Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Section 7: Constitutional Structure: Federalism, Administrative Law, Checks And Balances, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 5: Business And Commerce, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 6: Freedom Of Speech And Press, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 4: Civil Rights, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 10: Property Rights And Environmental Laws, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 3: Town Meeting: The Supreme Court And The Contract With America -- What Role For The Court In Changing Political Times?, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 2: Moot Court: Romer V. Evans, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 1: Justices' Profiles, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Section 9: Criminal Law, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

The Last Minuet: Disparate Treatment After Hicks, Deborah C. Malamud

Michigan Law Review

The purpose of this article is to explain why the Court's much-maligned decision in Hicks was correct, and to further argue that in the aftermath of Hicks, the McDonnell Douglas-Burdine proof structure ought to be abandoned.

The Public Safety Exception To Miranda: Analyzing Subjective Motivation, Marc Schuyler Reiner

Michigan Law Review

This Note argues, however, that the appropriate inquiry under Quarles is whether an actual and reasonable belief in an emergency motivated the interrogating officer. This Note proposes a two-prong test to facilitate this inquiry. The subjective motivation prong evaluates the officer's subjective motivation as revealed by objective factors: the. content of the officer's questions, when he asked them, and when the suspect received Miranda warnings. The objective reasonableness prong looks at the objective circumstances to determine the reasonableness of the officer's belief in an emergency.

Part I demonstrates that the Quarles opinion actually contemplates and requires analysis of the officer's …

Turner Broadcasting, The First Amendment , And The New Electronic Delivery Systems, Henry Geller

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

After ducking the issue of the First Amendment status of cable television for years, the United States Supreme Court rendered its most important decision concerning the regulation of the new electronic media in Turner Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC. Turner involved the constitutionality of the "must-carry" provisions of the 1992 Cable Act (the "Act" or "Cable Act") which require cable systems to carry specified local broadcast television stations. While cable television began over four decades ago as a community antenna service, it changed drastically after the advent of satellite in the mid-1970's to also provide scores of satellite-delivered programs and to …

Justice William Johnson And The History Of Supreme Court Dissent, Meredith Kolsky Lewis

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

Responsibility, Causation, And The Harm-Benefit Line In Takings Jurisprudence, Glynn S. Lunney Jr

Faculty Scholarship

As one of the guarantees provided in the Bill of Rights, the Fifth Amendment's Compensation Clause restricts government's otherwise largely plenary power over privately-held property rights. While the Compensation Clause does not directly limit government's ability to change, modify, or even eliminate existing privately-held property rights, in certain instances it circumscribes government's ability to force individual property owners to bear the cost of such government-imposed changes. Specifically, for those government-imposed property redistributions found to be "takings" within the meaning of the Compensation Clause, the Fifth Amendment requires federal and state governments to compensate the property holder for the taking, and …

Chopping Miranda Down To Size, Michael Chertoff

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Confessions, Truth, and the Law by Joseph D. Grano

Justice Lewis F. Powell And The Jurisprudence Of Centrism, Mark Tushnet

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr by John C. Jeffries, Jr.

Hugo Black Among Friends, Dennis J. Hutchinson

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Hugo Black: A Biography by Roger K. Newman

Improving Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Welsh S. White

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Failure of the Criminal Procedure Revolution by Craig M. Bradley

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes: Law And The Inner Self, Michael A. Carrier

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes: Law and the Inner Self by G. Edward White

Supreme Court Roundtable: Fogerty V. Fantasy, Inc. And Campbell V. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., Beryl R. Jones-Woodin

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Deja Vu, All Over Again: The Supreme Court Revisits Religious Liberty, Gerard V. Bradley

Journal Articles

The Supreme Court is at it again. The justices are looking this term at two church-state questions which have long perplexed them. One is the yuletide baby-Jesus-in-the-public-square problem. This time, in the case of Pinette v. Review Board, a private group set up a Latin cross near the Ohio state capitol. This public space has long been used by all sorts of private speakers, including, it would seem, people with religious messages. The Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Ohio Realm put up a sign disclaiming all public sponsorship. Was this still an "establishment" of religion? Federal appeals court …

William Gardiner Hammond And The Lieber Revival, Paul D. Carrington

Cardozo Law Review

Francis Lieber's Legal and Political Hermeneutics was first published in serial form in 1837. Jacksonian populism was then at high water and American judges and lawyers were acknowledged as politicians. Interpretation of legal texts was seen as a political activity. His work was so well received that a hard cover edition was published in 1839.

The edition presented in this issue was prepared by William Gardiner Hammond in 1880. Jacksonian politics were then in retreat before a rising tide of technocratic professionalism. Many lawyers and judges were disowning the political mission of American law and aspiring to be technocrats. To …

Johnson V. De Grandy: Mixed Messages On Equal Electoral Opportunity Under Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act, Brenda Wright

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

Johnson v. De Grandy' is Florida's contribution to the burgeoning Supreme Court jurisprudence addressing the redistricting which followed the 1990 Census.2 That round of redistricting has been heavily influenced by Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which Congress amended in 1982 to prohibit election practices that deny minorities an equal opportunity to participate in the political process andelect candidates of their choice to office.3 Because the composition of election districts may have a powerful impact on the ability of racial or ethnic minorities to elect candidates of their choice to office, 4 redistricting is among the practices …

On The 'Fruits' Of Miranda Violations, Coerced Confessions, And Compelled Testimony, Yale Kamisar

Articles

Professor Akhil Reed Amar and Ms. Renee B. Lettow have written a lively, provocative article that will keep many of us who teach constitutional-criminal procedure busy for years to come. They present a reconception of the "first principles" of the Fifth Amendment, and they suggest a dramatic reconstruction of criminal procedure. As a part of that reconstruction, they propose, inter alia, that at a pretrial hearing presided over by a judicial officer, the government should be empowered to compel a suspect, under penalty of contempt, to provide links in the chain of evidence needed to convict him.

Reply: Self-Incrimination And The Constitution: A Brief Rejoinder To Professor Kamisar, Akhil Reed Amar, Renée B. Lettow

Michigan Law Review

A Reply to Yale Kamisar's Response to the "Fifth Amendment Principles: The Self-Incrimination Clause"

Fifth Amendment First Principles: The Self-Incrimination Clause, Akhil Reed Amar, Renée B. Lettow

Michigan Law Review

In Part I of this article, we examine the global puzzle of the Self-Incrimination Clause and the local confusion or perversion lurking behind virtually every key word and phrase in the clause as now construed. In Part II we elaborate our reading of the clause and show how it clears up the local problems and solves the overall puzzle.

Seventh Amendment Right To Jury Trial In Non-Article Iii Proceedings: A Study In Dysfunctional Constitutional Theory, Martin H. Redish, Daniel J. La Fave

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The right to a jury trial in civil cases, as enumerated in the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, is an integral part of the Bill of Rights. Nevertheless, in this Article, Professor Redish and Mr. La Fave argue that the Supreme Court has failed to preserve this right when Congress has relegated claims to a non-Article III forum. Furthermore, they argue, the Court has done so without providing any basis in constitutional theory to justify such a relinquishment.

Professor Redish and Mr. La Fave first examine the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Seventh Amendment in instances where Congress …

The Supreme Court And Race Discrimination, 1967-1991: The View From The Marshall Papers, Mark V. Tushnet

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Rise And Fall Of Supreme Court Concern For Racial Minorities, John E. Nowak

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Physician Assisted Suicide: The Last Bridge To Active Voluntary Euthanasia, Yale Kamisar

Book Chapters

SOME 30 YEARS AGO an eminent constitutional law scholar, Charles L. Black, Jr, spoke of 'toiling uphill against that heaviest of all argumental weights- the weight of a slogan.' I am reminded of that observation when I confront the slogan the 'right to die.' Few rallying cries or slogans are more appealing and seductive than the 'right to die.' But few are more fuzzy, more misleading, or more misunderstood.