Constitutional Law Commons^™

February 16, 2016:Does The Constitution Protect The Right To Have More Than One Child?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Does the Constitution Protect the Right to Have More than One Child?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Domestic Violence And The Politics Of Self-Help, Elizabeth L. Macdowell

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

Self-help programs are conceptualized as alternatives to attorney representation that can help both courts and unrepresented litigants. The rhetoric of self-help also typically includes empowering unrepresented individuals to help themselves. But how do self-help programs respond to litigants’ efforts at self-advocacy? This Article reports findings from a study of courthouse self-help programs assisting unrepresented litigants applying for protection orders. The central finding is that self-help staff members were not neutral in the provision of services despite a professed ethic of neutrality. Using the sociological concept of demeanor, this Article shows that staff members rewarded protection order applicants who conformed to …

The Administrative Constitution In Exile, Mila Sohoni

William & Mary Law Review

For decades, the aspiration of administrative law has been to develop legal structures that would constrain and legitimate the exercise of agency power. The fruition of that hope was the complex internal blueprint that has made modern administrative governance both successful and legitimate the framework for executive action that many have hailed as the administrative constitution. Today, however, novel exercises of administrative power are crowding out old and familiar varieties, making the conventional forms of administrative action less and less relevant to the conduct of government.

This Article examines how the administrative constitution has changed over time and how that …

Neutral Principles And Some Campaign Finance Problems, John O. Mcginnis

William & Mary Law Review

This Article has both positive and normative objectives. As a positive matter, it shows that the Roberts Court’s campaign finance regulation jurisprudence can be best explained as a systematic effort to integrate that case law with the rest of the First Amendment, making the neutral principles refined in other social contexts govern this more politically salient one as well. It demonstrates that the typical Roberts Court majority in campaign finance cases follows precedent, doctrine, and traditional First Amendment theory, while the dissents tend to carve out exceptions at each of these levels.

As a normative matter, it argues that following …

Newsroom: A True Original(Ist) 02-15-2016, Michael M. Bowden

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

February 14, 2016: Was Scalia A Great Justice?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Was Scalia a Great Justice?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Conservative Movement V. Be'er Sheva Religious Council, Elyakim Rubinstein, Miriam Naor, Salim Joubran

Translated Opinions

Facts: An appeal of an administrative judgment finding that there was no defect in the decision of the Beer Sheva Religious Council to prevent the Masorti (Conservative) Movement and the Movement for Progressive (Reform) Judaism from using the mikve [ritual bath – plural: mikvaot] in its jurisdiction for the purpose of their conversion ceremonies.

Held: The Court (per Deputy President E. Rubinstein, Justice S. Joubran and President M. Naor concurring) granted the appeal, holding as follows:

Inasmuch as a number of local councils that permit the immersion of converts from the official conversion system in their mikvaot, the question of …

The Effect Of Rluipa’S Land Use Provisions On Local Governments, Alan C. Weinstein

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Occupy The Parks: Restoring The Right To Overnight Protest In Public Parks, Udi Ofer

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Rluipa: Necessary, Modest, And Under-Enforced, Douglas Laycock, Luke W. Goodrich

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Rluipa Is A Bridge Too Far: Inconvenience Is Not Discrimination, Marci A. Hamilton

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

February 10, 2016: Is Trump Back? No. But What About Clinton?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Is Trump Back? No. But What About Clinton?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

The Hidden Under Caste Of America: An Examination Of The Effects Of Terry V. Ohio, Florida V. Bostick, & Whren V. United States And Colorblindness On African Americans, Austin Schoeck

Political Science: Student Scholarship & Creative Works

No abstract provided.

Hurdles To The Court: The Doctrine Of Standing Under Statutory Violations, Priya Khangura

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Standing is a precondition for any suit brought in federal court. This Commentary analyzes a Supreme Court case, Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, which will address whether a violation of a federal statute grants a plaintiff standing to sue. The Author argues that such a violation is sufficient for establishing standing because the plaintiff suffered an injury-in-fact which the legisture intended to prevent. That harm is both traceable to the violation and redressible by statute. Thus, the requisite elements of constitutional standing exist in this case. Such a holding follows from existing standing jurisprudence and ensures that plaintiffs can have …

Arbitration Revisited: Preemption Of California’S Unconscionability Doctrine After Concepcion, David Friedman

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This commentary looks at a Supreme Court case, Imburgia v. DIRECTV, in which the Court faces the question of whether an arbitration agreement, made pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, preempts state unconscionability doctrine which would render that agreement unenforceable. The Author argues that holding that federal law implementing a policy favoring arbitration fully preempts state law doctrines from preventing the enforcement of arbitration agreements.

Luis V. United States: Asset Forfeiture Butts Heads With The Sixth Amendment, Jordan Glassberg

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

In recent years, the federal government has vastly increased its use of asset forfeiture, the seizure of property connected to illegal activities. As authorized under federal law, the government is also able to restrain assets prior to trial when the government belives those assets will ultimately be found to be forfeitable. This pretrial restraint potentially implicates the constitutionally guaranteed right to counsel for criminal defendants. In the upcoming Supreme Court case of Luis v. United States, the Court will address the question of whether a pretrial restraint of assets which are not traceable to any illegal activity is permissible …

February 4, 2016: Is This Weimar?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Is This Weimar?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

The Indefinite Deflection Of Congressional Standing, Nat Stern

Pepperdine Law Review

Recent litigation brought or threatened against the administration of President Obama has brought to prominence the question of standing by Congress or its members to sue the President for nondefense or non-enforcement of federal law. While scholars divide over the normative propriety of such suits, the Court has never issued a definitive pronouncement on their viability. Nevertheless, the Court’s rulings when the issue has arisen have displayed a distinct pattern. While the Court has not formally repudiated suits of this nature, neither has it issued a decision that hinges on the presence of congressional standing. On the contrary, the Court …

February 3, 2016: Is Trump Going To Be The Gop Nominee?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Is Trump Going to be the GOP Nominee?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Millennials, Equity, And The Rule Of Law: 2014 National Lawyers Convention, How First Amendment Procedures Protect First Amendment Substance, Erik S. Jaffe, Aaron H. Caplan, Robert A. Destro, Todd P. Graves, Alan B. Morrison, Eugene Volokh, David R. Stras

Catholic University Law Review

A panel, at the National Lawyers Convention, discussed procedure as it relates to First Amendment rights. The panel set forth how First Amendment procedures have historically protected First Amendment substance and discussed modern applications of the issue. For example, the prior restraint doctrine, overbreadth doctrine, the allocation of the burden of proof and relaxation of ripeness rules have important implications for challenging restrictions on speech and defending against libel and defamation.

The interaction of free speech and due process is often seen in litigation involving civil harassment orders, or civil protection orders. In many jurisidictions the definition of harassment permits …

Privacy Petitions And Institutional Legitimacy, Lauren Henry Scholz

Scholarly Publications

This Article argues that a petitions process for privacy concerns arising from new technologies would substantially aid in gauging privacy social norms and legitimating regulation of new technologies. An accessible, transparent petitions process would empower individuals who have privacy concerns by making their proposals for change more visible. Moreover, data accumulated from such a petitions process would provide the requisite information to enable institutions to incorporate social norms into privacy policy development. Hearing and responding to privacy petitions would build trust with the public regarding the role of government and large companies in shaping the modern privacy technical infrastructure. This …

The New Elections Clause, Michael T. Morley

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

The Elections Clause and Presidential Electors Clause are the sources of a wide range of constitutional doctrines concerning federal elections. While Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, on its face, addresses only the meaning of “Legislature” in the Elections Clause and the validity of redistricting commissions, the Court’s broad reasoning sweeps much further. This Essay offers a first analysis of the “new” Elections Clause in the wake of this ruling.

The New Elections Clause, Michael T. Morley

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Is Stare Decisis Inconsistent With The Original Meaning Of The Constitution?: Exploring The Theoretical And Empirical Possibilities, James Cleith Phillips

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

For some time, a scholarly debate has raged over whether a commitment to the original meaning of the Constitution allows for the doctrine of stare decisis, whereby courts defer to precedent simply because it is precedent. This Essay explains the range of theoretical possibilities for this seemingly incompatible duo, as put forth by originalism’s leading scholars, and situates these various theories on a continuum. The Essay ends with a preview of the difficulties and possibilities that follow from the various empirical answers regarding the relationship between stare decisis and the Constitution at the Founding.

Standing Doctrine's State Action Problem, Seth Davis

Notre Dame Law Review

Something surprising happened in the 2013 marriage equality cases that did not involve striking down the Defense of Marriage Act. The Supreme Court discovered standing doctrine’s state action problem. In standing doctrine, as elsewhere, the law distinguishes private from governmental action. There are, simply put, different standing rules for state actors than for private litigants. How should the law sort state actors from private litigants for the purposes of standing? In Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Court held that Article III limits government standing to common law agents who owe fiduciary duties to the state. The Perry Court’s apparent concern was …

Why The Right To Elective Abortion Fails Casey'S Own Interest-Balancing Methodology—And Why It Matters, Stephen G. Gilles

Notre Dame Law Review

Casey adopted a new, interest-balancing framework for the right to elective abortion while preserving the core of that right. But by declining to address whether the right to elective abortion can be justified in interest-balancing terms, Casey opened the door to unduly stringent applications of the undue-burden standard and, no less importantly, to future extensions of the right. By ruling that the state’s interest in protecting pre-viable fetal life outweighs the woman’s interest in an elective abortion, while preserving that right on stare decisis grounds, the Court could ensure that the balance it struck in Casey—and that “was central …

The Curious Case Of Seminole Rock: Revisiting Judicial Deference To Agency Interpretations Of Their Ambiguous Regulations, Peter M. Torstensen Jr.

Notre Dame Law Review

Seminole Rock deference warrants reconsideration as it is based on questionable constitutional and pragmatic foundations. This Note argues that courts should provide a meaningful check on agency interpretations by engaging in de novo review of agency resolutions of regulatory ambiguities. Part I explores the development of the Seminole Rock doctrine, from its questionable doctrinal foundations and rapid expansion to the developing concerns regarding its continued validity. In addition, Part I explains the variety of forms that agency interpretations can take, including legal briefs, amicus briefs, and internal memoranda, and discusses their impact in expanding the scope of Seminole Rock deference. …

Resilience And Raisins: Partial Takings And Coastal Climate Change Adaptation, Joshua Ulan Galperin, Zaheer Tajani

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The increased need for government-driven coastal resilience projects will lead to a growing number of claims for “partial takings” of coastal property. Much attention has been paid to what actions constitute a partial taking, but there is less clarity about how to calculate just compensation for such takings, and when compensation should be offset by the value of benefits conferred to the property owner. While the U.S. Supreme Court has an analytically consistent line of cases on compensation for partial takings, it has repeatedly failed (most recently in Horne v. U.S. Department of Agriculture) to articulate a clear rule. The …

Keynote Address, Justice John Paul Stevens (Ret.)

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Constitutional Challenge To Teacher Tenure, Derek W. Black

Faculty Publications

In 2012, education reformers theorized a novel constitutional strategy to eliminate tenure. They argued that tenure leads to the retention of ineffective teachers, and that ineffective teaching deprives students of the constitutional right to education embedded in state constitutions. This theory immediately caught hold, with a California trial court striking down tenure in 2014 and litigation commencing in other states weeks thereafter.

The outcome of this litigation movement will determine both the future of the teaching profession and the scope of the constitutional right to education. To date, however, no high court or scholar has thoroughly analyzed the theory. This …