Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Fourteenth Amendment (191)
- Criminal Procedure (122)
- Courts (114)
- Criminal Law (108)
- Supreme Court of the United States (103)
-
- State and Local Government Law (100)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (91)
- Administrative Law (47)
- Judges (46)
- Jurisprudence (43)
- Legislation (41)
- Legal History (36)
- Civil Procedure (33)
- First Amendment (33)
- Jurisdiction (33)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (33)
- Law and Society (33)
- Human Rights Law (31)
- Litigation (31)
- Law and Race (29)
- Property Law and Real Estate (27)
- Fourth Amendment (25)
- Evidence (23)
- Health Law and Policy (22)
- Civil Law (21)
- Immigration Law (21)
- Law and Politics (18)
- Family Law (17)
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (142)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (126)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (44)
- The University of Akron (26)
- University of Colorado Law School (21)
-
- Columbia Law School (20)
- Pepperdine University (19)
- Florida State University College of Law (18)
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (18)
- University of Kentucky (17)
- Cleveland State University (15)
- University of Georgia School of Law (15)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (13)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (12)
- BLR (11)
- Georgetown University Law Center (11)
- University of Maine School of Law (11)
- Roger Williams University (10)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (10)
- Fordham Law School (9)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (9)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (8)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (8)
- American University Washington College of Law (7)
- Cornell University Law School (6)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (6)
- St. Mary's University (6)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (6)
- University of Baltimore Law (5)
- University of Washington School of Law (5)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (109)
- Touro Law Review (109)
- Faculty Scholarship (36)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (30)
- Scholarly Works (25)
-
- Akron Law Review (24)
- Articles (18)
- Publications (18)
- Kentucky Law Journal (15)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (15)
- Florida State University Law Review (14)
- Cleveland State Law Review (12)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (11)
- ExpressO (11)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (11)
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (10)
- Maine Law Review (10)
- Faculty Articles (8)
- Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (8)
- Fordham Urban Law Journal (7)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (7)
- Pepperdine Law Review (7)
- Scholarly Articles (7)
- Faculty Publications (6)
- Northwestern University Law Review (6)
- American University Law Review (5)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (5)
- Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law (5)
- Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity (5)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (5)
- Publication Type
Articles 271 - 300 of 706
Full-Text Articles in Constitutional Law
Special Populations: Mobilization For Change
Special Populations: Mobilization For Change
Touro Law Review
This Article is based on a transcript of a break-out discussion which took place at An Obvious Truth: Creating an Action Blueprint for a Civil Right to Counsel in New York State, held at Touro Law Center, Central Islip, New York, in March 2008. The discussion was moderated by Karen L. Nicolson, Michael Williams, and Toby Golick.
This Article assesses the needs of various special populations and the possible strategies and solutions to create change through enacting a civil right to counsel. The Article is intended to capture information and viewpoints of the people who participated in the break-out discussion …
Gideon Meets Goldberg: The Case For A Qualified Right To Counsel In Welfare Hearings, Stephen Loffredo, Don Friedman
Gideon Meets Goldberg: The Case For A Qualified Right To Counsel In Welfare Hearings, Stephen Loffredo, Don Friedman
Touro Law Review
In Goldberg v. Kelly, the Supreme Court held that welfare recipients have a right under the Due Process Clause to notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard before the state may terminate assistance. However, the Court stopped short of holding due process requires states to appoint counsel to represent claimants at these constitutionally mandated hearings. As a result, in the vast majority of administrative hearings involving welfare benefits, claimants- desperately poor, and often with little formal education- must appear pro se while trained advocates represent the government. Drawing on the theory of underenforced constitutional norms, first articulated by Dean …
Sheltering Counsel: Towards A Right To A Lawyer In Eviction Proceedings, Raymond H. Brescia
Sheltering Counsel: Towards A Right To A Lawyer In Eviction Proceedings, Raymond H. Brescia
Touro Law Review
This Article provides an overview of the current arguments presented by advocates who seek to establish a right to counsel for indigent tenants in eviction proceedings and assesses the strength of those arguments in the current political, social, and economic milieu. It is beyond question that the overwhelming majority of low-income tenants are unrepresented in proceedings in which their homes are in jeopardy and having counsel in such proceedings often prevents eviction and homelessness. Preventing those evictions reduces the human cost of homelessness, saves government substantial money by not having to provide shelter to the homeless, and preserves the stock …
Keynote Address: The Evolution And Importance Of Creating A Civil Right To Counsel, Wade Henderson
Keynote Address: The Evolution And Importance Of Creating A Civil Right To Counsel, Wade Henderson
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Due Process; A Detached Judge; And Enemy Combatants, Julian Mann Iii
Due Process; A Detached Judge; And Enemy Combatants, Julian Mann Iii
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
In the landmark administrative law decision of Goldberg v. Kelly, Justice Brennan stated that an “impartial decision maker is essential” to procedural due process. As a corollary, in the more recent decision of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Justice O'Connor stated that “due process requires a neutral and a detached judge in the first instance.” Thus, the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution require that the essential element of neutrality remain an integral part of any administrative hearing. There can be no departure from this fundamental guarantee of constitutional due process for the administrative hearings …
The Right To Counsel For Indians Accused Of Crime: A Tribal And Congressional Imperative, Barbara L. Creel
The Right To Counsel For Indians Accused Of Crime: A Tribal And Congressional Imperative, Barbara L. Creel
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Native American Indians charged in tribal court criminal proceedings are not entitled to court appointed defense counsel. Under well-settled principles of tribal sovereignty, Indian tribes are not bound by Fifth Amendment due process guarantees or Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Instead, they are bound by the procedural protections established by Congress in the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968. Under the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA), Indian defendants have the right to counsel at their own expense. This Article excavates the historical background of the lack of counsel in the tribal court arena and exposes the myriad problems that it …
Watch Your Step: Recovery For Inmate Slip And Fall - Rodriguez V. City Of New York, Brittany A. Fiorenza
Watch Your Step: Recovery For Inmate Slip And Fall - Rodriguez V. City Of New York, Brittany A. Fiorenza
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Sanctity Of The Attorney-Client Relationship – Undermined By The Federal Interpretation Of The Right To Counsel - People V. Borukhova, Tara Laterza
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Mistreating A Symptom: The Legitimizing Of Mandatory, Indefinite Commitment Of Insanity Acquittees - Jones V. United States, Paul S. Avilla
Mistreating A Symptom: The Legitimizing Of Mandatory, Indefinite Commitment Of Insanity Acquittees - Jones V. United States, Paul S. Avilla
Pepperdine Law Review
At the end of the 1982 term, in Jones v. United States, the United States Supreme Court upheld a District of Columbia statute requiring the automatic and indefinite commitment of persons acquitted by reason of insanity. While under the D.C. statute the acquittee is periodically given the opportunity to gain release, the practice of involuntarily confining someone who has been acquitted raises serious due process and equal protection issues. This note examines the Court's analysis of these issues, focusing on a comparison of the elements necessary for an insanity defense with the showing required by the due process clause for …
Condominium Associations: Living Under The Due Process Shadow, Brian L. Weakland
Condominium Associations: Living Under The Due Process Shadow, Brian L. Weakland
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Unwed Father's Custody Claim In California: When Does The Parental Preference Doctrine Apply?, Jeffrey S. Boyd
The Unwed Father's Custody Claim In California: When Does The Parental Preference Doctrine Apply?, Jeffrey S. Boyd
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Code And The Constitution: Fifth Amendment Limits On The Debtor's Discharge In Bankruptcy, Nicholas A. Franke
The Code And The Constitution: Fifth Amendment Limits On The Debtor's Discharge In Bankruptcy, Nicholas A. Franke
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Constitutionality Of The Federal Sentencing Reform Act After Mistretta V. United States, Charles R. Eskridge Iii
The Constitutionality Of The Federal Sentencing Reform Act After Mistretta V. United States, Charles R. Eskridge Iii
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Introduction: Persecution Through Prosecution: Revisiting Touro Law Center’S Conference In Paris On The Dreyfus Affair And The Leo Frank Trial, Rodger D. Citron
Introduction: Persecution Through Prosecution: Revisiting Touro Law Center’S Conference In Paris On The Dreyfus Affair And The Leo Frank Trial, Rodger D. Citron
Touro Law Review
This piece provides the introduction for the Dreyfus affair. It gives a brief overview of the actual Dreyfus affair and outlines the articles in this volume.
Perry V. New Hampshire: Abandoning The Supreme Court's Fundamental Concern With Eyewitness Reliability, Shaun Gates
Perry V. New Hampshire: Abandoning The Supreme Court's Fundamental Concern With Eyewitness Reliability, Shaun Gates
Maryland Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Virtue Of Obscurity, Colin Starger
The Virtue Of Obscurity, Colin Starger
All Faculty Scholarship
The critics have panned Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion in United States v. Windsor. Supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage have together bemoaned what may be called Kennedy’s “doctrinal obscurity” in Windsor. Doctrinal obscurity describes the opinion’s failure to justify striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) using any discernable accepted test for substantive due process or equal protection. Specifically, Kennedy does not ask whether DOMA burdens a right “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition,” nor does he identify sexual orientation as a suspect or semi-suspect classification, nor does he subject DOMA to explicit rational …
Brady, Arkansas Rule 17.1, And Disclosure Of Scientific Evidence And Expert Opinion, J. Thomas Sullivan
Brady, Arkansas Rule 17.1, And Disclosure Of Scientific Evidence And Expert Opinion, J. Thomas Sullivan
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
The United States Constitution as well as state procedural rules require prosecutorial authorities to disclose evidence to the defense as a means for ensuring fairness in the prosecution of individuals charged with criminal offenses. When prosecutorial authorities fail to disclose evidence as required, the integrity of the criminal justice system is threatened and the defense is unable to adequately prepare for trial. This threat is illustrated and magnified by the substantiation of prosecutorial misconduct claims in high profile trials where prosecutors have been unable to resist the temptation not to disclose evidence that could damage the prosecution's case, or, where …
Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. White, Rosalinde Casalini
Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. White, Rosalinde Casalini
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Appellate Division, First Department - People V. Boyd, Joseph M. D'Amico
Appellate Division, First Department - People V. Boyd, Joseph M. D'Amico
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Appellate Division, Fourth Department - People V. Buchanan, Jacqulyn Vann
Appellate Division, Fourth Department - People V. Buchanan, Jacqulyn Vann
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Expanding Stare Decisis: The Role Of Precedent In The Unfolding Dialectic Of Brady V. Maryland, Colin Starger
Expanding Stare Decisis: The Role Of Precedent In The Unfolding Dialectic Of Brady V. Maryland, Colin Starger
All Faculty Scholarship
Does stare decisis constrain the expansion of constitutional doctrine? Does existing precedent preclude the Supreme Court from expanding a criminal defendant’s right to exculpatory evidence? While commentators frequently clash on when stare decisis should prevent the Court from overruling its own precedents, the question of when fidelity to precedent should inhibit doctrinal expansion is surprisingly under-theorized. This Article begins to fill this gap through an in-depth case study of stare decisis and the expansion of criminal due process doctrine.
This Article analyzes the longstanding constitutional dialectic between procedural and substantive schools of criminal due process. Focus is on Brady v. …
Cascading Constitutional Deprivation: The Right To Appointed Counsel For Mandatorily Detained Immigrants Pending Removal Proceedings, Mark Noferi
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
Today, an immigrant green card holder mandatorily detained pending his removal proceedings, without bail and without counsel, due to a minor crime committed perhaps long ago, faces a dire fate. If he contests his case, he may remain incarcerated in substandard conditions for months or years. While incarcerated, he will likely be unable to acquire a lawyer, access family who might assist him, obtain key evidence, or contact witnesses. In these circumstances, he will nearly inevitably lose his deportation case and be banished abroad from work, family, and friends. The immigrant's one chance to escape these cascading events is the …
How Not To Criminalize Cyberbullying, Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky, Andrea Garcia
How Not To Criminalize Cyberbullying, Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky, Andrea Garcia
UF Law Faculty Publications
This essay provides a sustained constitutional critique of the growing body of laws criminalizing cyberbullying. These laws typically proceed by either modernizing existing harassment and stalking laws or crafting new criminal offenses. Both paths are beset with First Amendment perils, which this essay illustrates through 'case studies' of selected legislative efforts. Though sympathetic to the aims of these new laws, this essay contends that reflexive criminalization in response to tragic cyberbullying incidents has led law-makers to conflate cyberbullying as a social problem with cyberbullying as a criminal problem, creating pernicious consequences. The legislative zeal to eradicate cyberbullying potentially produces disproportionate …
Due Process As Separation Of Powers, Nathan S. Chapman, Michael W. Mcconnell
Due Process As Separation Of Powers, Nathan S. Chapman, Michael W. Mcconnell
Scholarly Works
From its conceptual origin in Magna Charta, due process of law has required that government can deprive persons of rights only pursuant to a coordinated effort of separate institutions that make, execute, and adjudicate claims under the law. Originalist debates about whether the Fifth or Fourteenth Amendments were understood to entail modern “substantive due process” have obscured the way that many American lawyers and courts understood due process to limit the legislature from the Revolutionary era through the Civil War. They understood due process to prohibit legislatures from directly depriving persons of rights, especially vested property rights, because it was …
The Confirmation Of Punitive Awards In Arbitration: Did Due Process Disappear?, Stuart M. Boyarsky
The Confirmation Of Punitive Awards In Arbitration: Did Due Process Disappear?, Stuart M. Boyarsky
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
Part I of this article provides a brief overview of the reasoning behind the limited judicial review of an arbitral award. Part II describes the state action doctrine and explains how several courts have used the doctrine in order to apply due process protection to proceedings involving private actors. In particular, this section discusses several significant decisions that involve the issue of whether a court's confirmation of an arbitrator's award of punitive damages creates state action and requires the application of constitutional protections such as due process. This Note concludes that due to a leading decision by the Eleventh Circuit, …
Exactions For The Future, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Exactions For The Future, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Faculty Scholarship
New development commonly contributes to projected infrastructural demands caused by multiple parties or amplifies the impacts of anticipated natural hazards. At times, these impacts only can be addressed through coordinated actions over a lengthy period. In theory, the ability of local governments to attach conditions, or “exactions,” to discretionary land use permits can serve as one tool to accomplish this end. Unlike traditional exactions that regularly respond to demonstrably measurable, immediate development harms, these “exactions for the future” — exactions responsive to cumulative anticipated future harms — admittedly can present land assembly concerns and involve inherently uncertain long-range government forecasting. …
Originalism And Loving V. Virginia, Steven G. Calabresi, Andrea Matthews
Originalism And Loving V. Virginia, Steven G. Calabresi, Andrea Matthews
Faculty Working Papers
This article makes an originalist argument in defense of the Supreme Court's holding in Loving v. Virginia that antimiscegenation laws are unconstitutional. This article builds on past work by Professor Michael McConnell defending Brown v. Board of Education on originalist grounds and by Professor Calabresi defending strict scrutiny for gender classifications on originalist grounds. Professor Calabresi's work in this area was defended and praise recently by Slate magazine online. The article shows that Loving v. Virginia is defensible using the public meaning originalism advocated for by Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. This article shows that the issue in Loving …
My Fellow Americans, We Are Going To Kill You: The Legality Of Targeting And Killing U.S. Citizens Abroad, Mike Dreyfuss
My Fellow Americans, We Are Going To Kill You: The Legality Of Targeting And Killing U.S. Citizens Abroad, Mike Dreyfuss
Vanderbilt Law Review
Silent and cold. At twenty thousand feet, the temperature is minus ten degrees Fahrenheit. At almost a thousand miles per hour, sound cannot keep up. Heat and noise struggle in the turbulence. Three miles away, seven thousand miles from American soil, an American citizen driving an empty road has ten seconds to live. As a leader in an organization actively engaged in armed conflict against the United States, this American citizen has become an enemy of the United States. In response to the threat he poses to his fellow Americans, his government added him to a kill list, targeted him, …
The Constitutional Foundation For Federal Medical Liability Reform, Mark A. Behrens, Cary Silverman
The Constitutional Foundation For Federal Medical Liability Reform, Mark A. Behrens, Cary Silverman
Journal of Health Care Law and Policy
No abstract provided.
Partiality And Disclosure In Supreme Court Opinions, Robert F. Nagel
Partiality And Disclosure In Supreme Court Opinions, Robert F. Nagel
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
This Essay begins by identifying the various kinds of partiality the Justices of the Supreme Court can have in the cases they decide. Although there is widespread recognition of the influence these biases might have, for the most part the Justices continue to write opinions as if they (and other judges) were entirely disinterested. This practice is often thought to be justified as a source of judicial legitimacy, but there are a number of reasons to doubt that a pretense of impersonality is actually important for maintaining respect for the Court. Consequently, the possibility has to be considered that the …