Courts Commons^™

The Fourth Amendment In The Hallway: Do Tenants Have A Constitutionally Protected Privacy Interest In The Locked Common Areas Of Their Apartment Buildings?, Sean M. Lewis

Michigan Law Review

One afternoon, a police officer spots a man driving a Cadillac through a run·down neighborhood. His interest piqued, the officer decides to follow the vehicle. The Cadillac soon comes to rest in front of an apartment building, and the driver, Jimmy Barrios-Moriera, removes a shopping bag from the trunk and enters the building. The moment Barrios-Moriera disappears within the doorway, the officer sprints after him because he knows that the door to the apartment building will automatically lock when it closes. He manages to catch the door just in time and rushes in. Barrios-Moriera is already halfway up a flight …

A Subversive Strand Of The Warren Court, Gary Peller

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Causation, Constitutional Principles, And The Jurisprudential Legacy Of The Warren Court, Michelle Adams

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Come Back To The Nickel And Five:* Tracing The Warren Court's Pursuit Of Equal Justice Under Law, Jim Chen

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Warren Court, Criminal Procedure Reform, And Retributive Punishment, Darryl K. Brown

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Irreparability Resurrected?: Does A Recalibrated Irreparable Injury Rule Threaten The Warren Court's Establishment Clause Legacy?, Doug Rendleman

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

How The Supreme Court Delivers Fire And Ice To State Criminal Justice, Ronald F. Wright

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Law Of The Case In Nevada: Confusing Relatives, Scott Doney

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Rehnquist Court, Structural Due Process, And Semisubstantive Constitutional Review, Dan T. Coenen

Scholarly Works

Semisubstantive review, as I use that label, entails four key features. First, the subject matter of judicial inquiry is not the process applied in adjudicating a discrete dispute; rather, the matter at hand is the constitutionality of a statute or other generalized expression of legal policy. Second, some procedural omission by the lawmaker -- rather than an incurably substantive flaw in the end product of its work -- lays the groundwork for a judicial intervention that invalidates the challenged rule or negates how that rule otherwise would operate. It may be, for example, that a federal statute read as a …

Productive Silence On Carl Schmitt: Constrained Ignorance Or Concluded Reappraisal? A Reply To Detlev F. Vagts, Carl Schmitt In Context: Reflections On A Symposium, Emanuel Richter

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Marbury Ascendant: The Rehnquist Court And The Power To "Say What The Law Is", Timothy Zick

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Proposed Amendments To Fed. R. Crim. P. 26: An Exchange: Remote Testimony - A Prosecutor's Perspective, Lynn Helland

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Although the Supreme Court has declined, for now, to endorse the Judicial Conference proposal to add a Rule 26(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to permit live video testimony under limited circumstances, I agree with Professor Friedman that the matter is far from over. This is both because the potential benefits to be realized from the use of remote video testimony are too large to ignore and because, on closer inspection, any Confrontation Clause concerns that might underlie the Court's hesitation to adopt the proposal are not warranted. My purpose in writing is to summarize some of the …

How Is Constitutional Law Made?, Tracey E. George, Robert J. Pushaw Jr.

Michigan Law Review

Bismarck famously remarked: "Laws are like sausages. It's better not to see them being made." This witticism applies with peculiar force to constitutional law. Judges and commentators examine the sausage (the Supreme Court's doctrine), but ignore the messy details of its production. Maxwell Stearns has demonstrated, with brilliant originality, that the Court fashions constitutional law through process-based rules of decision such as outcome voting, stare decisis, and justiciability. Employing "social choice" economic theory, Professor Stearns argues that the Court, like all multimember decisionmaking bodies, strives to formulate rules that promote both rationality and fairness (p. 4). Viewed through the lens …

Do Attorneys Really Matter? The Empirical And Legal Case For The Right Of Counsel At Bail, Douglas L. Colbert, Ray Paternoster, Shawn Bushway

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Steel Seizure Case: One Of A Kind?, Neal Devins, Louis Fisher

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Book Review Of What Brown V. Board Of Education Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Landmark Civil Rights Recision, Wendy Parker

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

A Symposium Précis, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

This article is an introduction and overview of the Drake University Law School symposium Judicious Choices: Nominating and Confirming Supreme Court Justices held in March of 2002. It identifies important constitutional law issues in nominating and confirming the President's appointments to Supreme Court Justices in the United States.

Constitutional Pluralism And Democratic Politics: Reflections On The Interpretive Approach Of Baker V. Carr, Guy-Uriel Charles

Faculty Scholarship

Baker v. Carr is one of the Supreme Court's most important opinions, not least because its advent signaled the constitutionalization of democracy. Unfortunately, as is typical of the Court's numerous forays into democratic politics, the decision is not accompanied by an apparent vision of the relationship among democratic practice, constitutional law, and democratic theory. In this Article, Professor Charles revisits Baker and provides several democratic principles that he argues justifies the Court's decision to engage the democratic process. He examines the decision from the perspective of one of its chief contemporary critics, Justice Frankfurter. He sketches an approach, described as …

The Courts' Inconsistent Treatment Of Bethel V. Fraser And The Curtailment Of Student Rights, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 181 (2002), David L. Hudson

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Dynamic Judicial Opinion, William D. Popkin

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Eskridge's article on Dynamic Statutory Interpretation advances an aggressively pragmatic theory of interpretation but has had more influence among academics than judges because of a failure to attend to the problems of writing a candid, pragmatic and dynamic judicial opinion. This article argues that, although not free from doubt, a candid judicial opinion is preferable, and discusses how to write such an opinion - suggesting that judges rely on the "intent of the statute," not legislative intent; and adopt a personal/exploratory style in presenting their views.

Anastasoff, Unpublished Opinions, And Federal Appellate Justice, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

In Anastasoff v. United States, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently invalidated the court's local rule of appellate procedure providing that "unpublished opinions are not precedent and parties generally should not cite them." Eighth Circuit Judge Richard S. Arnold authored the opinion, holding that this local requirement violates Article ill of the United States Constitution. Regardless of whether the provocative decision in Anastasoff is constitutionally sound, the opinion trenchantly emphasizes the critical significance of a public policy issue that has remained essentially untreated for too long.

The three-judge panel, thus, threw …

Is The Rehnquist Court An "Activist" Court? The Commerce Cause Cases, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In United States v. Lopez, the Supreme Court, for the first time in sixty years, declared an act of Congress unconstitutional because Congress had exceeded its powers under the Commerce Clause. In 2000, the Court reaffirmed the stance it took in Lopez in the case of United States v. Morrison, once again finding that Congress had exceeded its powers. Are these examples of something properly called "judicial activism"? To answer this question, we must clarify the meaning of the term "judicial activism." With this meaning in hand, the author examines the Court's Commerce Clause cases. The answer he …

Knicks-Heat And The Appropriateness Of Sanctions In Sport, Robert L. Bard, Lewis Kurlantzic

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Baker's Promise, Equal Protection, And The Modern Redistricting Revolution: A Plea For Rationality, Luis Fuentes-Rohwer

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The conventional wisdom contends that Baker v. Carr did not set down a standard for lower courts to follow. This Article responds to this position. It reaches three conclusions. First, it argues the implicit promise of Baker v. Carr pointed toward a loose, flexible rationality standard for deciding redistricting controversies. Under this approach, states were given much room to enact redistricting plans in accordance to their states' particular needs. Second, the lower courts applied precisely this standard in litigation in the wake of Baker, and did so quite capably. This conclusion responds to those who exhort the imposition of a …

Supreme Court Of Arkansas Rule 4-3(J): No-Merit Briefs In Arkansas And The Need To Amend The Rule, Jeffrey A. Weber

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreign Relations And Federal Questions: Resolving The Judicial Split On Federal Court Jurisdiction, Erin E. Terrell

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The federal circuit courts have disagreed concerning a fundamental issue of federal court jurisdiction: whether cases that may implicate or involve the "foreign relations" of the United States, but do not otherwise raise a more traditional "federal question" under federal law, may be removed from state courts to federal courts. This Note examines the cases that have created the split, and proposes two potential resolutions to it, one judicial and the other legislative.

Treaties And The Eleventh Amendment, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court's recent invigoration of federalism doctrine has revived a question that had long lain dormant in constitutional law: whether and to what extent federalism limits apply to exercises of the Treaty Power. In the days before the famous switch in time that saved nine, the Court in Missouri v. Holland upheld a statute passed by Congress to implement a treaty even though it assumed that the statute would exceed Congress's legislative power under Article I in the absence of the treaty. The significance of this holding abated considerably when the Court embraced a broader interpretation of the Commerce …

The Ins And Outs, Stops And Starts Of Speedy Trial Rights In Colorado--Part Ii, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

This two-part article reviews the constitutional and statutory right to a speedy trial and discusses the case law interpreting that right. The first part was printed in July 2002.

See Part I at http://scholar.law.colorado.edu/articles/550/.

Do Jury Trials Encourage Harsh Punishment In The United States?, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Rehnquist Court And Criminal Procedure, Stephen F. Smith

Journal Articles

Much of recent discussions of conservative judicial activism has concerned the revival of federalism-based limits on Congress during the Rehnquist Court. The allure of federalism as a topic for discussion is understandable, yet I argue that constitutional criminal procedure provides a better context within which to test the Rehnquist Court's commitment to judicial restraint. In this Essay, I examine the topic at hand against the background of the many important developments that have taken place in criminal procedure on Rehnquist's watch. The results of this examination are surprising because they suggest that activism is not necessarily the antithesis of restraint. …