Constitutional Law Commons^™

Attitudes About Attitudes, Michael J. Gerhardt

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

A Representative Democracy: An Unfulfilled Ideal For Citizens Of The District Of Columbia, Aaron E. Price Sr.

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Property As A Fundamental Constitutional Right? The German Example, Gregory S. Alexander

Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers

This article examines an apparent paradox in comparative constitutional law. Property rights are not treated as a fundamental right in American constitutional law; they are, however, under the Basic Law (i.e., constitution) of Germany, a social-welfare state that otherwise gives less weight to property. The article uses this apparent paradox as a vehicle for considering the different reasons why constitutions protect property. It explains the difference between the German and American constitutional treatment of property on the basis of the quite different approaches taken in the two systems to the purposes of constitutional protection of property.

Quirin Revisited, A. Christopher Bryant, Carl Tobias

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In November 2001 President George W. Bush promulgated an Executive Order, premised on Ex Parte Quirin, that authorized the establishment of military commissions as well as purported to eliminate whatever jurisdiction federal courts might have by statute and to deny federal court access to individuals prosecuted or detained for terrorism. This article finds that the profound growth of federal habeas corpus over the last sixty years and the quite narrow holding in Quirin's ultimate determination must guide contemporary application of the precedent. Also, it concludes that federal courts have power not only to assess military commissions' validity in the abstract …

The Export Clause, Erik M. Jensen

Faculty Publications

This article examines the origins and meaning of the Export Clause in Article I, section 9 of the United States Constitution, which provides that "[n]o Tax or duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."

Part I of the article considers the original understanding of the Export Clause, concluding that, without the Clause, the Constitution would not have been adopted. In light of the Export Clause's significance in the constitutional structure, Part II examines the Supreme Court's decisions in United States v. International Business Machines Corp., 517 U.S. 843 (1996) (IBM), and United States v. United States Shoe …

Two Sides Of A "Sargasso Sea": Successive Prosecution For The "Same Offence" In The United States And The United Kingdom, Lissa Griffin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article analyzes the U. S. constitutional law interpreting the concept of “same offence.” Included is a survey of the Supreme Court's attempts to interpret constitutional text in order to provide adequate protection for the underlying double jeopardy interest against vexatious reprosecutions, which have frequently produced inconsistent and illogical results. Part III of this article analyzes U.K. law relating to the concept of “same offence,” where the same narrow double jeopardy protection adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court is supplemented with a broad discretion to prevent unfair successive prosecution that constitutes an abuse of process. Part IV draws lessons from …

The Debate Over War Powers, Mark R. Shulman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Heart Of Federalism: Pretext Review Of Means-End Relationships, J. Randy Beck

Scholarly Works

Section I of this article seeks to correct a common scholarly misconception regarding the sort of pretext review envisioned by McCulloch v. Maryland. All students of McCulloch understand the decision to call for judicial review of the means-end relationship underlying a federal statute. But McCulloch also indicated that the Court would strike down legislation "should Congress, under the pretext of executing its powers, pass laws for the accomplishment of objects not entrusted to the government." Various constitutional scholars construe this pretext passage to contemplate a second inquiry--separate from the Court's scrutiny of means-end relationships--into whether the legislative motive behind a …

Nearest To Legitimacy: Justice White And Strict Rational Basis Scrutiny, Michael Herz

Articles

No abstract provided.

Harris, Ring, And The Future Of Relevant Conduct Sentencing, Kyron J. Huigens

Articles

No abstract provided.

Choice Programs And Market-Based Separationism, Paul E. Salamanca

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The Supreme Court's recent decision in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris appears to clear the way for a wide variety of educational and charitable choice plans. In this decision, the Court upheld against Establishment Cause Challenge a formally neutral school choice program that encompassed a wide variety of options in the public and private sector, including private sectarian schools. The Court reasoned that, when the government makes aid available to a broad class of recipients without regard to their religious or non-religious affiliation, and when the recipients have a genuine choice as to whether to obtain that aid from a religious or …

"Seperation": From Epithet To Constitutional Norm, Marci A. Hamilton

Articles

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law, Robin Jean Davis, Louis J. Palmer Jr.

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Religion, The Rule Of Law, And The Good Of The Whole: A View From The Clergy, Marci A. Hamilton

Articles

No abstract provided.

Entrance, Voice And Exit: The Constitutional Bounds Of The Right Of Association, Evelyn Brody

All Faculty Scholarship

Despite the central role of organized groups as intermediary bodies in American society, the constitutional right of association is surprisingly recent and limited. As the Supreme Court struggles to define the bounds of 'the' freedom of association, it is time to take a critical look at a difficult set of questions. First, many private organizations engage in various types of selection criteria, but what subjects the Jaycees to State anti-discrimination laws but insulates the Boy Scouts of America? Second, the typical American nonprofit organization is a corporation that lacks both shareholders and members, so are there any 'associates' whose rights …

Extraterritoriality And Political Heterogeneity In American Federalism, Mark D. Rosen

All Faculty Scholarship

It is commonly understood that as a matter of federal law, states' substantive policies may diverge in respect of those matters that are not violative of the United States Constitution. As a practical matter, however, what degree of political heterogeneity among states is possible vis-a-vis substantive policies that are not unconstitutional? The answer to the question turns in large part on whether states, if they so choose, can regulate their citizens even when they are out-of-state. If they cannot, citizens can bypass their home state’s laws by simply traveling to a more legally permissive state to do there what is …

The Radical Possibility Of Limited Community-Based Interpretation Of The Constitution, Mark D. Rosen

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores a radical method under the U.S. Constitution for devolving extraordinary political power to select communities. The United States Constitution places limitations on the exercise of public power by sub-federal polities. When insular groups seek to exercise public power to govern themselves, however, there may be special constitutional limitations that are operative - doctrines that afford their local governments more options in the exercise of power than ordinary state and local governments enjoy. The Article shows that Congress may grant the communities the authority to construe designated provisions of the United States Constitution insofar as the provisions apply …

The Law: Defending Congress’S Interests In Court: How Lawmakers And The President Bargain Over Department Of Justice Representation, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

In understanding the willingness of government lawyers to defend the constitutionality of federal statutes, this article will explain why presidents rarely make use of their powers under the Constitution (allowing the president to refuse to defend laws he finds unconstitutional) and under federal law (placing the control of most government litigation with the attorney general). Attention will be paid both to how Department of Justice lawyers enhance their power by defending federal statutes and to how Congress, if need be, can pressure the department to bow to lawmaker preferences. In consequence, when the president refuses to defend a statute, courts …

Our Supermajoritarian Constitution, John O. Mcginnis, Michael B. Rappaport

Articles

No abstract provided.

Free Speech Rationales After September 11th: The First Amendment In Post-World Trade Center America, Marin R. Scordato, Paula A. Monopoli

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Legality And Constitutionality Of The President's Authority To Initiate An Invasion Of Iraq, Mark R. Shulman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

What To Do With Bin Laden And Al Qaeda Terrorists?: A Qualified Defense Of Military Commissions And United States Policy On Detainees At Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Kenneth Anderson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This article, published in a special post 9-11 issue of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, offers a defense of the view that terrorists such as Osama Bin Laden should be tried, if captured, outside of regular US civilian courts and in some form of military commission.

The article argues that terrorists should be seen as criminals as well as enemies of the United States. Criminals who are simply deviants from the domestic social order are properly dealt with within the constitutionally constituted civilian court structure. Enemies who are not also criminals - legal combatants - are properly …

Straw Polls, Daniel B. Rodriguez

University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series

A key measure of the democratic quality of a political community is how its members vote. The design and implementation of voting arrangements can illuminate the nature, purposes, and even potential of a community of citizens. Voting is, at the very least, used to sort out and implement preferences. Voting processes help in sorting out winners from losers and thereby provide a presumptively fair method for the implementation of public policy. At the same time, voting in a democratic policy is a coercive act. Voters are not merely expressing preferences; they are acting in order to transform their preferences into …

Free Speech Rationales After September 11th: The First Amendment In Post-World Trade Center America, Marin Roger Scordato

Scholarly Articles

The tragic events of September 11th generated numerous proposals for greater security measures and increased police powers that might, if implemented, constrict the customary scope of free speech in the United States. Legitimate concerns for internal security have placed increased pressures on traditional constitutional protections for expressive activity. It is against this backdrop that this article presents a careful examination of the basic rationales for adopting constitutional level protections for free speech. The article analyzes the nature of, and many of the conflicts among, the traditional rationales for a constitutional right of free expression. It also suggests that much of …

On Revolution And Wetland Regulations, Michael J. Gerhardt

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Washington Supreme Court Upholds State Anti-Spamming Law, Nathan B. Oman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Popular Sovereignty And The Electoral College, John O. Mcginnis

Articles

No abstract provided.

Solving The Apprendi Puzzle, Kyron Huigens

Articles

No abstract provided.

Presidential Review As Constitutional Restoration, John O. Mcginnis

Articles

No abstract provided.

Corrective Justice And Constitutional Torts, Bernard P. Dauenhauer, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Tort liability in the private realm may be understood as "an instrument aimed...at deterrence...[and] a way of achieving corrective justice between the parties." Following the common law model, the Supreme Court has borrowed this normative framework for constitutional torts, ruling that the aims of liability for damages are to vindicate constitutional rights and to deter constitutional violations. A recent article by Daryl Levinson takes issue with this approach. Levinson argues that the superficial similarities between public torts and private torts conceal real differences, to which neither the Court nor scholars have paid adequate attention. The main point of his article, …