Fourteenth Amendment Commons^™

The Evolution Of Search-And-Seizure Law: How New Hampshire And Federal Law Differ, Randall Lawrence–Hurt

Inquiry Journal 2010

No abstract provided.

Abandoning The Ten Percent Rule And Reclaiming One Person, One Vote, Stephanie Cirkovich

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Challenges To State Anti-Preference Laws And The Role Of Federal Courts, Michael E. Rosman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Future Of Discriminatory Local Ordinances Aimed At Regulating Illegal Immigration, John Ryan Syllaios

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Sit-Ins And The State Action Doctrine, Christopher W. Schmidt

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

By taking their seats at “whites only” lunch counters across the South in the spring of 1960, African American students not only launched a dramatic new stage in the civil rights movement, they also sparked a national reconsideration of the scope of the constitutional equal protection requirement. The critical constitutional question raised by the sit-in movement was whether the Fourteenth Amendment, which after Brown v. Board of Education1 prohibited racial segregation in schools and other stateoperated facilities, applied to privately owned accommodations open to the general public. From the perspective of the student protesters, the lunch counter operators, and most …

Of Fat People And Fundamental Rights: The Constitutionality Of The New York City Trans-Fat Ban, Katharine Kruk

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Gender Autonomy, Transgender Identity And Substantive Due Process: Finding A Rational Basis For Lawrence V. Texas, Jillian T. Weiss

Journal of Race, Gender, and Equality

No abstract provided.

The Pursuit Of Perfection: Congressional Power To Enforce The Reconstruction Amendments, A. Christopher Bryant

Faculty Articles and Other Publications

In June 2009 the Supreme Court avoided a decision on the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act's preclearance requirement, while at the same time managing to foreshadow that provision's ultimate demise. In a separate opinion, Justice Thomas announced that he would have reached the issue and invalidated the preclearance requirement. Conceding that unconstitutional racial discrimination in the administration of elections continued to be an unfortunate reality, he asserted that Congress was not permitted to pursue "perfect compliance" with the Constitution's mandate via the use of "broad prophylactic legislation."

Justice Thomas's statement accurately, though to be sure rather starkly, expressed an …

Gps Monitoring May Cause Orwell To Turn In His Grave, But Will It Escape Constitutional Challenges? A Look At Gps Monitoring Of Domestic Violence Offenders In Illinois, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 845 (2010), Mary Ann Scholl

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Post-Race Equal Protection?, Trina Jones, Mario L. Barnes, Erwin Chemerinsky

Faculty Scholarship

Most vividly demonstrated in the 2008 election of the first African-American President of the United States, post-race is a term that has been widely used to characterize a belief in the declining significance of race in the United States. Post-racialists, then, believe that racial discrimination is rare and aberrant behavior as evidenced by America’s pronounced racial progress. One practical consequence of a commitment to post-racialism is the belief that governments - both state and federal - should not consider race in their decision making. One might imagine that the recent explosion in post-racial discourse also portends a revised understanding of …

Second-Class Citizenship: The Tension Between The Supremacy Of The People And Minority Rights, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 963 (2010), Adam H. Morse

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Penalizing Punitive Damages: Why The Supreme Court Needs A Lesson In Law And Economics, Steve P. Calandrillo

Articles

The recent landmark Supreme Court decision addressing punitive damages in the infamous Exxon Valdez oil spill case has brought the issue of punitive awards back into the legal limelight. Modern Supreme Court jurisprudence, most notably BMW of North America, Inc. [517 U.S. 559 (1996)], State Farm [538 U.S. 408 (2003)], Philip Morris [549 U.S. 346 (2007)], and now Exxon Shipping Co. [128 S.Ct. 2605 (2008)] in 2008, has concluded that such judgments are justified to punish morally reprehensible behavior and to send a message to evildoers. The Court, however, has increasingly emphasized that the U.S. Constitution's Due Process Clause presumptively …

The Latest Phase Of Negro Disfranchisement [1912 Reprint From The Harvard Law Review], Julien C. Monnet

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Which Came First The Parent Or The Child?, Mary P. Byrn, Jenni Vainik Ives

Faculty Scholarship

From the moment a child is born, she is a juridical person endowed with constitutional rights. A child’s parents, however, do not become legal parents until a state statute grants them the fundamental right to raise one’s child. The state, therefore, exercises considerable power and discretion when it drafts the parentage statutes that determine who becomes a legal parent. This article asserts that the state, through its parens patriae power, has a duty to act as an agent for children when it drafts its parentage statutes. In particular, the state must adopt parentage statutes that satisfy children’s fundamental right to …

"The Prejudice Of Caste": The Misreading Of Justice Harlan And The Ascendency Of Anticlassificaiton, Scott Grinsell

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

This Article reconsiders the familiar reading of Justice Harlan's dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson as standing for the principle of constitutional colorblindness by examining the significance of Harlan's use of the metaphor "caste" in the opinion. By overlooking Harlan's invocation of "caste," it argues that conservative proponents of anticlassification have reclaimed the opinion for "colorblindness," and buried a powerful statement of the antisubordination principle that is at the heart of our equality law. The Article begins by examining the emergence of a reading of the opinion as articulating a view of equality law based in anticlassification. The Article then returns …

The Future Of Disparate Impact, Richard A. Primus

Articles

The Supreme Court's decision in Ricci v. DeStefano foregrounded the question of whether Title VIl's disparate impact standard conflicts with equal protection. This Article shows that there are three ways to read Ricci, one of which is likely fatal to disparate impact doctrine but the other two of which are not.

Mapp V. Ohio Revisited: A Law Clerk's Diary, Polly J. Price

Faculty Articles

The 1960 Supreme Court Term laid the groundwork for the subsequent revolution in the relationship between state and federal law accomplished by the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren. The "most famous search and seizure case in American history" - Mapp v. Ohio - would be decided that Term. Mapp held that the Fourth Amendment's protection against "unreasonable searches and seizures" required the exclusion of evidence found through an illegal search by state and local police officers, extending to the states a rule that had previously applied only to federal law enforcement. Mapp became a pivotal chapter in the …

Of Visible Race-Consciousness And Institutional Role: Equal Protection And Disparate Impact After Ricci And Inclusive Communities, Richard A. Primus

Book Chapters

Six years ago, Ricci v. DeStefano foregrounded the possibility that statutory disparate-impact standards like the one in Title VIl might be on a collision course with the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. For many observers, it was a radically new possibility. Until that point, disparate-impact doctrine had usually been understood as an ally of equal protection rather than as a potentially conflicting aspect of the law. But between the 1970s and the beginning of the present century, equal protection doctrine became more individualistic and less tolerant of race-conscious actions intended to redress inherited racial hierarchies. Those developments put equal protection …

Engquist And The Erosion Of The Equal Protection Clause: An Attempt To Stop The Creep Of Irrational Dicta, Darien Shanske

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Texas Mis-Step: Why The Largest Child Removal In Modern U.S. History Failed, Jessica Dixon Weaver

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This Article sets forth the historical and legal reasons as to how the State of Texas botched the removal of 439 children from the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints parents residing in Eldorado, Texas. The Department of Family and Protective Services in Texas overreached its authority by treating this case like a class-action removal based on an impermissible legal argument, rather than focusing on the facts and circumstances that could have been substantiated for a select group of children at risk. This impermissible legal argument regarding the “pervasive belief system” of a polygamist sect that allowed minor …

Justice Stevens And The Seattle Schools Case: A Case Study On The Role Of Righteous Anger In Constitutional Discourse, Andrew Siegel

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

Barriers To Financing: Is European Union Indirect Discrimination Law The Answer For Female Entrepreneurs?, Adam G. Panopoulos

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note explores whether European Union indirect discrimination law, particularly Directive 2004/113/EC, can address the barriers female entrepreneurs face in accessing financing. It examines the application of indirect discrimination principles to financial services, analyzing ECJ case law and advocating for the integration of gender mainstreaming to enhance gender equality in entrepreneurship.

Drawing Bisexuality Back Into The Picture: How Bisexuality Fits Into Lgbt Legal Strategy Ten Years After Bisexual Erasure, Heron Greenesmith

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article argues that bisexuality remains legally invisible, both in legal culture and jurisprudence, due to its inherent complexity and the reliance of legal arguments on a binary understanding of sexual orientation. It extends Kenji Yoshino's theory of bisexual erasure into the legal context, proposing that bisexuality is not just socially invisible but also legally inconspicuous. The analysis focuses on two main hypotheses: first, that bisexuality is inherently invisible to the law beyond deliberate erasure, and second, that where bisexuality is legally relevant, it complicates legal arguments that depend on the binary of sexuality. The article concludes by advocating for …

War And Peace Between Title Vii's Disparate Impact Provision And The Equal Protection Clause: Battling For A Compelling Interest, Eang Ngov

Faculty Articles

“[T]he war between disparate impact and equal protection will be waged sooner or later, and it behooves us to begin thinking about how – and on what terms – to make peace between them.” This Article addresses Justice Scalia’s premonition in Ricci v. DeStefano by providing an analysis of how that war may be waged and whether peace can be made between Title VII’s disparate impact provision and the Equal Protection Clause. Ricci involved a challenge to the City of New Haven’s decision to void the test results of an examination required for promotion within the City’s fire department. The …

Native Hawaiians And The Ceded Lands Trust: Applying Self-Determination As An Alternative To The Equal Protection Analysis, R. Hōkūlei Lindsey

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Origins Of The Privileges Or Immunities Clause, Part I: “Privileges And Immunities” As An Antebellum Term Of Art, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

Historical accounts of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment generally assume that John Bingham based the text on Article IV of the original Constitution and that Bingham, like other Reconstruction Republicans, viewed Justice Washington’s opinion in Corfield v. Coryell as the definitive statement of the meaning of Article IV. According to this view, Justice Miller in the Slaughterhouse Cases failed to follow both framers’ intent and obvious textual meaning when he distinguished Section One’s privileges or immunities from Article IV’s privileges and immunities.

A close analysis of antebellum law, however, suggests that Justice Miller’s …

Snyder V. Louisiana: Continuing The Historical Trend Towards Increased Scrutiny Of Peremptory Challenges, John P. Bringewatt

Michigan Law Review

In March 2008, the Supreme Court decided Snyder v. Louisiana, the latest in the line of progeny of Batson v. Kentucky. This Note demonstrates that Snyder is part of a historical pattern of Supreme Court decisions concerning the use of peremptory challenges in which the Court has moved away from permitting the unfettered use of the peremptory challenge in favor of stronger Equal Protection considerations. Snyder alters the requirements for trial judges in deciding Batson challenges by requiring them to provide some explanation of their reasons for accepting a prosecutor's justification of a peremptory challenge. Snyder is the …

Avoiding Another Eldorado: Balancing Parental Liberty And The Risk Of Error With Governmental Interest In The Well-Being Of Children In Complex Cases Of Child Removal, Andrew T. Erwin

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rescuing The Fourteenth Amendment Privileges Or Immunities Clause: How "Attrition Or Parliamentary Processes" Begat Accidental Ambiguity; How Ambiguity Begat Slaughter-House, Michael Anthony Lawrence

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Constitutional Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Mcdonald V. City Of Chicago, No. 08-1521 (U.S. Nov. 23, 2009)., Richard L. Aynes, Jack M. Balkin, Randy E. Barnett, Steven G. Calabresi, Michael Kent Curtis, Michael A. Lawrence, William Van Alstyne, Adam Winkler

Con Law Center Amicus Briefs

The question in this case is whether the individual right to keep and bear arms recently recognized in District of Columbia v. Heller, and held applicable to the federal government, must also be protected against state infringement. The textually and historically accurate way to determine if the states must respect an individual right to keep and bear arms is to examine the meaning of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Amici submit to the Court that the original meaning of the Privileges or Immunities Clause protected substantive, fundamental rights against state infringement, including the constitutional right of …