Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Highest Court: A Dialogue Between Justice Louis Brandeis And Justice Antonin Scalia On Stare Decisis, P. Thomas Distanislao Iii

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Habeas As Forum Allocation: A New Synthesis, Carlos M. Vázquez

University of Miami Law Review

The scope of habeas relief for state prisoners, especially during the decades before the Supreme Court’s 1953 decision in Brown v. Allen, is a famously disputed question—one of recognized significance for contemporary debates about the proper scope of habeas review. This Article provides a new answer. It argues that, until the enactment of Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), it was broadly accepted that state prisoners were entitled to plenary federal review of the legal and mixed law/fact questions decided against them by state courts. Until 1916, such review was provided by the Supreme Court; after 1953, …

April 14, 2017: The Judicial-Industrial Complex, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The Judicial-Industrial Complex“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

April 8, 2017: The Supreme Court And Politics, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The Supreme Court and Politics“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

April 2, 2017: Friday Op-Ed In The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Concerning Judge Gorsuch And Interpretation, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Friday Op-ed in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Concerning Judge Gorsuch and Interpretation“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

March 20, 2017: Hypocrisy On Neil Gorsuch, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Hypocrisy on Neil Gorsuch“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Trending @ Rwu Law: Dean Yelnosky's Post: 24: Dean Style 3-6-2017, Michael Yelnosky

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

Preventing An Air Panopticon: A Proposal For Reasonable Legal Restrictions On Aerial Surveillance, Jake Laperruque

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

February 18, 2017: What The Rule Of Law Looks Like, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “What the Rule of Law Looks Like“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Political Ripples Ahead For Supreme Court Confirmation, Michael S. Ariens

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

Trending @ Rwu Law: Professor Niki Kuckes's Post: 'Disparaging' Trademarks Meet The First Amendment 02-07-2017, Niki Kuckes

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

The Impact Of Justice Scalia's Replacement On Gender Equality Issues, Wilson R. Huhn

ConLawNOW

The last forty-six years may be accurately described as the era of the modern Republican Supreme Court. As a result of presidential elections, Republican presidents have nominated all ten of the Justices appointed to the United States Supreme Court between 1969 and 1991. Republicans have thus controlled the Court since 1970. During this period the right to gender equality was recognized and the right to marriage equality was realized. However, also during this period many Republican Justices staunchly opposed gender equality, and far more remains to be accomplished.

Since Justice Scalia’s death, the Supreme Court has been deadlocked on a …

Newsroom: Order Violates Roger Williams' Principles 01-30-2017, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Rwu First Amendment Blog: Jared A. Goldstein's Blog: Trump's Order Violates Bedrock Principles Of Roger Williams And Ri 01-30-2017, Jared A. Goldstein

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

January 20, 2017: Welcome, President Trump, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Welcome, President Trump“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Newroom: Yelnosky: Future Of Public Sector Union 'Dues' 01-14-2017, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

January 10, 2017: The Public Trust Litigation, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The Public Trust Litigation“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

A Progressive Mind: Louis D. Brandeis And The Origins Of Free Speech, Elizabeth Todd Byron

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Disparate Impact Canon, Michael T. Morley

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

The Wholesale Exclusion Of Religion From Public Benefits Programs: Why The First Amendment Religion Clauses Must Take A Backseat To Equal Protection, Michael J. Borger

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Spokeo Misspeaks, Lauren E. Willis

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

Most commentators have critiqued the Supreme Court’s opinion in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins for failing to answer the question presented. But in important ways, the Spokeo opinion does not merely fail to speak—it affirmatively misspeaks. This essay suggests that underlying the Justices’ inability to see how standing law ought to apply to the facts in Spokeo is a failure to appreciate the power that consumer reports have over individuals’ life prospects today. Worse, the Justices’ unawareness of their own ignorance leads them to afford Congress little deference in identifying injuries occurring in our new information society. Their meta-ignorance also induces …

Recent Applications Of The Supreme Court's Hands-Off Approach To Religious Doctrine: From Hosanna-Tabor And Holt To Hobby Lobby And Zubik, Samuel J. Levine

Scholarly Works

In each of the past four terms, the United States Supreme Court has decided a case with important implications for the interpretation and application of the Religion Clauses of the United States Constitution: Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & Sch. v. EEOC, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, Inc., Holt v. Hobbs, and, most recently, Zubik v. Burwell. Although the Court’s decisions in these cases addressed—and seemed to resolve—a number of questions central to Free Exercise and Establishment Clause jurisprudence, including recognition of the “ministerial exception” and religious rights of a corporate entity, the decisions left a number of questions unanswered, such as …

Justice Brandeis And Railroad Accidents: Fairness, Uniformity And Consistency, Larry Zacharias

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Continuing Vitality Of Louis D. Brandeis’S Free Expression Jurisprudence, Frederick M. Lawrence

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Privacy And Conformity: Rethinking “The Right Most Valued By Civilized Men”, Susan E. Gallagher

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Departmentalism: An Introduction, Kevin C. Walsh

Law Faculty Publications

This Article introduces the idea of judicial departmentalism and argues for its superiority to judicial supremacy. Judicial supremacy is the idea that the Constitution means for everybody what the Supreme Court says it means in deciding a case. Judicial departmentalism, by contrast, is the idea that the Constitution means in the judicial department what the Supreme Court says it means in deciding a case. Within the judicial department, the law of judgments, the law of remedies, and the law of precedent combine to enable resolutions by the judicial department to achieve certain kinds of settlements. Judicial departmentalism holds that these …

Originalist Law Reform, Judicial Departmentalism, And Justice Scalia, Kevin C. Walsh

Law Faculty Publications

Drawing on examples from Justice Antonin Scalia's jurisprudence, this Essay uses the perspective of judicial departmentalism to examine the nature and limits of two partially successful originalist law reforms in recent years. It then shifts to an examination of how a faulty conception of judicial supremacy drove a few nonoriginalist changes in the law that Scalia properly dissented from. Despite the mistaken judicial supremacy motivating these decisions, a closer look reveals them to be backhanded tributes to judicial departmentalism because of the way that the Court had to change jurisdictional and remedial doctrines to accomplish its substantive-law alterations. The Essay …

Ensuring The Constitution Remains Color Blind Vs. Turning A Blind Eye To Justice: Equal Protection And Affirmative Action In University Admissions, Attashin Safari

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of California's Mandatory Child Vaccination Law: California Courts Should Not Depart From Established Precedent, Stephanie Awanyai

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

In the wake of the 2015 measles outbreak in California, California Senate Bill 277 (S.B. 277) was enacted. S.B. 277 repeals the personal belief exemption to California’s immunization requirement for children in public and private educational or child care facilities in the State. While S.B. 277 was enacted to prevent the spread of contagious diseases through mandatory vaccinations of school-aged children, there are objections to this approach. Parents who oppose S.B. 277 contend that S.B. 277 violates their federal and state constitutional rights to make medical decisions on behalf of their child, and infringes on their child’s fundamental state interest …

Telling Stories In The Supreme Court: Voices Briefs And The Role Of Democracy In Constitutional Deliberation, Linda H. Edwards

Scholarly Works

On January 4, 2016, over 112 women lawyers, law professors, and former judges told the world that they had had an abortion. In a daring amicus brief that captured national media attention, the women “came out” to their clients; to the lawyers with or against whom they practice; to the judges before whom they appear; and to the Justices of the Supreme Court.

The past three years have seen an explosion of such “voices briefs,” 16 in Obergefell and 17 in Whole Woman’s Health. The briefs can be powerful, but their use is controversial. They tell the stories of non-parties—strangers …