Fourteenth Amendment Commons^™

Civil Gideon As A Human Right: Is The U.S. Going To Join Step With The Rest Of The Developed World?, Raven Lidman

Faculty Articles

This article will discuss the scope of services and rationale for the right to a free lawyer in civil matters as is the case in criminal cases. This right is currently provided in the 49 European member countries in the Council of Europe (COE), Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Japan, Zambia, South Africa, and Brazil. Frequent reference will be made to a chart in the appendix, which condenses extensive information about programs in each of these countries. The article’s general conclusion regarding the foreign programs is that the right to a free lawyer in civil matters is a …

Recent Appellate Court Decisions On Eyewitness Identification, Jerry E. Norton

Public Interest Law Reporter

No abstract provided.

The Riddle Of Hiram Revels, Richard A. Primus

Articles

In 1870, a black man named Hiram Revels was named to represent Mississippi in the Senate. Senate Democrats objected to seating him and pointed out that the Constitution specifies that no person may be a senator who has not been a citizen of the United States for at least nine years. Before the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, the Democrats argued, Revels had not been a citizen on account of the Supreme Court's 1857 decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford. Thus, even if Revels were a citizen in 1870, he had held that status for only two years. …

Preventing "You've Got Mail"™ From Meaning "You've Been Served": How Service Of Process By E-Mail Does Not Meet Constitutional Procedure Due Process Requirements, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1121 (2005), Matthew R. Schreck

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Majoritarian Difficulty: Affirmative Action, Sodomy, And Supreme Court Politics, Darren L. Hutchinson

Faculty Articles

This Article challenges liberal and conservative assessments of Lawrence, Gratz, and Grutter. Although the outcome of these cases might indeed prove helpful to the agendas of social movements for racial and sexual justice, progressive scholars and activists should not receive these cases with elation. Instead, the research of constitutional theorists, critical legal scholars, and political scientists allows for a more contextualized and guarded account of and reaction to these decisions. Instead of representing extraordinary victories for oppressed classes, these cases reflect majoritarian and moderate views concerning civil rights, and the opinions contain many doctrinal elements that reinforce, …

Schiavo And Klein (Symposium), Evan H. Caminker

Articles

When teaching federal courts, I sometimes find that students are slow to care about legal issues that initially seem picayune, hyper-technical, and unrelated to real-world concerns. It takes hard work to engage students in discussion of United States v. Klein,1 notwithstanding its apparent articulation of a foundational separation of powers principle that Congress may not dictate a "rule of decision" governing a case in federal court. A Civil War-era decision about the distribution of war spoils, one the Supreme Court has hardly ever cited since and then only to distinguish it, in cases involving takings and spotted owls? Yawn.

Congress's Power To Enforce Fourteenth Amendment Rights: Lessons From Federal Remedies The Framers Enacted , Robert J. Kaczorowski

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Robert Kaczorowski argues for an expansive originalist interpretation of Congressional power under the Fourteenth Amendment. Before the Civil War Congress actually exercised, and the Supreme Court repeatedly upheld plenary Congressional power to enforce the constitutional rights of slaveholders. After the Civil War, the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment copied the antebellum statutes and exercised plenary power to enforce the constitutional rights of all American citizens when they enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and then incorporated the Act into the Fourteenth Amendment. The framers of the Fourteenth Amendment thereby exercised the plenary power the Rehnquist Court claims the …

Choosing Liberty Over Equality And Sacrificing Both: Equal Protection And Due Process In Lawrence V. Texas, Andrew J. Seligsohn

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article critiques the Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas, arguing that the Court's reliance on substantive due process under the Due Process Clause, rather than the Equal Protection Clause, undermines the broader equality concerns faced by the LGBTQ+ community. By prioritizing liberty over equality, the Court missed an opportunity to establish a more robust legal foundation for future LGBTQ+ rights, leaving the decision vulnerable to challenge and failing to address the systemic discrimination against gays and lesbians.

Reinforcing Representation: Congressional Power To Enforce The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments In The Rehnquist And Waite Courts, Ellen D. Katz

Michigan Law Review

A large body of academic scholarship accuses the Rehnquist Court of "undoing the Second Reconstruction," just as the Waite Court has long been blamed for facilitating the end of the First. This critique captures much of what is meant by those generally charging the Rehnquist Court with "conservative judicial activism." It posits that the present Court wants to dismantle decades' worth of federal antidiscrimination measures that are aimed at the "reconstruction" of public and private relationships at the local level. It sees the Waite Court as having similarly nullified the civil-rights initiatives enacted by Congress following the Civil War to …

Reinforcing Representation: Enforcing The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments In The Rehnquist And Waite Courts, Ellen D. Katz

Articles

A large body of academic scholarship accuses the Rehnquist Court of "undoing the Second Reconstruction," just as the Waite Court has long been blamed for facilitating the end of the First. This critique captures much of what is meant by those generally charging the Rehnquist Court with "conservative judicial activism." It posits that the present Court wants to dismantle decades' worth of federal antidiscrimination measures that are aimed at the "reconstruction" of public and private relationships at the local level. It sees the Waite Court as having similarly nullified the civil-rights initiatives enacted by Congress following the Civil War to …

Jon O. Newman And The Abortion Decisions: A Remarkable First Year, Andrew D. Hurwitz

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

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.

Make Way For The Aba: Smith V. Robbins Clears A Path For Anders Alternatives, James E. Duggan, Andrew W. Moeller

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

Indigents appealing criminal convictions are entitled to court-appointed counsel. The American Bar Association suggests a standard for providing the required representation. This standard is known as the Idaho Rule.

'Appropriate' Means-Ends Constraints On Section 5 Powers, Evan H. Caminker

Articles

With the narrowing of Congress' Article I power to regulate interstate commerce and to authorize private suits against states, Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment provides Congress with an increasingly important alternative source of power to regulate and police state conduct. However, in City of Boerne v. Flores and subsequent cases, the Supreme Court has tightened the doctrinal test for prophylactic legislation based on Section Five. The Court has clarified Section Five's legitimate ends by holding that Congress may enforce Fourteenth Amendment rights only as they are defined by the federal judiciary, and the Court has constrained Section Five's permissible …

Trying To Make Peace With Bush V. Gore (Symposium: Bush V. Gore Issue 2001), Richard D. Friedman

Articles

The Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore, shutting down the recounts of Florida's vote in the 2000 presidential election and effectively awarding the election to George W. Bush, has struck many observers, including myself, as outrageous.' Decisions of the Supreme Court should be more than mere reflections of ideological or partisan preference thinly camouflaged behind legalistic language. It would therefore be pleasant to be able to believe that they are more than that. Accordingly, Judge Richard Posner's analysis,2 in which he defends the result reached by the Court-though not the path by which it got there-is particularly welcome. Though …

Petition For Writ Of Certiorari, Richard W. Garnett, Michael Stokes Paulsen, David C. Gibbs Jr., David C. Gibbs Iii, Charlotte A. Cover, Barbara J. Weller

Court Briefs

No. 00-131
K.D.M. v. Reedsport School District

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

From the Reasons for Granting the Writ

The Ninth Circuit conceded that the regulation at issue below " 'discriminates' against students in religious schools, i.e., treats them differently by denying them state services on the school grounds." KDM, 196 F.2d 1046, 1051 (9th Cir. 1999) (App. B at 11 a). This, then, is a case about admitted discrimination - discrimination against "religious ideas, religious people, [and] religious schools." Board of Educ. of Kiryas Joel v. …

Litigation In The United States And Mexico: A Comparative Overview, Robert M. Kossick, Jr.

University of Miami Inter-American Law Review

No abstract provided.

Private Remedies For Public Wrongs Under Section 5 (Symposium: New Directions In Federalism), Evan H. Caminker

Articles

The Supreme Court has ushered in the new millennium with a renewed emphasis on federalism-based limits to Congress's regulatory authority in general, and Congress's Section 5 power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment in particular. In a recent string of cases, the Court has refined and narrowed Section 5's enforcement power in two significant ways.1 First, the Court made clear that Congress lacks the authority to interpret the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment's substantive provisions themselves, and may only "enforce" the judiciary's definition of Fourteenth Amendment violations. 2 Second, the Court embraced a relatively stringent requirement concerning the relationship between means …

Making Biomedical Policy Through Constitutional Adjudication:The Example Of Physician-Assisted Suicide, Carl E. Scheider

Book Chapters

Throughout most of American history no one would have supposed biomedical policy could or should be made through constitutional adjudication. No one would have thought that the Constitution spoke to biomedical issues, that those issues were questions of federal policy, or that judges were competent to handle them. Today, however, the resurgence of substantive due process has swollen the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment, the distinction between federal and state spheres is tattered, and few statutes escape judicial vetting. Furthermore, Abraham Lincoln's wish that the Constitution should "become the political religion of the nation" has been granted. "We now reverently …

Sovereign Immunity, Due Process, And The Alden Trilogy, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Alden v. Maine, the Court held that the principle of sovereign immunity protects states from being sued without their consent in their own courts by private parties seeking damages for the states' violation of federal law. The Court thus rejected the "forum allocation" interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment, under which the Amendment serves merely to channel suits against the states based on federal law into the state courts, which are required by the Supremacy Clause to entertain such suits. The Court held instead that the Eleventh Amendment protects the states from being subjected to private damage liability by …

An Essay On Texas V. Lesage, Christina B. Whitman

Articles

When I was invited to participate in this symposium, I was asked to discuss whether the causation defense developed in Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle applied to cases challenging state action under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. As I argue below, it seems clear that Mt. Healthy does apply to equal protection cases. The Supreme Court explicitly so held last November in Texas v. Lesage. But the implications of Lesage go beyond questions of causation. The opinion suggests that the Court may be rethinking (or ignoring) its promise in Carey v. Piphus …

The Wrong Vampire, Garrett Epps

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Constitutional Right Of Poor People To Appeal Without Payment Of Fees: Convergence Of Due Process And Equal Protection In M.L.B. V. S.L.J, Lloyd C. Anderson

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In this Article, Professor Lloyd Anderson examines the recent decision M.L.B. v. S.L.J., in which the United States Supreme Court held that due process and equal protection converge to require that states cannot require indigent parents who seek to appeal decisions terminating their parental rights to pay court costs they cannot afford. Noting that this decision expands the constitutional right of cost-free appeal from criminal to civil cases for the first time, Professor Anderson discusses the characteristics a civil case should have in order to qualify for such a right. Professor Anderson proposes a number of other civil cases, …

No-Drop Prosecution Of Domestic Violence: Just Good Policy, Or Equal Protection Mandate?, Kalyani Robbins

Faculty Publications

Domestic violence is a problem that must be dealt with for what it is: a criminal act. The only way to effectively diminish it is through the full force of the criminal justice system, which must treat domestic violence the same as it treats crime by strangers. The purpose of this note is to argue that aggressive prosecution of domestic violence-at least to the same extent that other violent crimes are prosecuted-is mandated by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Part I will examine the extent of the problems that pervade the criminal justice system, both historically and …

What Spending Clause? - (Or The President's Paramour): An Examination Of The Views Of Hamilton, Madison, And Story On Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 Of The United States Constitution, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 81 (1999), Jeffrey T. Renz

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Bribery Statute And The Ethics Of Purchasing Testimony, 33 J. Marshall L. Rev. 209 (1999), Camille Knight

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Agency, Equality, And Antidiscrimination Law , Tracy E. Higgins, Laura A. Rosenbury

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court increasingly has interpreted the Equal Protection Clause as a mandate for the state to treat citizens as if they were equal-as a limitation on the state's ability to draw distinctions on the basis of characteristics such as race and, to a lesser extent, gender. In the context of race, the Court has struck down not only race-specific policies designed to harm the historically oppressed, but race conscious policies designed to foster racial equality. Although in theory the Court has left open the possibility that benign uses of race may be constitutional under some set of facts, in …

Oregon V. Elstad Revisited: Urging State Court Judges To Depart From The U.S. Supreme Court's Narrowing Of Miranda, Claudia R. Barbieri

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

Imagine an average young man on the threshold of adulthood, living in a medium-sized town in a middle-class family. Still in his early years, he gets into a little local trouble and one day finds the police at his door. They ask him questions about a burglary. He panics, and as he racks his brain for some scrap of legal knowledge that might get him out of this frightening situation, he admits that he knows about the crime, stating he was there. The police become more persistent, telling him they know about his involvement, asking him if he wants to …

Does New York's Death Penalty Statute Violate The New York Constitution?, Honorable Stewart F. Hancock Jr., Christopher Quinn, Richard Klein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Inequities Of The Drug War: Legislative Discrimination On The Cocaine Battlefield, Andrew N. Sacher

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.