Constitutional Law Commons^™

Maxim Constitutionalism: Liberal Equality For The Common Good, Alexander Tsesis

Faculty Publications & Other Works

No abstract provided.

Evaluating High School Students' Constitutional And Civic Literacy: A Case Study Of The Washington, D.C. Chapter Of The Marshall-Brennan Constitutional Literacy Project, Maryam Ahranjani, Caleb Medearis, Jeff Shook

Scholarly Works

The United States maintains a reputation as a vibrant, participatory democracy. Yet, paradoxically, formal civics education has essentially disappeared from America's public high schools, particularly urban public schools serving low-income and minority students. The Marshall-Brennan Constitutional Literacy Project, which is offered at almost zero cost to public schools and districts, developed as a response to the need for civics education in high schools and as a way to train future lawyers in public speaking, leadership, and counseling. To support the growth of the Marshall-Brennan project all over the country, the authors of this Essay came together to study the Marshall-Brennan …

Constitutional Value Judgments And Interpretive Theory Choice, Ian C. Bartrum

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Why Strickland Is The Wrong Test For Violations Of The Right To Testify, Daniel J. Capra, Joseph Tartakovsky

Washington and Lee Law Review

A criminal accused has a constitutional right to testify in his own defense. The right has an undisputed place alongside the most important “personal” rights, like the right to remain silent or the right to represent oneself. But in the 1990s, courts began to apply the ineffective-assistance test of Strickland v. Washington to evaluate claims by a defendant that his right to testify was abridged. In practice this nullifies the right. Moreover, the Strickland test is inapposite because it focuses on counsel and not the defendant’s right to testify. This Article proposes a new test to better secure and enforce …

Consistently Inconsistent: The Constitution And Animals, Marianne Sullivan

Animal Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Slave By Any Other Name Is Still A Slave: The Tilikum Case And Application Of The Thirteenth Amendment To Nonhuman Animals, Jeffrey S. Kerr, Martina Bernstein, Amanda S. Schwoerke, Matthew D. Strugar, Jared Goodman

Animal Law Review

On its face, the Thirteenth Amendment outlaws the conditions and practices of slavery and involuntary servitude wherever they may exist in this country—irrespective of the victim’s race, creed, sex, or species. In 2011, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, on behalf of five wild-captured orcas, sued SeaWorld for enslaving the orcas in violation of the Thirteenth Amendment. The case presented, for the first time, the question of whether the Thirteenth Amendment’s protections can extend to nonhuman animals. This Article examines the lawsuit’s factual, theoretical, and strategic underpinnings, and argues that the district court’s opinion ultimately dismissing the suit failed …

Watching The Watchers, Ronald J. Bacigal

Law Faculty Publications

This article focuses on the threat that increasingly sophisticated technology can pose to individual privacy. However, the author would like to provide the “yin to the yang” and point out the obvious: technology itself is not the culprit, because it is a double-edged sword, a tool that can be used to protect as well as invade privacy. We need not endorse the single-minded approach of WikiLeaks to recognize the benefits that occur when technology discloses government cover-ups or simply provides accurate information where none previously existed.

The Origins Of The Privileges Or Immunities Clause, Part Iii: Andrew Johnson And The Constitutional Referendum Of 1866, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

This Article divides the events of 1866 into four phases. First, I discuss the early framing debates and the political rupture between congressional Republicans and President Andrew Johnson that occurred in the spring of 1866. Johnson’s March 27 veto of the Civil Rights Act and the congressional override were major public events and signaled what would become the central issue in the fall elections: whether the southern states should be readmitted without condition, or whether they must first be forced to protect the rights of citizens of the United States. The second Part discusses the final framing and initial public …

Inkblot: The Ninth Amendment As Textual Justification For Judicial Enforcement Of The Right To Privacy, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

One of the more indelible moments in late twentieth century legal discourse occurred when Judge Robert Bork described the proper response of a judge confronted with the Ninth Amendment. Nominated to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell, Judge Bork appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee and declared that courts had no business enforcing the mysterious clause at all. Given the scarcity of historical evidence regarding the original meaning of the amendment, using the Ninth Amendment to strike down a law would say more about the predilections of the judge than the requirements of the text. Here is the famous …

Commandeering And Constitutional Change, Jud Campbell

Law Faculty Publications

Coming in the midst of the Rehnquist Court’s federalism revolution, Printz v. United States held that federal commandeering of state executive officers is “fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.” The Printz majority’s discussion of historical evidence, however, inverted Founding-era perspectives. When Federalists such as Alexander Hamilton endorsed commandeering during the ratification debates, they were not seeking to expand federal power. Quite the opposite. The Federalists capitulated to states’ rights advocates who had recently rejected a continental impost tax because Hamilton, among others, insisted on hiring federal collectors rather than commandeering state collectors. The commandeering power, it turns …

Military Commissions And The Paradigm Of Prevention, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Why military commissions? Given the United States’s track record of success in trying terrorists in civilian criminal courts, and the availability of courts-martial to try war crimes, why has the United States government, under both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations alike, insisted on proceeding through untested military commissions instead? In May 2009, President Obama defended military commissions with the following claims:

Military commissions have a history in the United States dating back to George Washington and the Revolutionary War. They are an appropriate venue for trying detainees for violations of the laws of war. They allow for …

Law, Liberty And The Rule Of Law (In A Constitutional Democracy), Imer Flores

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In the hunt for a better--and more substantial--awareness of the “law,” The author intends to analyze the different notions related to the “rule of law” and to criticize the conceptions that equate it either to the sum of “law” and “rule” or to the formal assertion that “law rules,” regardless of its relationship to certain principles, including both “negative” and “positive” liberties. Instead, he pretends to scrutinize the principles of the “rule of law,” in general, and in a “constitutional democracy,” in particular, to conclude that the tendency to reduce the “democratic principle” to the “majority rule” (or “majority principle”), …

The Problem Of Democracy In Contexts Of Polarization, Imer Flores

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this paper I argue that contemporary democracies all over the world are more polarized than ever and intend to analyze not only the conditions of possibility of a democracy, in general, and in contexts of polarization, in particular, but also the relationship between democracy and polarization. My claim is that polarization, if certain conditions are met, more than a problem it is a great opportunity to democracy and a greater democratization. Hence, I bring to mind that it was Ronald Dworkin, who recently asked about the conditions of possibility of a democracy and its relationship with polarization by developing …

Rethinking Legal Conservatism, Neal K. Katyal

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This is the time for us to think through whether an entity as august as the Federalist Society should embrace a move toward a constitutional conservatism. It strikes me as dangerous in terms of the underlying issues, but more importantly, as a step away from the fundamental insight that the Federalist Society had, which was that judges should be restrained because they lack the democratic pedigree of the political branches. There should be an impulse of judicial restraint, and, unless something is clearly unconstitutional, courts should not be mucking around with legislation and declaring it unconstitutional, no matter how novel …

State Law, The Westfall Act, And The Nature Of The Bivens Question, Carlos Manuel Vázquez, Stephen I. Vladeck

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In a number of recent cases touching to varying degrees on national security, different courts of appeals have applied a strong presumption against recognition of a Bivens cause of action. In each of these cases, the courts’ approach was based on the belief that the creation of a cause of action is a legislative function and that the courts would be usurping Congress’s role if they recognized a Bivens action without legislative authorization. Thus, faced with a scenario where they believed that the remedial possibilities were either "Bivens or nothing," these courts of appeals chose nothing.

The concerns that …

Conditional Spending After Nfib V. Sebelius: The Example Of Federal Education Law, Eloise Pasachoff

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In NFIB v. Sebelius, the Supreme Court’s recent case addressing the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, the Court concluded that the expansion of Medicaid in that Act was unconstitutionally coercive and therefore exceeded the scope of Congress’s authority under the Spending Clause. This was the first time that the Court treated coercion as an issue of more than mere theoretical possibility under the Spending Clause. In the wake of the Court’s decision, commentators have expressed either the concern or the hope that NFIB’s coercion analysis may lead to the undoing of much of the federal regulatory state, …

Afterword: The Libertarian Middle Way, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Libertarianism is sometimes portrayed as radical and even extreme. In this Afterword to a symposium on "Libertarianism and the Law" in the Chapman Law Review, I explain why, though it may be radical, libertarianism is far from extreme in comparison with its principal alternatives: the social justice of the Left or legal moralism of the Right. Social justice posits that everyone should get a certain amount of stuff; legal moralism posits that everyone should act in a certain way. But because there is no consensus about how much stuff each person should have or how exactly everyone should act, …

Preserving Privacy In A Digital Age: Lessons Of Comparative Constitutionalism, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In the modern age, we increasingly live our lives through, and accompanied by, digital media. Virtually every transaction or communication that uses such media, as well as every move of mobile phone owners, is recorded. Computers are able to store, transmit, and analyze the data as never before, drawing on multiple sources to construct an intimate picture of our interests, contacts, travels and desires. Private data-mining services, most often used for commercial advertising purposes, can determine: what we read, listen to, and look at; where we travel to, shop, and dine; and with whom we speak or associate. Meanwhile, social …

The Wages Of Crying Judicial Restraint, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Five Justices voted to affirm the proposition that the Constitution creates a government of limited and enumerated powers and that the courts will enforce those limits. To understand why this victory was possible, it is important to understand that there are not just two versions of federalism, pre‐New Deal and post‐New Deal. There is also a third version. The failure to recognize the third version goes a long way to explain why most of my academic colleagues predicted that the right would have no chance to prevail in our constitutional challenge to the individual insurance mandate.

The first version of …

Gideon At Guantánamo, Neal K. Katyal

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The right to counsel maintains an uneasy relationship with the demands of trials for war crimes. Drawing on the author’s personal experiences from defending a Guantánamo detainee, the Author explains how Gideon set a baseline for the right to counsel at Guantánamo. Whether constitutionally required or not, Gideon ultimately framed the way defense lawyers represented their clients. Against the expectations of political and military leaders, both civilian and military lawyers vigorously challenged the legality of the military trial system. At the same time, tensions arose because lawyers devoted to a particular cause (such as attacking the Guantánamo trial system) were …

What Alex Kozinski And The Investigation Of Earl Bradley Teach About Searching And Seizing Computers And The Dangers Of Inevitable Discovery, Stephen E. Henderson

Faculty Articles

This paper tells two stories. One concerns the investigation of a Delaware physician named Earl B. Bradley that resulted in a conviction and sentence of fourteen consecutive life terms for the sexual abuse of children. The other concerns the computer problems, both judicial and extra-judicial, of Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Though in a sense unrelated, they share lessons about the practicalities of computers and their search that are worth telling. As courts continue to struggle with how to cabin the searches of computers in order to minimize privacy intrusion …

Search, Seizure, And Immunity: Second-Order Normative Authority And Rights, Stephen E. Henderson, Kelly Sorensen

Faculty Articles

A paradigmatic aspect of a paradigmatic kind of right is that the rights holder is the only one who can alienate it. When individuals waive rights, the normative source of that waiving is normally taken to be the individual herself. This moral feature—immunity—is usually in the background of discussions about rights. We bring it into the foreground here, with specific attention to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, Kentucky v. King (2011), concerning search and seizure rights. An entailment of the Court’s decision is that, at least in some cases, a right can be removed by the intentional actions of …

Real-Time And Historic Location Surveillance After United States V. Jones: An Administrable, Mildly Mosaic Approach, Stephen E. Henderson

Faculty Articles

In United States v. Jones, the government took an extreme position: so far as the federal Constitution is concerned, law enforcement can surreptitiously electronically track the movements of any American over the course of an entire month without cause or restraint. According to the government, whether the surveillance be for good reason, invidious reason, or no reason, the Fourth Amendment is not implicated. Fortunately, that position was unanimously rejected by the High Court. The Court did not, however, resolve what restriction or restraint the Fourth Amendment places upon location surveillance, reflecting a proper judicial restraint in this nuanced and difficult …

Discriminating Speech: The Heterophilia Of The Freedom Of Speech Doctrine, Zvi Triger

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

In this Article, I seek to shed light on freedom ofspeech jurisprudence as it is reflected in the Snyder v. Phelps and Skokie cases, as well as in two analogous Israeli cases, namely petitions of members of the extreme right against the pride parades in Jerusalem, as well as petitions by the same petitioners for police permits to hold anti-Arab processions in the Arab town of Umm al-Fahm.

Comparing the cases, I identify the moral relativity built into the interpretation offreedom of expression doctrine in both countries. I introduce the concept of discriminating speech, which is speech that is designed …

Social Justice And The Charter: Comparison And Choice, Margot Young

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

At a time of radical inequality, the changes sought by social justice advocacy are urgently needed. Yet repeatedly, courts fail to respond adequately to this challenge. A core issue plagues social justice jurisprudence under sections 7 and 15: the difficulty inevitable in the contemplation and expression of the social and political forms in which oppression and social injustice occur. This problem manifests doctrinally in ways specific to the rights at issue. In section 15 cases, the casting of comparator groups has been deeply problematic, and in both section 15 and section 7 cases, the courts fail to deliver a nuanced …

Foreword: Public Constitutional Literacy; A Conversation, Melissa Hart

Publications

No abstract provided.

Parallel Investigations Between Administrative And Law Enforcement Agencies: A Question Of Civil Liberties, Shiv Narayan Persaud

Journal Publications

No abstract provided.

Asking The First Question: Reframing Bivens After Minneci, Alexander A. Reinert, Lumen N. Mulligan

Faculty Works

In Minneci v. Pollard, decided in January 2012, the Supreme Court refused to recognize a Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents suit against employees of a privately run federal prison because state tort law provided an alternative remedy, thereby adding a federalism twist to what had been strictly a separation-of-powers debate. In this Article, we show why this new state-law focus is misguided. We first trace the Court’s prior alternative-remedies-to-Bivens holdings, illustrating that this history is one narrowly focused on separation of powers at the federal level. Minneci’s break with this tradition raises several concerns. On a doctrinal level, …

Children Of Polyamorous Families: A First Empirical Look, Mark Goldfeder, Elisabeth Sheff

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Gideon’S Amici, Why Do Prosecutors So Rarely Defend The Rights Of The Accused?, Bruce A. Green

Faculty Scholarship

In Gideon v. Wainwright, twenty-three state attorneys general, led by Walter F. Mondale and Edward McCormack, joined an amicus brief on the side of the criminal accused, urging the Supreme Court to recognize indigent defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to appointed counsel in felony cases. This was a unique occurrence. Although amicus filings by public entities have increased significantly since then, including in criminal cases, government lawyers rarely submit amicus briefs in the Supreme Court supporting criminal defendants’ procedural rights, and never en masse as in Gideon. The states’ public support for Gideon’s position points up the special nature of the …