Constitutional Law Commons^™

Gorsuch, Cfpb And Future Of The Administrative State, David J. Reiss

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

U.S. Supreme Court nominee Judge Neil Gorsuch would have an outsized influence on federal consumer protection enforcement if he is confirmed. In particular, if PHH v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is appealed to the Supreme Court, a Justice Gorsuch is likely to vote to strongly curtail the independence of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and limit its enforcement powers. More generally, he will be a skeptic of agency action, one who will support greater judicial review of agency actions.

Ag-Gag Laws, Lies, And The First Amendment, Justin Marceau

Distinguished Speaker Series

In this talk, Professor Marceau will discuss the intersection of free speech and lies in constitutional doctrine. “Ag-gag” laws criminalize actions that include secret filming by whistleblowers of animal abuses on factory farms. Using the proliferation of ag-gag laws as an example, Professor Marceau will identify and discuss investigative deceptions as a category of high-value lies that ought to receive rigorous free speech protection because of their instrumental value to securing and disseminating information essential to a well-functioning democracy. He will also identify, more generally, the types of limits that may be imposed on lying consistent with the First Amendment

A House Built On Shifting Sands: Standing Under The Fair Housing Act After Thompson V. North American Stainless, Eric Vanderhoef

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

For decades, the Supreme Court construed standing under the Fair Housing Act broadly; any party could bring suit as long as it met Constitutional Standing requirements. In January 2011, in Thompson v. North American Stainless, the Court restricted standing under Title VII—a statute with similar empowering language to the Fair Housing Act. The Court will address Fair Housing Act standing post-Thompson in Bank of America Corp. v. City of Miami. This commentary argues that standing under the Fair Housing Act should be restricted. Additionally, it argues that the allegations of the Plaintiff-Respondent, City of Miami, of widespread reductions in tax …

Unprecedented Infringement: Debunking The Constitutionality Of Dna Collection From Mere Arrestees In Light Of Maryland V. King, Christen Giannaros

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development

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.

February 6, 2017: When Did The Lying Start?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “When Did the Lying Start?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

What Constitutes "Custody" Under Miranda?: An Examination Of Maine's Test As Applied In State V. Kittredge, Elizabeth L. Tull

Maine Law Review

In recent years, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, has issued several opinions addressing whether a defendant’s statements are admissible when made to law enforcement in the absence of “Miranda warnings.” These cases have similar features: a defendant made a personally incriminating statement; raised an appeal arguing that Miranda warnings should have been, but were not, read to him or her; and the Court—in many cases—determined that the defendant was not technically in police custody, and thus there was no requirement to recite Miranda warnings to him or her. Miranda warnings are an important safeguard that …

State V. Lovejoy: Should Pre-Arrest, Pre-Miranda Silence Be Admissible During The State's Case-In-Chief As Substantive Evidence Of Guilt?, Mark A. Rucci

Maine Law Review

Article 1, section 6 of Maine Constitution reads in part that “[t]he accused shall not be compelled to give evidence against himself or herself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, property, or privileges . . . .” Further, the Law Court has held that “the State constitutional protection against self-incrimination is the equivalent of the Fifth Amendment." However, as with most provisions of the Constitution, the protection against self-incrimination is open to interpretation. While the Supreme Court has answered some questions surrounding the Fifth Amendment’s protections, it has left many decisions regarding its scope largely within the purview of the …

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 …

The Free Exercise Clause: Fealty To God Or Caesar?, John O. Hayward

Journal of Catholic Legal Studies

No abstract provided.

May I Be Excused? Smith's Individualized Governmental Assessment Exception And The Hhs Mandate, Mary E. Mcmahon

Journal of Catholic Legal Studies

No abstract provided.

Obscenity Law: Après Stanley, Le Deluge?, Michael J. Gaynor

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

Recent Abortion Litigation, Martin F. Mckernan, Jr.

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

Shapiro, Et Al., V. Welt, Et Al., 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 6 (February 2, 2017), Stephanie Glantz

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The court considered consolidated appeals and a cross-appeal from a district court order granting a motion to dismiss complaint based on anti-SLAPP statutes and the awarding of attorney fees and costs. The Court considered whether parts of Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statute, NRS 41.637, are unconstitutionally vague, whether statements made in relation to a conservatorship action constitute an issue of public interest under NRS 41.637(4), and whether those statements fall within the scope of the absolute litigation privilege. The Court found that no, NRS 41.637 is not unconstitutionally vague; adopted a California test for determining an issue of public interest–and remanded the …

Comments On The Nuremberg Principles And Conscientious Objection With Special Reference To War Crimes, Robert K. Woetzel

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

February 1, 2017: First They Banned The Muslims, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “First They Banned the Muslims“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Aviram V. Minister Of Justice, Neal Hendel, Isaac Amit, Uzi Vogelman

Translated Opinions

A petition concerning whether the Knesset is required to ensure that a member of the opposition serves on the Judicial Selection Committee (hereinafter: the Committee) at all times. Background: The two Members of Knesset sitting on the Committee are elected by the Knesset by secret ballot. Since 1990, the Knesset has elected at least one Committee member from the ranks of the opposition. This was also the case in the last elections, with the election of MK Ilatov to the Committee. MK Ilatov was a meber of Yisrael Beitenu, which then sat in the opposition. Shortly thereafter, Yisrael Beitenu joined …

Liberty At The Cost Of Constitutional Protections: Undocumented Immigrants And Fourth Amendment Rights, Linet Suárez

University of Miami Inter-American Law Review

The Supreme Court has issued many opinions indirectly addressing the Fourth amendment rights of undocumented immigrants. However, none of these opinions answer the questions that matter most: do undocumented immigrants have Fourth Amendment protections and if so, what are they. These questions have increasingly become more important because advances in technology facilitate intrusive searches and seizures by law enforcement officers. This article will specifically focus on the Department of Homeland Security and its use of GPS ankle bracelets to monitor undocumented immigrants. This article compares existing Supreme Court opinions concerning undocumented immigrants and Fourth Amendment rights in the technological age. …

From Schmerber To Mcneely To Birchfield: The Life And Death Of The “Per Se” Rule, Jana Nestlerode

Criminal Justice Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Takings And Coastal Management (Legal Fact Sheet: Ctsg-17-02), Audrey Elzerman

Sea Grant Law Fellow Publications

No abstract provided.

Why I So Enjoyed Learning With And From Calvin Massey, Vikram David Amar

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “I am pleased and proud to participate in this tribute to Calvin Massey, with whom I had the pleasure to work and play for about two decades. When I think of Calvin—and I think of him often—I think of a generous friend, a gregarious colleague and a genuinely good man. He possessed many admirable traits, but today I want to focus on three: (1) his breadth; (2) his independent mind; and (3) his thoughtfulness.”

The Asymmetry Problem: Reflections On Calvin Massey’S Standing In State Courts, State Law, And Federal Review, John M. Greabe

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

This paper is based on remarks delivered at a symposium to honor my University of New Hampshire School of Law colleague Calvin Massey, who passed away in the fall of 2015. The paper discusses an asymmetry in federal standing law. The asymmetry lies in the fact that, when a state’s highest court decides the merits of a federal claim brought in circumstances where the claimant has standing under state law but not federal law, the United States Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review the decision only if the state supreme court upholds the federal claim. This asymmetry was the subject …

Riley And Abandonment: Expanding Fourth Amendment Protection Of Cell Phones, Abigail Hoverman

Northwestern University Law Review

In light of the privacy concerns inherent to personal technological devices, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision in 2014 recognizing the need for categorical heightened protection of cell phones during searches incident to arrest in Riley v. California. This Note argues for expansion of heightened protections for cell phones in the context of abandoned evidence because the same privacy concerns apply. This argument matters because state and federal courts have not provided the needed protection to abandoned cell phones pre- or post-Riley.

Feticide And Us Law, Gerard V. Bradley

Journal Articles

That abortion kills someone with a right-to-life has become easier to see since Roe v. Wade. Progress in scientific research and medical practice has made both birth and viability unrealistic criteria for demarcating between human life, which demands moral respect, and merely “potential life” which does not have moral or legal equivalency with maternal interest. The Eighth Circuit recently criticized the use of viability as a litmus test because it “tied a state’s interest in unborn children to developments in obstetrics, not to developments in the unborn.” The near-ubiquity of sonograms has probably done more than intellectual arguments to …

Precedent And Speech, Randy J. Kozel

Journal Articles

The U.S. Supreme Court has shown a notable willingness to reconsider its First Amendment precedents. In recent years the Court has departed from its prior statements regarding the constitutional value of false speech. It has revamped its process for identifying categorical exceptions to First Amendment protection. It has changed its position on corporate electioneering and aggregate campaign contributions. In short, it has revised the ground rules of expressive freedom in ways both large and small.

The Court generally describes its past decisions as enjoying a presumption of validity through the doctrine of stare decisis. This Article contends that within the …

Protean Statutory Interpretation In The Courts Of Appeals, James J. Brudney, Lawrence Baum

William & Mary Law Review

This Article is the first in-depth empirical and doctrinal analysis of differences in statutory interpretation between the courts of appeals and the Supreme Court. It is also among the first to anticipate how the Supreme Court’s interpretive approach may shift with the passing of Justice Scalia.

We begin by identifying factors that may contribute to interpretive divergence between the two judicial levels, based on their different institutional structures and operational realities. In doing so, we discuss normative implications that may follow from the prospect of such interpretive divergence. We then examine how three circuit courts have used dictionaries and legislative …

Personal Enough For Protection: The Fifth Amendment And Single-Member Llcs, Lila L. Inman

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Lurks Below Beckles, Leah M. Litman, Shakeer Rahman

Northwestern University Law Review

This Essay argues that if the Supreme Court grants habeas relief in Beckles v. United States, then it should spell out certain details about where a Beckles claim comes from and who such a claim benefits. Those details are not essential to the main question raised in the case, but the federal habeas statute takes away the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to hear just about any case that would raise those questions. For that reason, this Essay concludes that failing to address those questions now could arbitrarily condemn hundreds of prisoners to illegal sentences and lead to a situation where the …

The Constitutionality Of Sec Administrative Proceedings: The Sec Should Cure Its Alj Appointment Scheme, Kaela Dahan

Cardozo Law Review

The note examines the constitutional challenges surrounding the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) use of administrative law judges (ALJs), particularly under Section 929P of the Dodd-Frank Act. It argues that the SEC's ALJ appointment process violates the Appointments Clause, as current ALJs have not been properly appointed by SEC Commissioners. The note also highlights due process and Seventh Amendment concerns, as defendants in SEC administrative proceedings lack rights such as trial by jury and immediate appellate review. To maintain the integrity of its administrative processes, the SEC must adopt measures to ensure its ALJ appointments comply with constitutional requirements.

Discrimination In Employment, Housing, And Education: Constitutional Concepts And Social Theories, Frederick D. Braid

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.