Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Seattle University School of Law (187)
- University of Michigan Law School (29)
- University of Nebraska - Lincoln (22)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (11)
- UIC School of Law (11)
-
- William & Mary Law School (10)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (6)
- Cornell University Law School (4)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (4)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (3)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (3)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (3)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (3)
- University of San Diego (3)
- University of the District of Columbia School of Law (3)
- City University of New York (CUNY) (2)
- Florida State University College of Law (2)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (2)
- The University of Akron (2)
- University at Albany, State University of New York (2)
- University of Arkansas Little Rock (2)
- University of Maine School of Law (2)
- University of Washington School of Law (2)
- West Virginia University (2)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (2)
- Bridgewater College (1)
- Claremont Colleges (1)
- Duke Law (1)
- Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (1)
- Emory University School of Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- Fourteenth Amendment (19)
- Fourth Amendment (17)
- Law (16)
- Fifth Amendment (15)
- Fourth amendment (14)
-
- Privacy (13)
- Exclusionary rule (12)
- Fourteenth amendment (12)
- Search and seizure (12)
- Constitution (11)
- Due process (11)
- Supreme Court (11)
- Miranda v. Arizona (10)
- United States Constitution 14th Amendment (10)
- United States Constitution 4th Amendment (10)
- Bill of Rights (9)
- Dickerson v. United States (9)
- Due Process Clause (9)
- Due Process (8)
- Equal Protection Clause (8)
- Police (8)
- Affirmative Action (7)
- Probable cause (7)
- Race (7)
- SFFA (7)
- Diversity (6)
- ESG (6)
- Equal protection (6)
- Evidence (6)
- Excessive force (6)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (187)
- Michigan Law Review (24)
- Nebraska Journal on Advancing Justice (22)
- UIC Law Review (11)
- Touro Law Review (10)
-
- Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic (5)
- Articles (5)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (4)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (3)
- Faculty Publications (3)
- Maryland Law Review (3)
- Other Faculty Publications (3)
- University of Cincinnati Law Review (3)
- University of the District of Columbia Law Review (3)
- Akron Law Review (2)
- Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Indiana Law Journal (2)
- Maine Law Review (2)
- Psychology Faculty Scholarship (2)
- San Diego Law Review (2)
- Scholarly Articles (2)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (2)
- West Virginia Law Review (2)
- Arkansas Law Review (1)
- Articles & Chapters (1)
- Books (1)
- CMC Senior Theses (1)
- Capital Defense Journal (1)
- Capstones (1)
- Cardozo Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 271 - 300 of 347
Full-Text Articles in Fourth Amendment
A Legal Note On The Nixon Pardon: Equal Justice Vis-À-Vis Due Process, Luis Kutner
A Legal Note On The Nixon Pardon: Equal Justice Vis-À-Vis Due Process, Luis Kutner
Akron Law Review
THE FIRST TWO MAJOR ACTS of the Ford Presidency-the offer of earned amnesty (at least insofar as draft resisters in the Vietnam conflict are concerned) and the pardon granted to former President Richard M. Nixonwere charitable, wise and just. This article, of course, will discuss the presidential pardon for Mr. Nixon.
Abolish Anonymous Reporting To Child Abuse Hotlines, Dale Margolin Cecka
Abolish Anonymous Reporting To Child Abuse Hotlines, Dale Margolin Cecka
Catholic University Law Review
All states allow the public to anonymously report suspicions of child abuse or neglect to a toll free central phone number. An extensive examination of the policy and practices behind anonymous reporting hotlines indicates that they are widely unregulated and susceptible to abuse. The possible repercussions of an anonymous phone call create costs to the family and society which do not outweigh the potential benefit of allowing anonymous public reports. Under the guise of protecting children, the law has developed in such a way that it infringes on the fundamental rights of parents and children. At the same time, anonymous …
County Court, Westchester County, People V. Gant, Albert V. Messina Jr.
County Court, Westchester County, People V. Gant, Albert V. Messina Jr.
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Inverse Relationship Between The Constitutionality And Effectiveness Of New York City "Stop And Frisk", Jeffrey Bellin
The Inverse Relationship Between The Constitutionality And Effectiveness Of New York City "Stop And Frisk", Jeffrey Bellin
Faculty Publications
New York City sits at the epicenter of an extraordinary criminal justice phenomenon. While employing aggressive policing tactics, such as “stop and frisk,” on an unprecedented scale, the City dramatically reduced both violent crime and incarceration – with the connections between these developments (if any) hotly disputed. Further clouding the picture, in August 2013, a federal district court ruled the City’s heavy reliance on “stop and frisk” unconstitutional. Popular and academic commentary generally highlights isolated pieces of this complex story, constructing an incomplete vision of the lessons to be drawn from the New York experience. This Article brings together all …
Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Moore, Gennaro Savastano
Court Of Appeals Of New York, People V. Moore, Gennaro Savastano
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Criminal Procedure Decisions From The October 2006 Term, Susan N. Herman
Criminal Procedure Decisions From The October 2006 Term, Susan N. Herman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Recent Developments In The Use Of Excessive Force By Law Enforcement, Karen M. Blum, Jack Ryan
Recent Developments In The Use Of Excessive Force By Law Enforcement, Karen M. Blum, Jack Ryan
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
You Have The Right To Be Free From Unwanted Bodily Intrusion--Unless Of Course There Is A Court Order, Tara Laterza
You Have The Right To Be Free From Unwanted Bodily Intrusion--Unless Of Course There Is A Court Order, Tara Laterza
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Richard Ortega, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. United States Immigration And Customs Enforcement, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants: Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, Patricia E. Roberts, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Thomas W. Ports Jr.
Richard Ortega, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. United States Immigration And Customs Enforcement, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants: Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, Patricia E. Roberts, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Thomas W. Ports Jr.
Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic
No abstract provided.
Who Should Be The ‘Decider’ On Keeping Our Secrets?, Stephen Henderson
Who Should Be The ‘Decider’ On Keeping Our Secrets?, Stephen Henderson
Other Faculty Publications
An invited essay for Constitution Day, also available here: http://blogs.law.widener.edu/constitution2013/2013-essay-authors/stephen-henderson/It addresses the national security surveillance disclosed by Edward Snowden and others, and asks whether a fundamental shift would be prudent in the era of Big Data.
Richard Ortega, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. United States Immigration And Customs Enforcement, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants: Reply Brief Of Appellant, Patricia E. Roberts, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Alison R.W. Toepp
Richard Ortega, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. United States Immigration And Customs Enforcement, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants: Reply Brief Of Appellant, Patricia E. Roberts, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Alison R.W. Toepp
Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic
No abstract provided.
Richard Ortega, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. United States Immigration And Customs Enforcement, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants: Brief Of Appellant, Patricia E. Roberts, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Alison R.W. Toepp
Richard Ortega, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. United States Immigration And Customs Enforcement, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants: Brief Of Appellant, Patricia E. Roberts, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Alison R.W. Toepp
Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic
No abstract provided.
Mary D. Branch, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. Officer Timothy Gorman, Et Al., Defandants-Appellants: Reply Brief Of Appellant, Patricia E. Roberts, Pamela Palmer, Alexa Roggenkamp, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Robert M. Luck Iii
Mary D. Branch, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. Officer Timothy Gorman, Et Al., Defandants-Appellants: Reply Brief Of Appellant, Patricia E. Roberts, Pamela Palmer, Alexa Roggenkamp, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Robert M. Luck Iii
Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic
No abstract provided.
Florence V. Board Of Chosen Freeholders: Maintaining Jail Security While Stripping Detainees Of Their Constitutional Rights, Nina Gleiberman
Florence V. Board Of Chosen Freeholders: Maintaining Jail Security While Stripping Detainees Of Their Constitutional Rights, Nina Gleiberman
Maryland Law Review Online
No abstract provided.
The Mercenary Gap: How To Protect The Constitutional Rights Of American Contractors In The Age Of The Private Military Firm, 46 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1121 (2013), John Sviokla
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Mary D. Branch, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. Officer Timothy Gorman, Et Al., Defandants-Appellants: Brief Of Appellant, Patricia E. Roberts, Pamela Palmer, Alexa Roggenkamp, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Robert M. Luck Iii
Mary D. Branch, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. Officer Timothy Gorman, Et Al., Defandants-Appellants: Brief Of Appellant, Patricia E. Roberts, Pamela Palmer, Alexa Roggenkamp, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Robert M. Luck Iii
Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic
No abstract provided.
Due Process In American Military Tribunals After September 11, 2001, Gary Shaw
Due Process In American Military Tribunals After September 11, 2001, Gary Shaw
Touro Law Review
The Authorization for Use of Military Force ("AUMF") provides broad powers for a president after September 11, 2001. President Bush, under the AUMF, claimed he had the power to hold "enemy combatants" without due process. This gave rise to two questions that the article addresses: "Could they be held indefinitely without charges or proceedings being initiated? If proceedings had to be initiated, what process was due to the defendants?"
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.
Mapp V. Ohio Revisited: A Law Clerk's Diary, Polly J. Price
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 …
Roth At Fifty: Reconsidering The Common Law Antecedents Of American Obscenity Doctrine, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 393 (2008), James R. Alexander
Roth At Fifty: Reconsidering The Common Law Antecedents Of American Obscenity Doctrine, 41 J. Marshall L. Rev. 393 (2008), James R. Alexander
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Hitching A Ride: Every Time You Take A Drive, The Government Is Riding With You, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1499 (2006), Benjamin Burnham
Hitching A Ride: Every Time You Take A Drive, The Government Is Riding With You, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1499 (2006), Benjamin Burnham
UIC Law Review
No abstract provided.
Data Matching, Data Mining, And Due Process, Daniel J. Steinbock
Data Matching, Data Mining, And Due Process, Daniel J. Steinbock
Georgia Law Review
The Article concerns the governmental use of computerized data matching (comparison of records) and data mining (profiling),which increasingly are aimed at locating potential terrorists. The most striking aspect of virtually all anti-terrorist data matching and data mining decisions is the total absence of even the most rudimentary procedures for notice, hearing, or other opportunities for meaningful participation before, or even after, the deprivation is imposed. The Article evaluates under Fourth Amendment and due process standards a variety of law enforcement activities data matching or data mining might instigate. After reviewing these activities' potential effects on private, governmental, and accuracy interests, …
Righteous Shooting, Unreasonable Seizure? The Relevance Of An Officer's Pre-Seizure Conduct In An Excessive Force Claim, Aaron Kimber
Righteous Shooting, Unreasonable Seizure? The Relevance Of An Officer's Pre-Seizure Conduct In An Excessive Force Claim, Aaron Kimber
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
No abstract provided.
Profiling With Apologies, Sherry F. Colb
Profiling With Apologies, Sherry F. Colb
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
When Constitutional Worlds Colide: Resurrecting The Framers' Bill Of Rights And Criminal Procedure, George C. Thomas Iii
When Constitutional Worlds Colide: Resurrecting The Framers' Bill Of Rights And Criminal Procedure, George C. Thomas Iii
Michigan Law Review
For two hundred years, the Supreme Court has been interpreting the Bill of Rights. Imagine Chief Justice John Marshall sitting in the dim, narrow Supreme Court chambers, pondering the interpretation of the Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process in United States v. Burr. Aaron Burr was charged with treason for planning to invade the Louisiana Territory and create a separate government there. To help prepare his defense, Burr wanted to see a letter written by General James Wilkinson to President Jefferson. In ruling on Burr's motion to compel disclosure, Marshall departed from the literal language of the Sixth Amendment - …
Miranda, The Constitution, And Congress, David A. Strauss
Miranda, The Constitution, And Congress, David A. Strauss
Michigan Law Review
Are Miranda warnings required by the Constitution, or not? If they are, why has the Supreme Court repeatedly said that the rights created by Miranda are "not themselves rights protected by the Constitution"? If not, why can't an Act of Congress, such as 18 U.S.C. 3501, declare them to be unnecessary? These were the central questions posed by United States v. Dickerson. It is not clear that the majority opinion ever really answered them. The majority said that "Miranda is constitutionally based," that Miranda has "constitutional underpinnings," that Miranda is "a constitutional decision," and that Miranda "announced a constitutional rule." …
Miranda'S Mistake, William J. Stuntz
Miranda'S Mistake, William J. Stuntz
Michigan Law Review
The oddest thing about Miranda is its politics - a point reinforced by the decision in, and the reaction to, Dickerson v. United States. In Dickerson, the Supreme Court faced the question whether Miranda ought to be overturned, either directly or by permitting legislative overrides. The lawyers, the literature, and the Court split along right-left - or, in the Court's case, right-center - lines, with the right seeking to do away with Miranda's restrictions on police questioning, and the left (or center) seeking to maintain them. The split is familiar. Reactions to Miranda have always divided along ideological lines, with …
The Paths Not Taken: The Supreme Court's Failures In Dickerson, Paul G. Cassell
The Paths Not Taken: The Supreme Court's Failures In Dickerson, Paul G. Cassell
Michigan Law Review
Where's the rest of the opinion? That was my immediate reaction to reading the Supreme Court's terse decision in Dickerson, delivered to me via email from the clerk's office a few minutes after its release. Surely, I thought, some glitch in the transmission had eliminated the pages of discussion on the critical issues in the case. Yet, as it became clear that I had received all of the Court's opinion, my incredulity grew.
Miranda, Dickerson, And The Puzzling Persistence Of Fifth Amendment Exceptionalism, Stephen J. Schulhofer
Miranda, Dickerson, And The Puzzling Persistence Of Fifth Amendment Exceptionalism, Stephen J. Schulhofer
Michigan Law Review
Dickerson v. United States preserves the status quo regime for judicial oversight of police interrogation. That result could be seen, in the present climate, as a victory for due process values, but there remain many reasons for concern that existing safeguards are flawed - that they are either too restrictive or not restrictive enough. Such concerns are partly empirical, of course. They depend on factual assessments of how much the Miranda rules do restrict the police. But such concerns also reflect a crucial, though often unstated, normative premise; they presuppose a certain view of how much the police should be …
Questioning The Relevance Of Miranda In The Twenty-First Century, Richard A. Leo
Questioning The Relevance Of Miranda In The Twenty-First Century, Richard A. Leo
Michigan Law Review
Miranda v. Arizona is the most well-known criminal justice decision - arguably the most well-known legal decision - in American history. Since it was decided in 1966, the Miranda decision has spawned voluminous newspaper coverage, political and legal debate, and academic commentary. The Miranda warnings themselves have become so well-known through the media of television that most people recognize them immediately. As Patrick Malone has pointed out, the Miranda decision has added its own lexicon of words and phrases to the American language. Perhaps with this understanding in mind, George Thomas recently suggested that the Miranda warnings are more well-known …