Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- First Amendment (102)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (97)
- Supreme Court of the United States (93)
- Criminal Law (90)
- Law and Philosophy (90)
-
- Law and Society (90)
- Law and Politics (78)
- Legal History (77)
- State and Local Government Law (74)
- Courts (71)
- Criminal Procedure (64)
- Fourteenth Amendment (59)
- Administrative Law (54)
- Judges (45)
- Human Rights Law (42)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (42)
- Jurisprudence (40)
- Legislation (40)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (39)
- Jurisdiction (38)
- Litigation (37)
- Immigration Law (33)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (33)
- Law and Gender (32)
- President/Executive Department (32)
- Civil Procedure (29)
- Health Law and Policy (29)
- International Law (28)
- Institution
-
- Duquesne University (74)
- William & Mary Law School (51)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (35)
- Duke Law (28)
- Notre Dame Law School (28)
-
- Columbia Law School (25)
- UC Law SF (24)
- Brooklyn Law School (21)
- University of Michigan Law School (21)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (21)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (20)
- Cornell University Law School (18)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (18)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (17)
- Seattle University School of Law (17)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (16)
- The University of Akron (16)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (16)
- Fordham Law School (15)
- Mitchell Hamline School of Law (15)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (15)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (14)
- Universitas Indonesia (14)
- University of Colorado Law School (14)
- Georgetown University Law Center (13)
- American University Washington College of Law (12)
- Pace University (12)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (12)
- St. John's University School of Law (11)
- University of Arkansas, Fayetteville (11)
- Keyword
-
- Philosophy (73)
- Theology (73)
- American Religious Democracy (64)
- Hallowed Secularism (64)
- Constitution (63)
-
- Constitutional law (62)
- Constitutional Law (57)
- Law (44)
- Politics (43)
- First Amendment (28)
- Civil rights (25)
- Supreme Court (25)
- Federalism (21)
- Originalism (21)
- History (19)
- Due process (18)
- Religion (18)
- Supreme court (18)
- Discrimination (15)
- Equal protection (15)
- Fourteenth Amendment (15)
- Immigration (15)
- United States (15)
- Fourth Amendment (14)
- Free speech (14)
- Privacy (14)
- Separation of powers (14)
- Government (13)
- Court (12)
- Fifth Amendment (12)
- Publication
-
- Faculty Scholarship (75)
- Hallowed Secularism (64)
- Notre Dame Law Review (25)
- UC Law Constitutional Quarterly (23)
- Faculty Publications (22)
-
- William & Mary Law Review (20)
- Articles (18)
- Touro Law Review (16)
- Mitchell Hamline Law Review (15)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (14)
- ConLawNOW (13)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (13)
- Cardozo Law Review (12)
- Northwestern University Law Review (12)
- Arkansas Law Review (11)
- Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar (11)
- Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan (11)
- Scholarly Works (11)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (11)
- FIU Law Review (10)
- Fordham Law Review (10)
- Catholic University Law Review (9)
- Marquette Law Review (9)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (9)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (9)
- Law Faculty Publications (8)
- Scholarly Articles (8)
- Seattle University Law Review (8)
- Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press (7)
- Cleveland State Law Review (7)
- Publication Type
Articles 481 - 510 of 901
Full-Text Articles in Constitutional Law
March 17, 2019: The Response To My Anti-Court-Packing Message, Bruce Ledewitz
March 17, 2019: The Response To My Anti-Court-Packing Message, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “The Response to My anti-Court-Packing Message“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
Whole Woman’S Health V. Hellerstedt, Kelly Lynn Claxton
Whole Woman’S Health V. Hellerstedt, Kelly Lynn Claxton
Ohio Northern University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Fisher V. University Of Texas At Austin, Christopher M. Calpin
Fisher V. University Of Texas At Austin, Christopher M. Calpin
Ohio Northern University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Thornton & The Pursuit Of The American Presidency, Jackson C. Smith J.D., Llm
Thornton & The Pursuit Of The American Presidency, Jackson C. Smith J.D., Llm
Ohio Northern University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Merging Offensive-Speech Cases With Viewpoint-Discrimination Principles: The Immediate Impact Of Matal V. Tam On Two Strands Of First Amendment Jurisprudence, Clay Calvert
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
This Article examines flaws with the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2017 decision in Matal v. Tam that equated giving offense with viewpoint discrimination. Already, the Court’s language in Tam that “giving offense is a viewpoint” is being cited by multiple lower courts. This Article argues, however, that giving offense is not synonymous with viewpoint discrimination. This Article contends that the Court in Tam conflated two distinct strands of First Amendment jurisprudence—namely, its offensive-speech cases with principles against viewpoint discrimination. The Article proposes two possible paths forward to help courts better clarify when a case such as Tam should be analyzed as …
State Empowerment And The Compact Clause, James F. Blumstein, Thomas J. Cheeseman
State Empowerment And The Compact Clause, James F. Blumstein, Thomas J. Cheeseman
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
No abstract provided.
Epilogue: From Too Tall To Trim And Small, Mark A. Drumbl
Epilogue: From Too Tall To Trim And Small, Mark A. Drumbl
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
No abstract provided.
Scrutinizing Anticompetitive State Regulations Through Constitutional And Antitrust Lenses, Daniel A. Crane
Scrutinizing Anticompetitive State Regulations Through Constitutional And Antitrust Lenses, Daniel A. Crane
William & Mary Law Review
State and local regulations that anticompetitively favor certain producers to the detriment of consumers are a pervasive problem in our economy. Their existence is explicable by a variety of structural features—including asymmetry between consumer and producer interests, cost externalization, and institutional and political factors entrenching incumbent technologies. Formulating legal tools to combat such economic parochialism is challenging in the post-Lochner world, where any move toward heightened judicial review of economic regulation poses the perceived threat of a return to economic substantive due process. This Article considers and compares two potential tools for reviewing such regulations—a constitutional principle against anticompetitive parochialism …
Religious Freedom Through Market Freedom: The Sherman Act And The Marketplace For Religion, Barak D. Richman
Religious Freedom Through Market Freedom: The Sherman Act And The Marketplace For Religion, Barak D. Richman
William & Mary Law Review
In prior work, I examined certain restraints by private religious organizations and concluded that the First Amendment did not immunize these organizations from antitrust liability. In short, the First Amendment did not preempt enforcing the Sherman Act against certain religious monopolies or cartels.
This Article offers a stronger argument: First Amendment values demand antitrust enforcement. Because American religious freedoms, enshrined in the Constitution and reflected in American history, are quintessentially exercised when decentralized communities create their own religious expression, the First Amendment’s religion clauses are best exemplified by a proverbial marketplace for religions. Any effort to stifle a market organization …
Parker V. Brown, The Eleventh Amendment, And Anticompetitive State Regulation, William H. Page, John E. Lopatka
Parker V. Brown, The Eleventh Amendment, And Anticompetitive State Regulation, William H. Page, John E. Lopatka
William & Mary Law Review
The Parker v. Brown (or “state action”) doctrine and the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution impose different limits on antitrust suits challenging anticompetitive state regulation. The Supreme Court has developed these two versions of state sovereign immunity separately, and lower courts usually apply the immunities independently of each other (even in the same cases) without explaining their relationship. Nevertheless, the Court has derived the two immunities from the same principle of sovereign immunity, so it is worth considering why and how they differ, and what the consequences of the differences are for antitrust policy. The state action immunity is based …
Accommodating Competition: Harmonizing National Constitutional And Antitrust Commitments, Jonathan B. Baker
Accommodating Competition: Harmonizing National Constitutional And Antitrust Commitments, Jonathan B. Baker
William & Mary Law Review
This Article shows how the norm supporting governmental action to protect and foster competitive markets was harmonized with economic rights to contract and property during the 19th century, and with the development of the social safety net during the 20th century. It explains why the Constitution, as understood today, does not check the erosion of the entrenched but threatened national commitment to assuring competitive markets.
Antitrust As Speech Control, Hillary Greene, Dennis A. Yao
Antitrust As Speech Control, Hillary Greene, Dennis A. Yao
William & Mary Law Review
Antitrust law, at times, dictates who, when, and about what people can and cannot speak. It would seem then that the First Amendment might have something to say about those constraints. And it does, though perhaps less directly and to a lesser degree than one might expect. This Article examines the interface between those regimes while recasting antitrust thinking in terms of speech control.
Our review of the antitrust-First Amendment legal landscape focuses on the role of speech control. It reveals that while First Amendment issues are explicitly addressed relatively infrequently within antitrust decisions that is, in part, because certain …
The (Limited) Constitutional Right To Compete In An Occupation, Rebecca Haw Allensworth
The (Limited) Constitutional Right To Compete In An Occupation, Rebecca Haw Allensworth
William & Mary Law Review
Is there a constitutional right to compete in an occupation? The “right to earn a living” movement, gaining steam in policy circles and winning some battles in the lower courts, says so. Advocates for this right say that the right to compete in an occupation stands on equal footing with our most sacred constitutional rights such as the right to be free from racial discrimination. This Article takes a different view, arguing that while there is a limited constitutional right to compete in an occupation, it is—and should be—weaker than these advocates claim. Some state licensing laws run afoul of …
“Competition Policy In Its Broadest Sense:” Michael Pertschuk’S Chairmanship Of The Federal Trade Commission 1977-1981, William E. Kovacic
“Competition Policy In Its Broadest Sense:” Michael Pertschuk’S Chairmanship Of The Federal Trade Commission 1977-1981, William E. Kovacic
William & Mary Law Review
In the late 1960s and through the 1970s, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) undertook an ambitious program of reforms. Among other measures, the agency expanded the focus of antitrust enforcement to address economic concentration, including the use of Section 5 of the FTC Act to restructure dominant firms and oligopolies. In many ways Michael Pertschuk, who chaired the agency from 1977 to 1981, became the symbol of the FTC’s efforts to stretch the boundaries of antitrust policy—to pursue a conception of “competition policy in its broadest sense.” Despite a number of valuable accomplishments, the FTC achieved relatively few litigation successes, …
Antitrust And The Politics Of State Action, Thomas B. Nachbar
Antitrust And The Politics Of State Action, Thomas B. Nachbar
William & Mary Law Review
In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners, the Court refused to exempt the board from the second element of Parker immunity—active supervision by the state—because the Board was made up largely of “active market participants.” This Article argues that the “active market participant” rule laid out in North Carolina State Board, while intuitively appealing, ignores important political values represented by antitrust law, values most evident in the context of state action immunity. By focusing on the potential market harm from self-interested regulators, the Court ignored a series of political harms inherent in the structure of the North …
Stepping Into The Breach: State Constitutions As A Vehicle For Advancing Rights-Based Climate Litigation, Benjamin T. Sharp
Stepping Into The Breach: State Constitutions As A Vehicle For Advancing Rights-Based Climate Litigation, Benjamin T. Sharp
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
The perceived failures of the political branches to mitigate climate change have led climate change activists to seek alternative means to achieve reductions in greenhouse gas emissions; many are turning to litigation. The claims in these cases rely on a variety of legal bases, but this Note will focus on those cases claiming that governments’ failures to prevent climate change amount to violations of the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Rights-based climate change litigation is likely to increase in the future. Among the most prominent of the surviving rights-based cases is Juliana v. …
Timbs V. Indiana: The Constitutionality Of Civil Forfeiture When Used By States, Kris Fernandez
Timbs V. Indiana: The Constitutionality Of Civil Forfeiture When Used By States, Kris Fernandez
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
In Timbs v. Indiana, Petitioner Tyson Timbs asks the Supreme Court to incorporate the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment against the states, providing extra protection for individuals against fines and forfeiture that are “grossly disproportionate” to the harm caused. The decision to incorporate the Excessive Fines Clause and the guidelines for applying that incorporation would have a substantial effect on governments, which often rely on the revenue gained from forfeiture. This commentary argues that the Supreme Court of the United States should incorporate the Excessive Fines Clause based on historical support of an individual’s right to be …
Bucklew V. Precythe: The Power Of Assumptions And Lethal Injection, Renata Gomez
Bucklew V. Precythe: The Power Of Assumptions And Lethal Injection, Renata Gomez
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
Once again, the Supreme Court of the United States has an opportunity to determine the extent to which death-row inmates can bring as-applied challenges to the states’ method of execution and prevent possible botched executions. In Bucklew v. Precythe, the Court will confront the assumptions that the execution team is equipped to handle any execution and that the procedure will go as planned. Additionally, the Court will determine whether the standard articulated in Glossip v. Gross, which requires inmates asserting facial challenges to the states’ method of execution to plead a readily available alternative method of execution, further …
Swords Into Plowshares: Nuclear Power And The Atomic Energy Act’S Preemptive Scope In Virginia Uranium, Inc. V. Warren, Francis X. Liesman
Swords Into Plowshares: Nuclear Power And The Atomic Energy Act’S Preemptive Scope In Virginia Uranium, Inc. V. Warren, Francis X. Liesman
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar
This commentary highlights the considerations the Supreme Court should attend to in its decision in Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren, both in construing § 2021(k) and in reviewing the Fourth Circuit’s reading of precedent from other circuits and from the Court’s prior opinions. Specifically, the Court must clarify how to interpret § 2021(k)’s activities component in concert with its “for purposes” language and determine the importance of the particular underlying activity the state seeks to regulate in a preemption analysis under the Atomic Energy Act. Clarification is necessary to ensure that courts properly effectuate Congress’s intent in regulating nuclear …
No Indeterminate Sentencing Without Parole, Katherine Puzauskas, Kevin Morrow
No Indeterminate Sentencing Without Parole, Katherine Puzauskas, Kevin Morrow
Ohio Northern University Law Review
This article looks critically at the indeterminate sentencing system that survived after the elimination of parole in Arizona in 1993. It begins by exploring the purpose and history of indeterminate sentencing and parole as well as its earliest constitutional challenges and eventual decline. Next it compares two commonly confused forms of “release”: parole and executive clemency. The article then examines the three types of defendants affected by indeterminate sentences without parole: death row defendants denied parole eligibility instructions at trial, defendants sentenced with parole at trial, and defendants whose plea agreement includes parole. Finally, the article argues that without parole, …
Qualified Tenure: Presidential Removal Of The Fbi Director, Leah A. Hamlin J.D.
Qualified Tenure: Presidential Removal Of The Fbi Director, Leah A. Hamlin J.D.
Ohio Northern University Law Review
In 1976, Congress passed a bill instituting a ten-year term for the FBI director, ostensibly to provide the head of the nation’s foremost law enforcement agency some measure of independence from political pressure that could improperly influence investigations. This note explores the impact of the tenured term on the president’s power to remove the director at will for a personal reason, a political reason, or no reason at all. Although the Supreme Court has never directly addressed the president’s power with respect to the FBI director, this note concludes that a statutory term alone does not restrict the president’s ability …
Punishing Poverty: Robinson & The Criminal Cash Bond System, Lauren Bennett
Punishing Poverty: Robinson & The Criminal Cash Bond System, Lauren Bennett
Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice
The current cash bail system works in a way that punishes poverty. In Robinson v. California, the Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment to punish an individual for a status or condition. Poverty is a status. The cash bail system is unconstitutional under Robinson and the Eighth Amendment because it punishes the status of poverty. Similar to drug addiction, poverty “may be contracted innocently or involuntarily or it might even take hold from the moment of a person’s birth.” Kalief Browder had no control over his family’s financial position. Yet, this financial position kept him …
Dogs Of War Get A New Lease On Life: Why The Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act Violates The Eighth Amendment In Light Of United States V. Slatten, Michael D. Stinnett-Kassoff
Dogs Of War Get A New Lease On Life: Why The Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act Violates The Eighth Amendment In Light Of United States V. Slatten, Michael D. Stinnett-Kassoff
Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice
The United States has relied on Private Military Firms (PMFs) extensively to carry out its numerous overseas military missions since the end of the Cold War. Civilians and contractors have always had a place in American wars, even during the American Revolution and beyond. But the recent American incursions into Afghanistan and Iraq brought an unprecedented number of private contractors into the forefront of these conflict zones, the discussions surrounding them, and the legal questions arising from their ashes. Particularly, private contractors in Iraq seemed to be operating in a legal grey area—they clearly were not soldiers, and they clearly …
The Role Of Deference In Adjudicating The Military Transgender Policy, Daca And The Census, Peter Margulies
The Role Of Deference In Adjudicating The Military Transgender Policy, Daca And The Census, Peter Margulies
Law Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
March 10, 2019: Best Column Even By Thomas Friedman, Bruce Ledewitz
March 10, 2019: Best Column Even By Thomas Friedman, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “Best Column Even by Thomas Friedman“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
March 7, 2019: Network Message Endorses Nihilism, Bruce Ledewitz
March 7, 2019: Network Message Endorses Nihilism, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “Network Message Endorses Nihilism“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
At The Intersection Of Due Process And Equal Protection: Expanding The Range Of Protected Interests, Vincent J. Samar
At The Intersection Of Due Process And Equal Protection: Expanding The Range Of Protected Interests, Vincent J. Samar
Catholic University Law Review
Are the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses interconnected? Justice Kennedy in Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court case holding the fundamental right to marry includes the right to a same-sex marriage, stated that they are profoundly connected in that each clause “may be instructive as to the meaning and reach of the other.” But exactly what instruction each doctrine might afford the other, Justice Kennedy did not say. An earlier Supreme Court decision, Plyler v. Doe, also suggested a connection, when the Court held unconstitutional a Texas statute baring funding for the education of undocumented children. But …
Deference Vs. Evidence: An Exploration Of The Appropriate Application Of Putative Benefits To The Pike Balancing Test, Nathan Gniewek
Deference Vs. Evidence: An Exploration Of The Appropriate Application Of Putative Benefits To The Pike Balancing Test, Nathan Gniewek
Catholic University Law Review
The Supreme Court has long done battle with the intricacies and subtle implications of the interplay between state and federal power with regard to commerce. Although the Supreme Court crafted the Pike balancing test in 1970, that test has proven a jurisprudential headache due to a lack of a solid definition of the key phrase “putative benefits.”
Since the Supreme Court decided Pike v. Bruce Church, circuit courts have been unable to apply the term consistently when making use of the Pike test, generating a massive circuit split. This Comment teases out the differing treatment of states’ burden of …
The White House And Congress Are Heading For A Collision. Who Will Win?, Katherine A. Shaw
The White House And Congress Are Heading For A Collision. Who Will Win?, Katherine A. Shaw
Online Publications
With the 116th Congress up and running, President Trump is facing meaningful congressional oversight for the first time. On Monday, the House Judiciary Committee embarked on a major investigative mission, sending letters to 81 witnesses seeking documents and testimony relating to possible “obstruction of justice, public corruption and other abuses of power” by Mr. Trump and his administration.
But the White House shows no signs of rolling over. It has indicated for months that it is prepared to assert the president’s executive privilege to keep congressional investigators from gathering information about Mr. Trump — including his conversations with high-level advisers. …
Public Interest Litigation & Women’S Rights: Cases From Nepal & India, Jordan E. Stevenson
Public Interest Litigation & Women’S Rights: Cases From Nepal & India, Jordan E. Stevenson
2019 Symposium
As a complex, diverse and dynamic region with diverging, constantly changing constitutional and jurisprudential contexts as well as lasting legacies of patriarchy, South Asia’s traditions of public interest litigation are one of the most well-studied institutions by Western audiences due to their contradictory progressive and innovative nature. Particularly in India, where public interest litigation gives ordinary citizens extraordinary access to the highest courts of justice, questions have been raised as to the effectiveness of public interest litigation as a tool to address gender disparities across the region. Although Supreme Court justices have been a key ally in eliminating legal barriers …