Constitutional Law Commons^™

October 30, 2018: Executing Robert Bowers, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Executing Robert Bowers“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

October 28, 2018: The Shootings In Pittsburgh, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

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

Introduction To The "Lockett V. Ohio At 40 Symposium": Rethinking The Death Penalty 40 Years After The U.S. Supreme Court Decision, Margery B. Koosed

ConLawNOW

Professor Koosed provides an introduction to the symposium on the fortieth anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Lockett v. Ohio, which discusses the backstory and import of the case. The decision in Lockett laid the framework for narrowing application of the death penalty by overturning Ohio’s 1974 era death penalty law, and heralding the significance and breadth of mitigating factors that must be considered by jurors and judges making the life or death decision in the penalty phase of capital cases, and tapped in to issues of disproportionate sentencing (those decided and yet to be).

October 23, 2018: "Because He Doesn’T Exist", Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, "Because He doesn’t exist" discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

October 20, 2018: Absurdities Of Anti-Religious Bias, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Absurdities of Anti-Religious Bias“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

October 18, 2018: Rhodri Lewis Responds, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Rhodri Lewis Responds“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Alqasem V. Ministry Of The Interior And The Hebrew University, Neal Hendel, Anat Baron, Uzi Vogelman

Translated Opinions

Facts:

This was a request for leave to appeal the judgment of the Tel Aviv-Jaffa District Court sitting as an Administrative Affairs Court denying the Petitioner’s appeal against the judgment of the Tel Aviv Appeals Tribunal that denied the her appeal of the decision of the Minister of the Interior to cancel the her visa and prevent her entrance into Israel due to her activities in support of boycotting the State of Israel.

The Petitioner had recently completed her studies toward a B.A. at the University of Florida and was accepted into a graduate program in human rights and transitional …

Legislative Committee Systems: A Design Perspective, Chase Stoddard

Indiana Journal of Constitutional Design

Committees are the defining characteristic of the modern legislature. While the centrality and study of party politics goes back further than committee politics, the focus on committee systems emerged over the course of the twentieth century, and legislatures could not function as we understand them without this mechanism. The United States Congressional committee system is the most studied system, yet virtually every country utilizes a committee system of some sort within its legislature. Despite their ubiquity in and centrality to the operations of legislatures, committees remain insufficiently studied, especially outside of the United States. The existing body of work tends …

Taxonomy Of Minority Governments, Lisa La Fornara

Indiana Journal of Constitutional Design

A minority government in its most basic form is a government in which the party holding the most parliamentary seats still has fewer than half the seats in parliament and therefore cannot pass legislation or advance policy without support from unaffiliated parties. Because seats in minority parliaments are more evenly distributed amongst multiple parties, opposition parties have greater opportunity to block legislation. A minority government must therefore negotiate with external parties and adjust its policies to garner the majority of votes required to advance its initiatives.

This paper serves as a taxonomy of minority governments in recent history and proceeds …

We Are All Farkhunda: An Examination Of The Treatment Of Women Within Afghanistan's Formal Legal System, Ashley Lenderman

Indiana Journal of Constitutional Design

In this paper, I will examine three cases of violence against women that went through the Afghan formal legal system: the case of Farkhunda, the Paghman district gang rape case, and the case of Sahar Gul. In the first Part, I will discuss the formal legal system framework on which the cases are based. In the second Part, I will discuss the cases in detail. In the third Part, I will describe neo-liberal, reformist, and neo-fundamentalist approaches to interpretation of Islamic law, and I will then draw out pieces of the decisions from the three cases that closely match these …

Lockett Symposium: Is The Supreme Court's Command On Mitigating Circumstances A Spoonful Of Sugar With A Poison Pill For The Death Penalty?, Jeffrey L. Kirchmeier

ConLawNOW

This Article addresses how Lockett v. Ohio and the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on mitigating factors in capital cases established a more humane death penalty while at the same time undermining the death penalty system. The Court’s emphasis on the constitutional importance of individualized sentencing has, in effect, helped return the U.S. death penalty system to an unconstitutional arbitrary and discriminatory system.

After the U.S. Supreme Court effectively struck down the existing death penalty statutes in 1972, state legislatures responded with new statutes designed to try to make a fairer and less arbitrary death penalty. When the Supreme Court reviewed these …

Lockett Symposium: Lockett V. Ohio And The Rise Of Mitigation Specialists, Russell Stetler

ConLawNOW

This article discusses the impact of Lockett in terms of the rise of mitigation specialists—the capital defense team members from a variety of multidisciplinary backgrounds whose dedicated function is to investigate the social history of the client in order to facilitate an outcome that avoids execution. In Part I, the article discusses how Lockett ended the confusion that resulted from the Supreme Court’s prior death penalty decisions in the 1970s. In Part II, the article examines the emergence of mitigation investigation as a central obligation of capital defense in response to Lockett, and the diverse career paths that led …

Lockett Symposium: Justice White's Lockett Concurrence And The Evolving Standards For A Capital Defendant's Mens Rea, Jordan Berman

ConLawNOW

In Lockett v. Ohio, Justice Byron White authored a separate concurring opinion specifically to assert that capital punishment violates the Eighth Amendment when imposed absent “a finding that the defendant possessed a purpose to cause the death of the victim.” This view was largely vindicated when Justice White authored the opinions in Enmund v. Florida and Cabana v. Bullock, in which the Court held that the death sentence could not constitutionally be imposed on one who did not kill or attempt to kill or have any intention of participating in or facilitating a killing. Nonetheless, just one year …

Lockett Symposium: Reflections On The Sandra Lockett Case, Peggy Cooper Davis

ConLawNOW

Professor Davis, who was one of the lawyers handling Sandra Lockett’s Supreme Court case, describes Ms. Lockett's courage under threat of execution and explains why principles of respect for human dignity should have forbidden placing her in that horrifying position.

Lockett Symposium: The Other Lockett, Dennis Balske

ConLawNOW

Sandra’s case was perfect for the New York Times. James’s makes for choice tabloid reading.

Few people realize that two Locketts were involved in the famous Lockett case–Sandra and her brother, James. Sandra is famous because she is the Lockett in the United States Supreme Court decision. James is unknown because the Ohio Supreme Court remanded his case to Akron for a new trial.

Sandra lost her direct appeal in the Ohio Supreme Court. Eventually the United States Supreme Court granted review and reached its all-important decision striking down Ohio’s death penalty statute and mandating that capital defendants be permitted …

October 16, 2018: Pittsburgh Foundation Grant, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Pittsburgh Foundation Grant“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

The New Jim Crow’S Equal Protection Potential, Katherine Macfarlane

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In 1954, the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education opinion relied on social science research to overturn Plessy v. Ferguson’s separate but equal doctrine. Since Brown, social science research has been considered by the Court in cases involving equal protection challenges to grand jury selection, death penalty sentences, and affirmative action. In 2016, Justice Sotomayor cited an influential piece of social science research, Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, in her powerful Utah v. Strieff dissent. Sotomayor contended that the Court’s holding overlooked the unequal racial impact of suspicionless …

Silencing State Courts, Jeffrey Steven Gordon

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In state courts across the Nation, an absolutist conception of the First Amendment is preempting common law speech torts. From intentional infliction of emotional distress and intrusion upon seclusion, to intentional interference with contractual relations and negligent infliction of emotional distress, state courts are dismissing speech tort claims on the pleadings because of the broad First Amendment defense recognized by Snyder v. Phelps in 2011. This Article argues, contrary to the scholarly consensus, that Snyder was a categorical departure from the methodology adopted by New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the landmark 1964 case that first applied the First …

A Historical Examination Of The Constitutionality Of The Federal Estate Tax, Henry Lowenstein, Kathryn Kisska-Schulze

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act At 25: A Quantitative Analysis Of The Interpretive Case Law, Lucien J. Dhooge

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Dear Colleague: Due Process Is Not Under Attack At Colleges And Universities, As Shown Through A Comparative Analysis Of College Disciplinary Committees And American Juries, Mara Emory Shingleton

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Common Law Endures In The Fourth Amendment, George C. Thomas Iii

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The text of the Fourth Amendment provides no guidance about what makes a search unreasonable or when warrants are required to make a search reasonable. The Supreme Court has had to craft a doctrine based on intuition, policy goals, and halfhearted stabs at history. This Article argues that the Court’s Fourth Amendment doctrine is stable when it roughly tracks the eighteenth-century common law protection of property, privacy, and liberty. When the Court has sought to provide more protection than the common law provided, the result has been an erratic doctrine that has gradually receded almost back to the common law …

Adapting Bartnicki V. Vopper To A Changing Tech Landscape: Rebalancing Free Speech And Privacy In The Smartphone Age, Andrew E. Levitt

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

An Examination Of The Need For Campaign Fianance Reform Through The Lens Of The United States Treaty Clause And Environmental Protection Treaties, Jordan Smith

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

The United States’ federal election system is constantly the focus of debate, including components from voting mechanisms, to candidate selection, and to the candidates themselves. Unsurprisingly, campaign finance has also been the source of much debate. For decades, scholars, politicians, lawyers, and laypersons have debated the merits and shortcomings of the campaign finance system enumerated in the United States Code. The landmark Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) decision in 2010, in which the United States Supreme Court equated corporate speech to human speech, merely added fuel to the fire. The considerable volume of scholarship based upon campaign finance …

Replacing The Flawed Chevron Standard, Brian G. Slocum

William & Mary Law Review

Judicial review of agency statutory interpretations depends heavily on the linguistic concept of ambiguity. Most significantly, under Chevron, judicial deference to an agency’s interpretation hinges on whether the court determines the statute to be ambiguous. Despite its importance, the ambiguity concept has been poorly developed by courts and deviates in important respects from how linguists approach ambiguity. For instance, courts conflate ambiguity identification and disambiguation and treat ambiguity as an umbrella concept that encompasses distinct forms of linguistic indeterminacy such as vagueness and generality. The resulting ambiguity standard is unpredictable and does not adequately perform its function of mediating between …

October 12, 2018: So, Shakespeare Is Now A Nihilist, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “So, Shakespeare Is Now a Nihilist“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Church History, Liberty, And Political Morality: A Response To Professor Calhoun, Ian Huyett

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

In his address, Professor Calhoun used American Christian abolitionism to illustrate the beneficial role that religion can play in political debate. Surveying the past two millennia, I argue that Christian political thought has protected liberty in every era of the church’s dramatic history. Along the way, I rebut critics—from the left and right—who urge that Christianity’s political influence has been unhelpful or harmful. I also seek to show that statements like “religion has no place in politics” are best understood as expressions of arbitrary bias.

Law By Non-Lawyers: The Limit To Limited License Legal Technicians Increasing Access To Justice, Rebecca M. Donaldson

Seattle University Law Review

For the first time in the American legal profession, non-lawyers can openly, independently, ethically, and legally engage in activities recognized by bar associations as the practice of law. In 2012, the Washington Supreme Court passed Admission and Practice Rule 28 (APR 28), establishing the profession’s first paraprofessional licensing scheme that allows non-lawyers to give legal advice. The process authorizes qualified non-lawyers to provide legal advice without the supervision of a lawyer. Washington’s Supreme Court intends for Limited License Legal Technicians, or “LLLTs” as they are known, to increase access to justice by responding to the unmet civil legal needs of …

Much Ado About Nothing?: Local Resistance And The Significance Of Sanctuary Laws, Alyssa Garcia

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment explores the current constitutional discourse of sanctuary laws and compares their various components. Part I provides background on the basic policy components of sanctuary laws and modern policies. Part II explores and compares the substantive legal and political value of sanctuary laws. This section will first assess the impact of sanctuary policies on existing immigration and constitutional law. In doing so, specific sanctuary jurisdictions involved in litigation, Seattle, San Francisco, and Chicago, and their likelihood of withstanding preemption under existing doctrine will be compared. The impact sanctuary laws may have on the Tenth Amendment will next be discussed. …

Originalism And Congressional Power To Enforce The Fourteenth Amendment, Christopher W. Schmidt

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

In this Essay, I argue that originalism conflicts with the Supreme Court’s current jurisprudence defining the scope of Congress’ power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment. Under the standard established in Boerne v. Flores, the Court limits congressional power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to statutory remedies premised on judicially defined interpretations of Fourteenth Amendment rights. A commitment to originalism as a method of judicial constitutional interpretation challenges the premise of judicial interpretive supremacy in Section 5 jurisprudence in two ways. First, as a matter of history, an originalist reading of Section 5 provides support for broad judicial …