Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Twombly’S Seismic Disturbances, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

The Supreme Court's decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), has had a seismic impact on federal civil litigation. We all thought the notice pleading concept introduced un­der the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure had substantially eased the plaintiff's burden at the pleading stage. The Supreme Court in Twombly said "yes, but," and emphasized that notice pleading was never intended to dispense entirely with the need to plead facts demonstrating a right to relief. In short, facts matter: Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires a statement of circumstances, events, and …

Crosses And Culture: State-Sponsored Religious Displays In The Us And Europe, Mark L. Movsesian

Faculty Publications

This article compares the recent jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights on the question of state-sponsored religious displays. Both tribunals insist that states have a duty of religious “neutrality,” but each defines that term differently. For the Supreme Court, neutrality means that government may not proselytize, even indirectly, or appear to favor a particular church; neutrality may even mean that government must not endorse religion generally. For the ECtHR, by contrast, neutrality means only that government must avoid active religious indoctrination; the ECtHR allows government to give “preponderant visibility” to the symbols of …

Obligatory Health, Noa Ben-Asher

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court will soon rule on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed in March 2010. Courts thus far are divided on the question whether Congress had authority under the Commerce Clause to impose the Act's "Individual Mandate" to purchase health insurance. At this moment, the public and legal debate can benefit from a clearer understanding of the underlying rights claims. This Article offers two principal contributions. First, the Article argues that, while the constitutional question technically turns on the interpretation of congressional power under the Commerce Clause, underlying these debates is a tension between …

Communicating Substance, Jelani Jefferson Exum

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Now that the Federal Sentencing Guidelines are advisory, the U.S. Sentencing Commission has more responsibility than ever to convince sentencing judges of the legitimacy of the Guidelines’ advice. During their mandatory period, the Guidelines enjoyed a captive set of followers—district judges who had limited choices for departing from the applicable Guidelines ranges, even when those judges were unhappy with the sentencing options before them. However, given the freedom that comes with the Guidelines’ current advisory form, sentencing judges are increasingly departing from the applicable Guidelines ranges. Although district judges still are required to calculate and consider the Sentencing Guidelines …

The Common School Before And After Brown: Democracy, Equality, And The Productivity Agenda, Rosemary C. Salomone

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In recent years, economic forces of global magnitude have placed the substance and value of education in the national spotlight. With jobs for college graduates in short supply, political pundits and news commentators have placed different estimates on the worth of a college degree and the continued utility of the liberal arts. Economists tie specific educational factors to future income. A high school diploma, we are told, can translate into an additional $300,000 in lifetime salary. A highly effective kindergarten teacher likewise carries a value-added benefit of $320,000, the additional income that a classroom of today’s students may earn …

Why March To A Uniform Beat? Adding Honesty And Proportionality To The Tune Of Federal Sentencing, Jelani Jefferson Exum

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

This Article fills a gap in current scholarship concerning the Federal Sentencing Guidelines ("Guidelines") by bringing together many sentencing concerns and refocusing them on the Guidelines themselves. Since United States v. Booker, in which the Supreme Court demoted the Guidelines from mandatory to advisory status and imposed reasonableness as the appellate standard of review, several scholars have written about the new, advisory Guidelines scheme. Some have focused on the constitutional problems that Booker failed to settle. Others have argued against a presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentences. For some scholars, the biggest issues with the advisory Guidelines regime …

Prosecutorial Discretion In The Shadow Of Advisory Guidelines And Mandatory Minimums, Michael A. Simons

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Imagine the following rather run-of-the-mill crime spree:

Three young men, ranging in age from eighteen to twenty and without significant criminal histories, get together to rob a convenience store in New York City. They take an unloaded an inoperable gun, go into the store, point the gun at the clerk behind the counter, and take a few hundred dollars from the cash register. Flush with success, they decide to do it again, this time at a jewelry store down the block. One of the young men points the unloaded gun at the store employees, another stands guard by the …

Using The Fourteenth Amendment To Protect The Integrity Of Kinship Foster Families, Jennifer Baum, Teresa J. Grogan

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

As children’s advocates, we know well the value of an extended family to a dependency case. Living with a family member is often considered by children removed from their parents to be the “second best.” Such arrangements are often more comforting, less socially stigmatizing, and more capable at facilitating children’s normal daily routines, including school, medical care, and religious training, than stranger foster care. The social and psychological benefits of kinship care are well documented. One recent retrospective study concluded that children in kinship foster care have fewer behavioral problems three years after placement than do children who were …

The More Things Change: A Psychological Case Against Allowing The Federal Sentencing Guidelines To Stay The Same In Light Of Gall, Kimbrough, And New Understandings Of Reasonableness Review, Jelani Jefferson Exum

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In December 2007, through two decisions, the Supreme Court sought to clean up the confusion that it created just shy of three years earlier when it rendered the Federal Sentencing Guidelines advisory in United States v. Booker and called for circuit courts to begin reviewing sentences for "unreasonableness." In one of those December decisions, Gall v. United States, the Court clarified what it meant by reasonableness review and explained that such review had both a procedural and substantive component. In the other decision, Kimbrough v. United States, the Court gave more meaning to the substantive component, …

Twombly: The Demise Of Notice Pleading, The Triumph Of Milton Handler, And The Uncertain Future Of Private Antitrust Enforcement, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly reversed the Second Circuit and held that a complaint that alleged mere parallel behavior among rival telecommunications companies, coupled with stray statements of agreement that amounted to legal conclusions, failed as a matter of law to state a claim for an antitrust conspiracy in violation of the Sherman Act. The Court ruled that in order to withstand a motion to dismiss, an antitrust conspiracy complaint must plead such factual material that, if taken as true, would suggest that the defendants have entered into an unlawful agreement. …

Tiresias And The Justices: Using Information Markets To Predict Supreme Court Decisions, Miriam A. Cherry, Robert L. Rogers

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In ancient Greek mythology, oracles and seers could foretell the actions of gods and kings. With these predictions, ordinary citizens could glimpse the future actions of their rulers, and the recipients treasured those insights.

Such knowledge may be more than myth. This Article explores the power of the information market, an economic instrument that allows groups of participants to merge their collective knowledge to make predictions. Specifically, we discuss the application of information markets to predicting Supreme Court decisions. The implications are significant: Supreme Court rulings determine issues critical to American politics and business, ranging from the Fifth Amendment …

Markets For Markets: Origins And Subjects Of Information Markets, Miriam A. Cherry, Robert L. Rogers

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

After the death of Pope John Paul II, a papal conclave convened to elect his successor. The media speculated that certain candidates were the "frontrunners" to watch. At the same time, pools formed on web sites to predict the outcome of the conclave, either for fun (using virtual money) or for profit. Throughout the days that the conclave met in April of 2005, trading continued, and ultimately the various markets predicted both that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger would emerge as the next pope and that he would choose the name Benedict XVI. After the white smoke signifying a new pope …

Illinois Brick: A Look Back And A Look Ahead, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In June 1977, the United States Supreme Court decided Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, ruling that only those dealing directly with price-fixers, and not others in the chain of distribution, are "injured" within the meaning of Section 4 of the Clayton Act in price-fixing cases. The decision struck the death knell to claims by indirect purchasers that illegal overcharges incurred by first purchasers had been passed-on to them through the distribution chain. The so-called direct purchaser rule of Illinois Brick was clear and unequivocal, the very essence of a bright-line rule. Yet, after over a quarter century, the …

Is It Ever Too Late For Innocence? Finality, Efficiency, And Claims Of Innocence, George C. Thomas Iii, Gordon G. Young, Keith Sharfman, Kate B. Briscoe

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

[Does it violate the Constitution] to execute a person who, having been convicted of murder after a full and fair trial, later alleges that newly discovered evidence shows him to be "actually innocent." ... [l]t is perfectly clear what the answer is: There is no basis in text, tradition, or even in contemporary practice (if that were enough) for finding in the Constitution a right to demand judicial consideration of newly discovered evidence of innocence brought forward after conviction.

Justice Scalia, joined by Justice Thomas, concurring in Herrera v. Collins.

Should innocent people be imprisoned as criminals? More …

Clarence Thomas: The First Ten Years Looking For Consistency, Mark C. Niles

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Ten years ago, when George Herbert Walker Bush nominated Clarence Thomas to replace Thurgood Marshall as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, I, like many Americans and most lawyers, waited with interest to hear information about this soon-to-be-powerful man. I had a vague recollection from my recent law school days of hearing about a young, conservative, black federal judge who might be inline for a nomination to the Court. This vague reference was all that I had heard of Clarence Thomas prior to the Fall of 1991.

When stories about Thomas began to appear in the …

Double Jeopardy Issues In The Financial Sector; Outside Counsel, Richard L. Stone, Jay Facciolo

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Double jeopardy issues arise regularly in the financial, banking and commodities industries where both civil and criminal statutes and penalties are used in successive prosecutions by federal and state governments to sanction the same conduct.

Recent Supreme Court and federal court decisions have established new standards for determining when civil fines and other civil penalties constitute “punishment” for purposes of the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment.

These decisions indicate that where a civil penalty imposed by a federal or state actor bears no “rational relation” to any actual damages caused, the penalty will be characterized as punishment …

Public Forum Doctrine And The Perils Of Categorical Thinking: Lessons From Lamb's Chapel, Rosemary C. Salomone

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In recent years, the intersection of the Religion and Speech Clauses of the First Amendment has become increasingly controversial particularly in the context of public schooling. Religious group meetings, the distribution of religious literature, the discussion of religious themes, and the recitation of prayers at graduation ceremonies have all forced the courts to weigh and re-weigh the right to individual speech against the responsibility of the state to stay within the bounds of Establishment Clause doctrine. Several legal and political factors have fueled this debate. Although the Supreme Court has reaffirmed on several occasions the unconstitutionality of organized prayer …

Free Speech And School Governance In The Wake Of Hazelwood, Rosemary C. Salomone

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

The Supreme Court's 1988 decision in Hazelwood School District v. KuhImeier upholding public school officials' authority to censor material in a high school student newspaper sent immediate shock waves throughout the educational and legal communities. The Court's sweeping language in Hazelwood moved far beyond the narrow issue of school newspaper censorship. It even moved beyond the question of appropriate or acceptable speech in public secondary schools. It was clear that Hazelwood could have far-reaching consequences for student rights, school governance, and the scope of official authority to make curricular decisions that reflect the values of the local community.

Some …

Rotten To The "Core": An Essay On Juries, Jurisdiction And Granfinanciera, G. Ray Warner

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Like a worm in an apple, the recent Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg decision has eaten away the article III heart of the current bankruptcy jurisdictional scheme while leaving nothing more than a seventh amendment blemish on the surface.

Granfinanciera ostensibly involves only the question whether Congress may, consistent with the seventh amendment jury trial guarantee, bar trial by jury in a fraudulent conveyance action brought in the bankruptcy court. The Court, however, converts the issue into an article III delegation question by equating Congress' power to override the seventh amendment with its power to delegate matters to non-article III …

From Widmar To Mergens: The Winding Road Of First Amendment Analysis, Rosemary C. Salomone

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In 1981, the Supreme Court decided Widmar v. Vincent, holding that a state university that created a "limited open forum" by opening its facilities to student organizations must grant equal access to religiously affiliated groups. The university's failure to do so constituted content-based discrimination that violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court rejected the university's argument that its policy to disallow religious meetings on campus was implemented to avoid contravening establishment clause principles. The Court's opinion was inconclusive as to whether the Widmar rationale would apply to secondary schools.

During the same period, Congress …

A Radical Intent, Michael A. Simons

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Much of the recent debate regarding constitutional interpretation has focused on the relevance of the Framers' intent. Attorney General Edwin Meese III has urged judges to "resurrect the original meaning of constitutional provisions." In contrast, Justice William Brennan has argued that courts should adapt the Constitution to "cope with current problems and current needs." A key disagreement involves whether the Bill of Rights protects citizens against state as well as federal government abuses. Some scholars have called for a rollback of Supreme Court decisions that incorporate provisions of the Bill of Rights in the fourteenth amendment, arguing that these …

Student Speech—Free Press In High Schools, Michael A. Simons

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Public educators in the United States are expected to pass on to their students—to inculcate in them—the shared values of their community. This communication of values is essential to the continued vitality of American culture and to the social, moral, and political education of students. Yet inculcation of community values cannot be allowed to trample students' individual liberties; public educators must strike a delicate balance between the state's educational interests and the students' rights to self-expression. Although the striking of this balance should initially be left to local educators, when value inculcation impermissibly interferes with students' constitutional rights, courts …