one and must not be exercised in bad faith or in breach of constitutional rights. With respect to the equality provision in the Constitution, the Prosecution has to give unbiased consideration to all potential accused persons and avoid any irrelevant considerations. The article considers whether the presumption of the constitutionality of prosecutorial decisions and …

Foreground Principles, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court has declared for decades that, for Takings Clause purposes, property interests are not created by the Constitution but rather are determined by “existing rules or understandings that stem from an independent source such as state law.” However, the Court has exhibited a strong normative preference for a certain type of independent source — “background principles” of the common law — over others, namely state statutory and administrative law. This Article calls this preference into question.

The Article develops a model to demonstrate the four basic categories, or quadrants, of takings decisions that extensive reliance on the …

Personal Jurisdiction And Choice Of Law, Stewart E. Sterk

Articles

The article critiques the Supreme Court's recent personal jurisdiction decisions for failing to provide a clear doctrinal framework, arguing that the Court has oscillated between prioritizing state sovereignty and individual liberty without adequately balancing these interests. The author contends that personal jurisdiction doctrine must evolve to address the complexities of modern, interconnected commerce while protecting both state regulatory power and defendants' reliance interests. The analysis emphasizes the need for a coherent approach that integrates fairness, foreseeability, and sovereign authority in jurisdictional determinations.

Tobacco Endgame Strategies: Challenges In Ethics And Law, Bryan P. Thomas, Lawrence O. Gostin

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

There are complex legal and ethical tradeoffs involved in using intensified regulation to bring smoking prevalence to near-zero levels. The authors explore these tradeoffs through a lens of health justice, paying particular attention to the potential impact on vulnerable populations. The ethical tradeoffs explored include the charge that heavy regulation is paternalistic; the potentially regressive impact of heavily taxing a product consumed disproportionately by the poor; the simple loss of enjoyment to heavily addicted smokers; the health risks posed by, for example, regulating nicotine content in cigarettes—where doing so leads to increased consumption. Turning to legalistic concerns, the authors explore …

February 28, 2013: Heidegger And The Jews, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

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

Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Nan D. Hunter, Et Al., Addressing The Merits In Support Of Respondents, Nan D. Hunter, Suzanne B. Goldberg

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

In this amicus brief filed in United States v. Windsor, pending before the Supreme Court, amici constitutional law professors argue that all classifications that carry the indicia of invidiousness should trigger a more searching inquiry than the traditional rational basis test under the Equal Protection Clause would suggest. Classifications that already receive heightened scrutiny, such as race or sex, fit easily into this approach. But the Court’s equal protection jurisprudence has become muddied in a series of cases in which it says rational basis review, but appears to do a more rigorous review. Sexual orientation classifications seemingly were analyzed …

Doe Co., Ltd V. Doe, Uzi Vogelman, Isaac Amit, Esther Hayut

Translated Opinions

[This abstract is not part of the Court's opinion and is provided for the reader's convenience. It has been translated from a Hebrew version prepared by Nevo Press Ltd. and is used with its kind permission.]

The Supreme Court (Justice Vogelman, Justices Hayut and Amit, concurring) granted leave to appeal, upheld the appeal and ruled as follows.

The Court considered the proceedings on the premise that the provisions of section 70(e1) of the Courts Act [Consolidated Version], 5744-1984 (hereinafter – the “Act”), which refers to a “suspect” as defined in section 70(e2) of the Act “as someone against whom a …

Untrodden Ground: How Presidents Interpret The Constitution, Harold H. Bruff

Schmooze 'tickets'

No abstract provided.

Democratizing The Executive, Bernadette Meyler

Schmooze 'tickets'

No abstract provided.

Long Wars And The Constitution, Stephen M. Griffin

Schmooze 'tickets'

No abstract provided.

Standing For The Structural Constitution, Aziz Z. Huq

Schmooze 'tickets'

No abstract provided.

The Emergency Powers Of The Judiciary, Or Necessity And German Constitutionalism, Jacqueline R. Hunsicker

Schmooze 'tickets'

No abstract provided.

February 22, 2013: Time Off For Surgery, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Time Off for Surgery“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

February 22, 2013: Time Off For Minor Surgery, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Time Off for Minor Surgery“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Religions As Sovereigns: Why Religion Is "Special", Elizabeth Clark

Faculty Scholarship

Commentators increasingly challenge religion’s privileged legal status, arguing that it is not “special” or distinct from other associations or philosophical or conscientious claims. I propose that religion is “special” because it functions metaphorically as a legal sovereign, asserting supreme authority over a realm of human life. Under a religion-as-sovereign theory, religious freedom can be understood as at least partial deference to a religious sovereign in a system of shared or overlapping sovereignty. This Article suggests that federalism, which also involves shared sovereignty, can provide a useful heuristic device for examining religious freedom. Specifically, the Article examines a range of federalism …

What Standard Should Be Used To Determine A Valid Juvenile Waiver?, Martin Levy, Stephen Skacevic

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The California Constitutional Right Of Privacy And Exclusion Of Evidence In Civil Proceedings, Jerry D. Mackey

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Mexican-American Penal Sentences Treaty: A Run-On Sentence, Gary Gray

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Where For Art Thou Danforth: Bellotti V. Baird , David C. Boatwright

Pepperdine Law Review

The author's focus is upon a Supreme Court opinion dealing with the constitutional parameters of a minor's right to make an independent decision with respect to abortion. The majority, in an attempt to balance the often conflicting interests of the minor, the minor's parents, and the state, sets forth the minimum requirements with which parental consent statutes must comply. The author emphasizes the significance of the high court's plurality split regarding this issue, and cautions the practitioner as to the possibility of inconsistent rulings on such statutes in the future.

Procedural Rights In The Juvenile Court: Incorporation Or Due Process?, Glen W. Clark

Pepperdine Law Review

The landmark Supreme Court decision in In re Gault established, among other things, a juvenile's right to counsel in delinquency prosecutions. However, the decision left unanswered certain questions relating to the nature and scope of that right. In this article, the author examines whether or not Gault initiated a special due process right to counsel for juveniles apart from that body of sixth amendment law previously developed in criminal cases. Alternatively, he wonders whether Gault was meant to initiate a process of selective incorporation of the Bill of Rights into the juvenile justice system. The author critically analyzes the resulting …

The Road To Abolition: How Widespread Legislative Repeal Of The Death Penalty In The States Could Catalyze A Nationwide Ban On Capital Punishment, Nicholas M. Parker

Legislation and Policy Brief

On December 17, 2007, former New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine signed into law a bill that abolished his state’s death penalty, saying he felt a “moral duty to end ‘state-endorsed killing.’” With Corzine’s signature, New Jersey became the fourteenth state to eradicate the death penalty, and the first to do so legislatively since Iowa and West Virginia legislators did away with capital punishment in 1965. The vote by New Jersey lawmakers followed close, but ultimately unsuccessful, votes on similar bills in Colorado, Maryland, Montana, Nebraska, and New Mexico earlier in 2007. And while it took more than thirty-one years for …

Circumventing The Electoral College: Why The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Survives Constitutional Scrutiny Under The Compact Clause, Michael Brody

Legislation and Policy Brief

It’s Election Night 2016. Brian Williams stands by at NBC, waiting to give the first returns of the night. “Kentucky to Christie,” Williams triumphantly announces to kick off the evening’s festivities. Kentucky turns flush red on NBC’s virtual election map. Williams continues: “Maryland to Clinton.” Now comes the hard part for Williams. Clinton won Maryland by an incredible two-to-one margin. NBC viewers intently watch the map, expecting to see the Old Line State turn blue. Instead, Maryland sits idly in its static grey color. This election has something new.

Confused NBC viewers keep watching, waiting for Williams to provide an …

February 16, 2013: No One Believes In Separation Of Church And State, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “No One Believes in Separation of Church and State“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

The End Of An Era: The Supreme Court (Finally) Butts Out Of Punitive Damages For Good, Jim Gash

Florida Law Review

Part I of this Article chronicles and summarizes the development of the Supreme Court’s punitive damages jurisprudence. Over the past two decades, the Court has increasingly constitutionalized various aspects of punitive damages jurisprudence, using both procedural and substantive due process rationales. A set of three “guideposts” has emerged that courts are to use in determining whether a punitive damages award runs afoul of constitutional guarantees.

Part II outlines the multiple punishments problem that is currently facing courts throughout the country and provides a brief overview of the various failed attempts and current proposals to remedy this problem.

Part III provides …

Two Faces Of Judicial Restraint (Or Are There More?) In Mcdonald V. City Of Chicago, Nelson Lund

Florida Law Review

Since the days of the Warren Court, conservatives have attacked “judicial activism.” Beginning with Judge Robert Bork’s Supreme Court nomination hearings, and lately with increasing frequency, liberals have sought to turn the tables. Critics now charge that conservative judges are activists, especially when they undermine liberal precedents or strike down liberal legislation. Defenders of judicial activism have all but disappeared. One sign of this apparent consensus is that all Supreme Court nominees now promise to be paragons of judicial restraint.

Some politicians and commentators have suggested that nominees are dissembling when they make such statements, and some of the sitting …