Constitutional Law Commons^™

Policing The Wombs Of The World's Women: The Mexico City Policy, Samantha Lalisan

Indiana Law Journal

This Comment argues that the Policy should be repealed because it undermines

firmly held First Amendment values and would be considered unconstitutional if

applied to domestic nongovernmental organizations (DNGOs). It proceeds in four

parts. Part I describes the inception of the Policy and contextualizes it among other

antiabortion policies that resulted as a backlash to the U.S. Supreme Court’s

landmark decision in Roe v. Wade. Part II explains the Policy’s actual effect on

FNGOs, particularly focusing on organizations based in Nepal and Peru, and argues

that the Policy undermines democratic processes abroad and fails to achieve its stated

objective: reducing …

Masthead

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Foreword, Wendy Melissa Hernandez

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

You Don’T Have To Pay The Troll Toll: Antitrust Violations Of Patent Assertion Entities And The Noerr-Pennington Doctrine “Sham Litigation” Exception, Katheryn M. Wenger

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

This Note discusses the implications of possible antitrust violations when Patent Assertion Entities (“PAEs”) enforce their vast patent portfolios against alleged infringers by forcing a license of the entire portfolio or threatening continuous and costly litigation. This Note analyzes this PAE conduct under antitrust laws, using Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Capital One Financial Corp. as an exemplar case study. Further, the Note explains that PAEs are not immune to antitrust counterclaims under the Noerr-Pennington doctrine because their anticompetitive conduct meets the standard for the “sham litigation” exception to the doctrine. Ultimately, this Note offers preventative solutions to this PAE …

Chevron As Construction, Lawrence B. Solum, Cass R. Sunstein

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In 1984, the Supreme Court declared that courts should uphold agency interpretations of ambiguous statutory provisions, so long as those interpretations are reasonable. The Chevron framework, as it is called, is now under serious pressure. Current debates can be both illuminated and softened with reference to an old distinction between interpretation on the one hand and construction on the other. In cases of interpretation, judges (or agencies) must ascertain the meaning of a statutory term. In cases of construction, judges (or agencies) must develop implementing principles or specify a statutory term. Chevron as construction is supported by powerful arguments; it …

From The Legal Literature: Highlighting The Failure Of Criminal Courts To Adequately Test Machine Evidence, Francesca Laguardia

Department of Justice Studies Faculty Scholarship and Creative Works

No abstract provided.

Abolishing Private Prisons: A Constitutional And Moral Imperative, André Douglas Pond Cummings, Robert Craig

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Mccleary V. State And The Washington State Supreme Court's Retention Of Jurisdiction—A Success Story For Washington Public Schools?, Jessica R. Burns

Seattle University Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

Thin And Thick Conceptions Of The Nineteenth Amendment Right To Vote And Congress's Power To Enforce It, Richard L. Hasen, Leah M. Litman

Articles

This Article, prepared for a Georgetown Law Journal symposium on the Nineteenth Amendment’s one-hundred-year anniversary, explores and defends a “thick” conception of the Nineteenth Amendment right to vote and Congress’s power to enforce it. A “thin” conception of the Nineteenth Amendment maintains that the Amendment merely prohibits states from enacting laws that prohibit women from voting once the state decides to hold an election. And a “thin” conception of Congress’s power to enforce the Nineteenth Amendment maintains that Congress may only supply remedies for official acts that violate the Amendment’s substantive guarantees. This Article argues the Nineteenth Amendment does more. …

Mempertanyakan Pancasila Sebagai Grundnorm: Suatu Refleksi Kritis Dalam Perspektif Fondasionalisme, E. Fernando M. Manullang

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

Legal scholars in Indonesia discuss whether Pancasila is grundnorm or not. Grundnorm according to Hans Kelsen is the basis for validity of legal norms. Kelsen is therefore considered a foundational scholar according to Luc J. Wintgens. Meanwhile, in the view of foundationalism, certain foundation can be accepted if such foundation becomes belief. Thus, saying that Pancasila is basic norm or not, in the view of foundationalism shall answer whether Pancasila is a belief or not. Instead of continuing the debates whether Pancasila is a grundnorm or not, this article instead takes the pre-debates stands, namely reflecting critically the question Pancasila …

June 27, 2020: Report On The Universe Is On Our Side, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Report on The Universe Is On Our Side“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Forensic Searches Of Electronic Devices And The Border Search Exception: Movement Toward Requirement For Particularized Suspicion, Marissa Pursel

Akron Law Review

Under current federal law, government agents at the national border have broad discretion to search a traveler seeking to enter or exit the United States. While these government agents would generally need a warrant to conduct the same search elsewhere, searches at the border do not require any degree of suspicion. The policy argument that protects this practice is national security, recognizing the border’s vulnerability to physical threats such as the transportation of contraband and dangerous weapons. Current federal policy, however, makes no distinction between the search of a traveler’s suitcase and the search of her smartphone. The Fourth and …

Democratic Legitimacy Under Conditions Of Severely Depressed Voter Turnout, James A. Gardner

Journal Articles

Due to the present pandemic, it seems increasingly likely that the 2020 general election in November will be held under conditions of unprecedented downward pressure on voter turnout. The possibility of severely depressed turnout for a highly consequentialpresidential election raises troubling questions of democratic legitimacy. Although voter turnout in the United States has historically been poor, low turnout is not usually thought to threaten the legitimacy of electoral processes when it results from voluntary abstention and is distributed unsystematically. Conversely, electoral legitimacy is often considered at risk when nonvoting is involuntary, especially when obstacles to voting fall systematically on specific …

The Meaning Of Federalism In A System Of Interstate Commerce: Free Trade Among The Several States, Donald J. Kochan

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

As states become dissatisfied with either the direction of federal policy or the

gridlock that seems like a barrier frustrating action, their disdain or impatience is

increasingly manifest in state legislative or regulatory efforts to reach big issues

normally reserved to federal resolution. Increasingly, such efforts to stake a position

on issues of national or international importance are testing the limits of state

autonomy within a system of federalism that includes robust protection for the free

flow of commerce among the several states.

This Essay provides the primary historical backdrop against which these

measures should be judged with a particular …

The Difference Of One Vote Or One Day: Reviewing The Demographics Of Florida’S Death Row After Hurst V. Florida, Melanie Kalmanson

University of Miami Law Review

As the federal appeals court with jurisdiction over Florida and Alabama—two leaders in capital punishment in the United States—the Eleventh Circuit reviews several claims each year related to capital punishment. Florida is home to one of the largest death row populations in the country. Thus, understanding Florida’s capital sentencing scheme is important for understanding capital punishment nationwide.

This Article analyzes the empirical demographics of Florida’s death row population and reviews how defendants are sentenced to death and ultimately executed in Florida. The analysis reveals that although age is not a factor upon which murder/manslaughter defendants are discriminated against in the …

South Dakota V. Wayfair: An Ill-Conceived Blow To The Free Flow Of Interstate Commerce, Revel Shinn Atkinson

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

For more than a century, brick-and-mortar retailers have been losing local customers—first with the rise of mail-order houses and then more acutely with the rapid growth of online retail. As a result, states have noticed a significant loss in sales tax revenue. While an equivalent amount of tax is typically still owed to the state in the form of a use tax, which is to be remitted to the state by the customer, because these taxes are not automatically collected at the time of the sale, customers have overwhelmingly elected not to pay them. In an effort to recover this …

June 21, 2020: Is Every White Person A Racist?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Is Every White Person a Racist?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Racism Is White People’S Fault. It’S Our Responsibility To End It, Bruce Ledewitz

Newspaper Columns

Collected biweekly contributions to the Pennsylvania Capital-Star, a nonpartisan, nonprofit news site.

June 20, 2020: White Racism Matters, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

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

Judicial Review And Governmental Bad Faith, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] This column is the third and final installment of a series considering some potential implications of June Medical Services v. Russo, a case involving a constitutional challenge to a Louisiana law regulating access to abortion services. The United States Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on March 4. A decision is expected shortly.

The first column sought to place June Medical Services in context by describing the history of constitutional abortion-rights litigation at the Supreme Court. The second explained what the case is likely to tell us about the respect the court will show to prior constitutional …

"Of Substantial Religious Importance": A Case For A Deferential Approach To The Ministerial Exception, Allison H. Pope

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note argues that, in order to remain consistent with the Religion Clauses’ protection of religious autonomy, civil courts must defer to the religious group’s determination of which of its employees play a role “of substantial religious importance” within the organization in carrying out its religious mission under its tenets, and are therefore “ministers,” rather than investigate and make that determination themselves. Part I provides background information on the First Amendment and an overview of the circuit court and Supreme Court decisions that laid the foundation for, built, adopted, and applied the ministerial exception as described in Hosanna-Tabor. Part …

A Different Kind Of Prisoner's Dilemma: The Right To The Free Exercise Of Religion For Incarcerated Persons, Daniel T. Judge

Notre Dame Law Review

Part I will lay the foundation for the constitutional right to freedom of religion in the United States. It will explain how the Framers understood the right in the lead up to, and at the time of, the ratification of the Free Exercise Clause as part of the Bill of Rights. Part I will also address more modern advances in religious liberty protections for prisoners before discussing two recent milestones: the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act and the Supreme Court’s decision in Holt v. Hobbs. Part II addresses the right to freedom of religion internationally. It begins …

Not Gill-Ty: Challenging And Providing A Workable Alternative To The Supreme Court's Gerrymandering Standing Analysis In Gill V. Whitford, Colin Neal

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Information Gathering Or Speech Creation: How To Think About A First Amendment Right To Record, Jared Mullen

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Understanding The Spirit Of The Constitution On Corruption: Emoluments, Impeachment, And The Primacy Of Political Virtue, Lea Mano

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Arbitrary Arbiters: Evaluating The Right To Be Informed Of Eligibility For Discretionary Relief In Removal Proceedings, Michael Jordan

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Kidnapping Reconsidered: Courts Merger Tests Inadequately Remedy The Inequities Which Developed From Kidnapping's Sensationalized And Racialized History, Samuel P. Newton

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Steps Toward Abolishing Capital Punishment: Incrementalism In The American Death Penalty, Melanie Kalmanson

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

While scholars seem united on the sentiment that abolition is the ultimate resting place for capital sentencing in the United States, their arguments vary as to how the system will reach that point. For example, Carol and Jordan Steiker argue that the systemic disarray of capital sentencing in the United States is a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s attempt to constitutionalize capital sentencing. This Article contends that the U.S. Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence that has developed since 1972, when the Court reset capital sentencing in Furman v. Georgia, has aided the Court in gradually narrowing capital punishment, as a …

The Bad News Of Good News Club: Obliterating The Wall Between Church & State, Kevin W. Connell

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

America's Newest Boogeyman For Deviant Teen Behavior: Violent Video Games And The First Amendment, Joseph C. Alfe, Grant D. Talabay

Pace Intellectual Property, Sports & Entertainment Law Forum

Are violent video games harming America’s youth? Is it possible a series of interconnected circuit boards can influence children (or even adults) to become, themselves, violent? If so, how should our society-- and government-- respond?

To properly answer this last query, violent video games must be viewed through the lens of the First Amendment. Simply put: do games depicting grotesque acts of depravity so profound as to negatively influence the psyche warrant the full constitutional protections ordinarily guaranteed under the mantle of free speech and expression? Are these guarantees without limit? If not, how far may the government go in …