Fourteenth Amendment Commons^™

Diversity: The Red Herring Of Equal Protection, Sharon E. Rush

UF Law Faculty Publications

Couching the constitutional inquiry in cases like Bakke and VMI in the context of integration also puts in perspective the diversity justification. Affirmative action policies are constitutional because they integrate state programs. Integration on the basis of race and sex also diversifies state programs. In contrast, attempts to justify sex-segregation in state programs by arguing the policy promotes diversity is irrelevant to an equal protection analysis. Voluntarily created all-female schools should be constitutional because they promote the equal citizenship of women without damaging the equal citizenship stature of men. This is true for voluntarily race-segregated programs for minorities; as well. …

Booth V. Maryland 112 F.3d 139 (4th Cir. 1997) United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Great Myths: Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny & Virginia's Proportionality Review, Deborah A. Hill

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

O'Dell V. Netherland 117 S. Ct. 1969 (1997) United States-Supreme Court

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Arnold V. Evatt 113 F.3d 1352 (4th Cir. 1997) United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Mu'min V. Pruett 1997 Wl 597978 (4th Cir. Aug. 18, 1997) United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Pope V. Netherland 113 F.3d 1364 (4th Cir. 1997)1 United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Reflections On Constitutional Interpretation, Raoul Berger

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Antidisestablishmentarianism: Why Rfra Really Was Unconstitutional, Jed Rubenfeld

Michigan Law Review

Two months ago, the Supreme Court struck down the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), handing down its most important church-state decision, and one of its most important federalism decisions, in fifty years. Through RFRA, Congress had prohibited any state actor from "substantially burden[ing] a person's exercise of religion" unless imposing that burden was the "least restrictive means" of furthering "a compelling governmental interest." RFRA was a response to Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, in which the Supreme Court abandoned the very same compelling interest test that RFRA mandated. Smith, overturning decades-old precedent, held …

From Piracy To Prostitution - State Forfeiture Of An Innocent Owner's Property: Bennis V. Michigan, Charlena Toro

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

Bmw Of North America, Inc. V. Gore: The Supreme Court Rejects A Punitive Damage Award On Due Process Grounds, Rob S. Register

Mercer Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States has addressed the validity of punitive damages awards many times over the years, but until now has never overturned one based on a claim of excessiveness under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore is the first case in which the Court reversed and remanded a large punitive damage amount based on those grounds.

How Many Times Was Lochner-Era Substantive Due Process Effective?, Michael J. Phillips

Mercer Law Review

According to Justice David Souter, it is "most familiar history" that back when the Supreme Court took a restricted view of the commerce power, it also "routinely invalidated state social and economic legislation under an expansive conception of Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process." As the word "routinely" suggests, Souter evidently believed that this Lochner Court struck down a large number of laws on substantive due process grounds' during the years 1897 to 1937.

As discussed later, other observers agree. Although they recognize that the old Court rejected more substantive due process attacks than it accepted, they also suggest that cases …

Gray V. Netherland 99 F.3d 158 (4th Circuit 1996) United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Mueller V. Murray 252 Va. 356,478 S.E.2d 542 (1996) Supreme Court Of Virginia

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Hoke V. Netherland 92 F.3d 1350 (4th Cir. 1996) United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Beaver V. Thompson 93 F.3d 1186 (4th Cir. 1996) United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

George V. Angelone 100 F.3d 353 (4th Cir. 1996) United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Buchanan V. Angelone 103 F.3d 344 (4th Cir. 1996) United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Matthews V. Evatt 105 F.3d 907 (4th Cir. 1997) United States Court Of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Toward A More Effective Use Of Batson In Virginia Capital Trials, Daryl L. Rice, C. Cooper Youell, Iv

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

Is A Standard Of Proof Required For The Evaluation Of Unadjudicated Acts In Capital Sentencing?, David T. Mcindoe

Capital Defense Journal

No abstract provided.

The Casey Standard For Evaluating Facial Attacks On Abortion Statutes, John Christopher Ford

Michigan Law Review

Since the Supreme Court declared in 1973 that the Constitution grants women a limited right to an abortion, the Justices have decided abortion cases with reference to such weighty matters as religious freedom, the disadvantaged position of women in society, and the proper role of the judiciary. Understandably, the Supreme Court's writings on abortion deal extensively with these large themes. The Court, and certainly others, view abortion cases as rivaling Brown v. Board of Education in their importance to the nation. While the Court has focused on the big issues, however, it has neglected an equally important, if less emotionally …

Punishing Bias: An Examination Of The Theoretical Foundations Of Bias Crime Statutes, Anthony M. Dillof

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

No More Excuses: Closing The Door On The Voluntary Intoxication Defense, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 535 (1997), Chad J. Layton

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Women's Powerless Tool: How Congress Overreached The Constitution With The Civil Rights Remedy Of The Violence Against Women Act, 30 J. Marshall L. Rev. 803 (1997), Lisa A. Carroll

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States, Puerto Rico, And The Territorial Incorporation Doctrine: Reaching A Century Of Constitutional Authoritarianism, 31 J. Marshall L. Rev. 55 (1997), Gabriel A. Terrasa

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fighting Anti-Gay Abuse In Schools: The Opening Appellate Brief Of Plaintiff Jamie Nabozny In Nabozny V. Podlesny, Patricia M. Logue, David S. Buckel

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

In Nabozny v. Podlesny, 92 F.3d 446 (7th Cir. 1996), a case of first impression, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recognized the constitutional right of a gay male public school student to equal protection from anti-gay harassment and assaults. The court held that Jamie Nabozny had stated equal protection claims against his school district and three school principals for gender and sexual orientation discrimination based on allegations that, because he is gay and a boy, defendants had failed to afford him the same kinds of protection given to other harassed students. At trial on remand a jury found …

Polygamy And Same-Sex Marriage, David L. Chambers

Articles

In the American federal system, state governments bear the responsibility for enacting the laws that define the persons who are permitted to marry. The federal government, throughout our history, has accepted these definitions and built upon them, fixing legal consequences for those who validly marry under state law. Only twice in American history has Congress intervened to reject the determinations that states might make about who can marry. The first occasion was in the late nineteenth century when Congress enacted a series of statutes aimed at the Mormon Church, prohibiting polygamy in the Western territories and punishing the Church and …

Making Sausage: The Ninth Circuit's Opinion, Carl E. Schneider

Articles

As I write, the Supreme Court has just agreed to hear Compassion in Dying v. Washington and Quill v. Vacco, the two cases in which United States circuit courts of appeals held that a state may not constitutionally prohibit physicians from helping a terminally ill person who wishes to commit suicide to do so. These cases have already received lavish comment and criticism, and no doubt the Supreme Court's opinion will garner even more. Reasonably enough, most of this analysis addresses the merits of physician-assisted suicide as social policy. I, here, want to talk about how setting bioethical policy …

Congruence Principle Applied: Rethinking Equal Protection Review Of Federal Alienage Classifications After Adanrand Constructors, Inc. V. Peña, Victor C. Romero

Faculty Scholarship

This article suggests that the Supreme Court's 1995 decision in Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña constitutes a starting point for a renewed dialogue on the intersection of race, noncitizens' rights, and immigration law.

Part I of this Article examines the historical foundations of the plenary power doctrine up to the current dichotomy between judicial review of state and federal alienage classifications under equal protection. Part II reviews the Adarand decision, arguing that Justice O'Connor's congruence principle provides the bulwark for a revision of judicial review of federal legislation, especially in light of the historical and continuing perception of Asian- and …