Constitutional Law Commons^™

Different Types Of Participation In Constitution Making Processes: Towards A Conceptualisation, Abrak Saati

Southern African Journal of Policy and Development

Though participatory constitution making processes in post-conflict states and in states transitioning from authoritarian rule have become a new trend, scholarly research has yet to approach the notion of participation in a sharp and distinct way. In this article, I develop a novel approach for differentiating participation in constitution making, depending on the extent of influence that participants are granted, illustrating this reasoning with eight empirical cases from the African continent.

Ohio V. Clark , Peter M. Torstensen Jr.

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The heart of the debate over the purpose of the Confrontation Clause is the manner in which confrontation was intended to secure a defendant’s rights—either through procedural fairness or ensuring evidentiary reliability. The eventual direction the Supreme Court takes will depend, in large part, on which of these visions of the Confrontation Clause ultimately prevails. Michigan v. Bryant marked a potential step in the direction of the Ohio v. Roberts vision, and Ohio v. Clark does not appear to have departed from the course set in Bryant. Thus, while Crawford v. Washington marked a sea change in the Court’s confrontation …

The Road To The Gettysburg Address, Alfred L. Brophy

Florida State University Law Review

This Article recovers the forgotten ideas about public constitutionalism in seventy published addresses given at cemetery dedications from Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story’s address at Mount Auburn Cemetery in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1831, to the addresses by Edward Everett and Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg in November 1863. It reveals an important, but forgotten, set of ideas that provided a precedent for Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. Those addresses, including Lincoln’s, reveal the centrality of constitutional values—as opposed to constitutional text—in framing Americans’ interpretation of the Constitution. Pre-Civil War Americans had a vibrant public discussion of constitutional principles, in addition to constitutional text. …

Originalist Or Original: The Difficulties Of Reconciling Citizens United With Corporate Law History, Leo E. Strine Jr., Nicholas Walter

Notre Dame Law Review

In this Article, we focus on a specific question raised by Citizens United, which is whether the Supreme Court’s decision can be justified solely by application of the originalist method of constitutional interpretation, or whether it can only be explained by giving substantial weight to a more modern, evolved understanding of the relevant constitutional provisions. We conclude that however Citizens United is rationalized, it cannot be defended solely or primarily as the product of a disciplined application of the originalist method of constitutional interpretation. Because Citizens United takes a view at odds both with the historical understanding of business …

The Meanings Of The "Privileges And Immunities Of Citizens" On The Eve Of The Civil War, David R. Upham

Notre Dame Law Review

The Fourteenth Amendment to our Constitution provides, in part, that “[n]o State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” This “Privileges or Immunities Clause” has been called “the darling of the professoriate.” Indeed, in the last decade alone, law professors have published dozens of articles treating the provision. The focus of this particular study is the interpretation of the “privileges and immunities of citizens” offered by American political actors, including not only judges, but also elected officials and private citizens, before the Fourteenth Amendment, and primarily, on the …

Stop The Reach: Solving The Judicial Takings Problem By Objectively Defining Property, Steven C. Begakis

Notre Dame Law Review

The future of judicial takings may rest on the ability of the Court to define property in a robust and objective way. Property has essential characteristics that make it easily identifiable, the most significant of which are the rights to exclude and use. However, even when a property right does not fit within a neat categorical definition, should that right have a long, well established pedigree in state court precedent, that property right is similarly within the capacity of the reviewing court to identify. And once it is determined that, prior to the judgment, the petitioners possessed a clearly defined …

Military Mothers And Claims Under The Federal Tort Claims Act For Injuries That Occur Pre-Birth, Tara Willke

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

In order to right a longstanding wrong perpetrated against military mothers and their children, the Court should grant review in Ortiz v. United States ex rel. Evans Army Community Hospital. Part I of this Essay provides a brief discussion of the FTCA and the Feres doctrine. Part II discusses the facts and holding in Ortiz and its rejection of the approaches taken in other circuits involving pregnant service members and pre-birth injuries, which has caused a clear split in the circuits. Part III argues that these types of claims are not subject to the Feres doctrine because pregnancy and …

The Emergence Of Contextually Constrained Purposivism, Michael C. Mikulic

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

This Case Comment first outlines the various methods of statutory construction used by the Supreme Court throughout its history, leading up to the Court’s implementation of contextually constrained purposivism in King v. Burwell. It then provides a summary of the facts and procedural history of King, thereby setting the stage to explain how the Court invoked contextually constrained purposivism. Finally, the Case Comment discusses some of the positive and negative implications of the approach.

The Horne Dilemma: Protecting Property’S Richness And Frontiers, Lynda L. Butler

Maryland Law Review

In a 2015 decision, the Supreme Court concluded that real and personal property should not be treated differently under the Takings Clause and that a government condition requiring raisin growers, in certain years, to reserve a percentage of their crop for the government to manage in noncompetitive venues was a per se physical taking. The decision to treat both real and personal property as equally worthy of protection under the Takings Clause has merit given the weak historical evidence suggesting stronger protection for land and the importance of personal property to income generation and capital development in a modern society. …

The Influence Of Emotional And Situated Social Cognition Factors On Consents To Search, Sarah A. Moody

UCARE: Research Products

The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution holds that the government cannot conduct an unreasonable search or seizure without probable cause or consent. A surprising majority of people acquiesce to search requests and research is lacking in determining what factors play a role in these decisions. Findings from the current research on the roles of emotions and situated social cognition in consents to search may help police officers and other legal authority figures ensure against coercive or unfair consents. Based upon regression models constructed from the data, authority figures can alter their search requests to help prevent coercion. The current …

Distinctive Identity Claims In Federal Systems: Judicial Policing Of Subnational Variance, Antoni Abat I Ninet, James A. Gardner

Journal Articles

It is characteristic of federal states that the scope of subnational power and autonomy are subjects of frequent dispute, and that disagreements over the reach of national and subnational power may be contested in a wide and diverse array of settings. Subnational units determined to challenge nationally-imposed limits on their power typically have at their disposal many tools with which to press against formal boundaries. Federal systems, moreover, frequently display a surprising degree of tolerance for subnational obstruction, disobedience, and other behaviors intended to expand subnational authority and influence, even over national objection. This tolerance, however, has limits. In this …

Of Reasonable Readers And Unreasonable Speakers: Libel Law In A Networked World, Lyrissa Lidsky, Ronnell Anderson Jones

Faculty Publications

Social-media libel cases require courts to map existing defamation doctrines onto social-media fact patterns in ways that create adequate breathing space for expression without lincensing character assassination. This Article explores these challenges by investigating developments involving two important constitutional doctrines - the so-called opinion privlege, which protects statements that are unverifiable or cannot be regarded as stating actual facts about a person, and the actual malice rule, which requires defamation plaintiff's who are public officials or public figures to prove that the defendant made a defamatory statement with knowledge of or reckless disregard for, its falsity. Given the critical role …

Prove Yourselves: Oliver Wendell Holmes And The Obsessions Of Manliness, John M. Kang

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Natural Baselines For Wildfire Takings Claims, Justin Pidot

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Horne V. Department Of Agriculture: Just Compensation Left To Wither On The Vine, Michael P. Collins Jr.

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

To Seek A Newer World: Prisoners’ Rights At The Frontier, David M. Shapiro

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

Prisoners’ rights lawyers have long faced a dismal legal landscape. Yet, 2015 was a remarkable year for prison litigation that could signal a new period for this area of law—the Supreme Court handed down decisions that will reverberate in prison jurisprudence for decades to come. New questions have been asked, new avenues opened. This piece is about what the Court has done recently, and what possibilities it has opened for the future. More broadly, I suggest that the Court may be subjecting prison officials to greater scrutiny and that this shifting judicial landscape reflects an evolving social discourse about prison …

The Horne Dilemma: Protecting Property's Richness And Frontiers, Lynda L. Butler

Faculty Publications

In a 2015 decision, the Supreme Court concluded that real and personal property should not be treated differently under the Takings Clause and that a government condition requiring raisin growers, in certain years, to reserve a percentage of their crop for the government to manage in noncompetitive venues was a per se physical taking. The decision to treat both real and personal property as equally worthy of protection under the Takings Clause has merit given the weak historical evidence suggesting stronger protection for land and the importance of personal property to income generation and capital development in a modern society. …

Horne V. Department Of Agriculture: Expanding Per Se Takings While Endorsing State Sovereign Ownership Of Wildlife, John D. Echeverria, Michael C. Blumm

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Resetting The Baseline Of Ownership: Takings And Investor Expectations After The Bailouts, Nestor M. Davidson

Maryland Law Review

During the economic crisis that began in 2008, the federal government nationalized several of the nation’s most significant private companies as part of a broad effort to forestall a global depression. Shareholders in those companies later filed suit, alleging that the federal government in so doing—and in subsequent actions while in control of the firms—took their property without compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment. To date, those claims have not succeeded. If these cases continue on their current trajectory, with courts rejecting arguments that the rescue of systematically important firms on the brink of collapse requires compensation for shareholders, …

Negotiations In The Aftermath Of Koontz, Daniel P. Selmi

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Founding-Era Translation Of The U.S. Constitution, Christina Mulligan, Michael Douma, Hans Lind, Brian Quinn

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Taking The Oceanfront Lot, Josh Eagle

Indiana Law Journal

Oceanfront landowners and states share a property boundary that runs between the wet and dry parts of the shore. This legal coastline is different from an ordinary land boundary. First, on sandy beaches, the line is constantly in flux, and it cannot be marked except momentarily. Without the help of a surveyor and a court, neither the landowner nor a citizen walking down the beach has the ability to know exactly where the line lies. This uncertainty means that, as a practical matter, ownership of some part of the beach is effectively shared. Second, the common law establishes that the …

A Supreme Court Homecoming, George S. Isaacson

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—Fourth Amendment And Seizures— Accidental Seizures By Deadly Force: Who Is Seized During A Police Shootout? Plumhoff V. Rickard, 134 S. Ct. 2012 (2014)., Adam D. Franks

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dissecting The Hybrid Rights Exception: Should It Be Expanded Or Rejected?, David H. Hudson Jr., Emily H. Harvey

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutionalizing Corporate Law, Elizabeth Pollman

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Supreme Court has recently decided some of the most important and controversial cases involving the federal rights of corporations in over two hundred years of jurisprudence. In rulings ranging from corporate political spending to religious liberty rights, the Court has dramatically expanded the zone in which corporations can act free from regulation. This Article argues these decisions represent a doctrinal shift, even from previous cases granting rights to corporations. The modern corporate rights doctrine has put unprecedented weight on state corporate law to act as a mechanism for resolving disputes among corporate participants regarding the expressive and religious activity …

Standing For (And Up To) Separation Of Powers, Kent H. Barnett

Indiana Law Journal

The U.S. Constitution requires federal agencies to comply with separation-of-powers (or structural) safeguards, such as by obtaining valid appointments, exercising certain limited powers, and being sufficiently subject to the President’s control. Who can best protect these safeguards? A growing number of scholars would allow only the political branches—Congress and the President—to defend them. These scholars would limit or end judicial review because private judicial challenges are aberrant to justiciability doctrine and lead courts to meddle in minor matters that rarely affect regulatory outcomes.

This Article defends the right of private parties to assert justiciable structural causes of action, arguing that …

Taking The Oceanfront Lot, Josh Eagle

Faculty Publications

Oceanfront landowners and states share a property boundary located between the wet and dry parts of the shore. This legal coastline is different from an ordinary land boundary. First, on sandy beaches, the line is constantly in flux, and it cannot be marked except momentarily. Without the help of a surveyor and a court, neither the landowner nor a citizen walking down the beach has the ability to know exactly where the line lies. This uncertainty means that, as a practical matter, ownership of some part of the beach is effectively shared. Second, the common law establishes that the owner …

The Federalist Safeguards Of Politics, Anthony Johnstone

Faculty Law Review Articles

This Article argues that states do and should play as important a role as the federal government in articulating and implementing the law governing state political processes, or in formal terms, their republican forms of government.20 The argument has four parts. Part I introduces the basic meaning of the guarantee and its amendment. Beyond a consensus that holds our republicanism to require basic political equality, various perfectionist conceptions of a republican form of government diverge, giving way to the essential pluralism of republican governments in a federal system. Part II explains how the Supreme Court, Congress, and the Executive are …

James Wilson And The Moral Foundations Of Popular Sovereignty, Ian Bartrum

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.