Constitutional Law Commons^™

First Amendment And Media Law Diversity Moot Court Competition, Roger Williams University School Of Law, Michelle Choate

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Amicus Brief Of Legal Scholars Lee Kovarsky Et Al. In Support Of Petitioner, Ira P. Robbins

Amicus Briefs & Court Filings

QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether a second-in-time habeas claim filed while an appeal from the judgment on an initial habeas claim is still pending counts as a second or successive habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)

INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE: Amici curiae are law professors and legal scholars who study federal post-conviction law and civil procedure. Amici curiae have no personal interest in the outcome of this case. They all share an interest in seeing habeas law applied in a way that ensures the just and timely adjudication of claims while preserving the traditional and intended operation of the Federal Rules …

What The Cluck? Backyard Chickens And Maine's Mysterious Right To Food, Lucy Weaver

Maine Law Review

When Maine voters approved the nation’s first “right to food” constitutional amendment, many were concerned about the amendment’s potential to conflict with animal welfare, food safety, and other regulations currently in place at the state and local level. Born from a decade of advocacy, the amendment represents a new era for Maine’s food sovereignty movement. However, the boundaries of the amendment remain unclear, and Maine’s municipalities lack sufficient guidance as they attempt to navigate how this amendment applies to them. This Comment explores one example of the many challenges that may arise from the enactment of the right to food …

You Can Grow Your Own Way: Maine's Constitutional "Right To Food" Amendment, Kristin Hebert

Maine Law Review

Maine is the first state to constitutionalize a right to food. This is significant not only because no other states have enshrined such a right, but because this is Maine’s first foray into constitutionalizing any new individual rights. This raises a host of questions for courts to grapple with: What level of scrutiny should apply? What kinds of protections does this right afford? What are its limitations? This Comment offers a framework for courts to use when interpreting the right to food that is grounded in the legislative and voter intent. Given the amendment’s broad language, this comment argues that …

“Food Of Their Own Choosing”: Improving Access To Locally Grown, Sustainable, And Real Food, Alexia M. Kulwiec, Tom Starck

Maine Law Review

The State of Maine is leading the nation in efforts not only to promote production of locally and sustainably grown food, but the right of consumers to grow, produce, and consume the food of their choosing. This includes creation of a constitutional right to food, a right recognized in the global community but not throughout the United States. Many advocates in the United States emphasize the right to food as a human right, advocating for the same attention and protection as other human rights such as the right to life, liberty, freedom from slavery, and freedom from discrimination. The right …

Realizing The Right To Food In Maine: Insights From International Law, Smita Narula

Maine Law Review

In November 2021, Maine made history as the first U.S. state to constitutionally recognize the right to food. Maine’s right to food amendment—which sought to address widespread food insecurity and corporate control of the food supply—proclaims food as a “natural, inherent and unalienable right,” and empowers Mainers to grow and consume food of their own choosing, affirming their right to food sovereignty. This Article makes three key contributions to scholarly examinations of this historic amendment. First, it situates the amendment within the broader landscape of domestic and global struggles for the right to food and food sovereignty. Second, the Article …

Democracy's Ruling Hand, Steven L. Winter Walter S. Gibbs Distinguished Professor Of Constitutional Law

Law Faculty Research Publications

The claim of liberal constitutionalism is that a text-like object or a ‘diplomatically abstract’ set of principles can work a deflection of disagreements within a pluralist polity. But this project assumes both that pluralism remains amenable to reason and that reason is a capacity independent of the profound differences of meaning, value, and forms of life that shape those disagreements. Neither assumption is correct. Differences in norms, values, and forms of life inevitably undergird and structure differences in meaning, perception, and interpretation. Consequently, a constitution (even when written and accompanied by judicial review) will necessarily unfold in an ongoing process …

A Major Question For Administrative Law: How Are Courts Applying The Major Questions Doctrine Post West Virginia V. Epa?, Christopher Eckhardt

Catholic University Law Review

On June 30, 2022, judicial deference toward actions of administrative agencies took a significant hit. In West Virginia v. EPA, the Court formally recognized—for the first time—the major questions doctrine, which requires agencies to identify clear congressional authorization when claiming the authority to make decisions of vast economic and political significance. Since June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court has utilized the major questions doctrine in decisions of national importance, including topics ranging from environmental protection efforts to cancelling student debt. This note offers a snapshot of how the major questions doctrine has been applied by federal courts across the country …

Sustaining America's Non-Jurisdictional Wetlands Post-Sackett Through Conservation, Shawna Bligh

UMKC Law Review

Part I of this Article discusses the functional role of wetlands in meeting the intended purpose of the Clean Water Act (“CWA”). The intended purpose of the CWA is to "restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Nation's waters." The Court's decision in Sackett undermines the intended purpose of the CWA. Wetlands play an essential role in meeting this objective. Wetlands are hydrologically connected to and an embedded part of the overall aquatic ecosystem. The Sackett decision leaves wetlands subject to further degradation.

Part II of this Article provides an overview of the CWA, how we …

Sowing Seeds Of Restriction: Cultivating Insight Into Foreign Agricultural Holdings And Equal Protection Concerns, Payton R. Flower

Arkansas Law Review

Twenty-four states have enacted laws to restrict foreign land ownership, with many placing an emphasis on agricultural land in some capacity. This Comment will argue that state restrictions on foreign land ownership should be vulnerable to equal protection violations when presented squarely to the Supreme Court. Additionally, it will explore the specific implications for agricultural land given its increasing value and economic importance. This analysis is illustrated by the issue presented in Shen v. Simpson, a recent constitutional challenge to Florida’s land ownership restrictions. Part II will discuss the pertinent history and legal landscape that frames the issue. Part III …

Brief For Amici Curiae New York State Legal Scholars In Support Of Defendants-Respondents, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii, Michael Pollack

Amicus Briefs

This document presents a legal brief submitted by amici curiae in a case involving prominent Republican plaintiffs challenging the constitutionality of New York State's absentee voting provisions. The brief emphasizes the fundamental importance of voting as enshrined in the New York Constitution, particularly Article II, which guarantees suffrage to all qualified citizens. It argues that the Constitution's democracy principle supports broad access to the electoral process, countering the plaintiffs' claims that the absentee voting provisions are overly restrictive. The amici curiae assert that the legislative authority to expand voting access is consistent with the overarching democratic commitments of the Constitution. …

Masthead

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

A Government Branch Of Its Own: Reining In The Power Of The Regents Of The University Of California, Veronica Gray

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

The University of California system is the crown jewel of American public universities. However, Californians have virtually no say over University of California policies. At the University of California’s inception, the drafters of the 1879 California Constitution envisioned a school system controlled by a Board of Regents who are largely insulated from politics. The autonomy from elected officials and the public allows the Regents to have nearly full control over a public good. The Regents’ autonomy and control over the University of California system has led to conflict between the Regents, the public, and state legislators regarding land use, labor, …

The Spy In Your Pocket: Montana’S Tiktok Ban And The Federalism Limits Of State-Level Foreign Policy, Wei Luo

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

In May 2023, Montana became the first state in America to ban the social media app TikTok. This article proposes a two-prong analytical framework for evaluating the federalism limits of Montana’s TikTok ban (SB 419) and similar laws that other states might enact in the future. The first prong is a mandatory constitutional analysis of whether the state law runs afoul of restrictions on states’ foreign policy powers. These limits are threefold— Article I, Section 10, preemption, and the dormant Commerce Clause. This article focuses on federalism limits that only the states face and does not explore other constraints that …

The Undignified First Amendment, Douglas E. Edlin

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

Many commonly understand the constitutional right of free speech as an individual right of expression. One reason for this is the ascendance of the dignitarian or autonomy theory of free speech, which has supplanted the marketplace and democratic conceptions as the predominant theory of speech rights in the United States. As a result, scholars, judges, and citizens usually focus on the rights of speakers. But the United States Constitution does not describe a right to speak; the First Amendment protects a right to speech. This article argues that the preoccupation with the dignitarian basis for speech as expression has distorted …

The Death Of "Hey Ump!": New Rules In Pennsylvania And New Jersey Could Get You Locked Up Or Kicked Out For Heckling The Umpire, Hanna Lambert

Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal (1994 - )

No abstract provided.

Judicial Power And Potential Unconstitutionality: A Scholastic Perspective, Kevin C. Walsh

Catholic University Law Review

This essay is an exercise in constructive retrieval of the traditional American understanding of judicial power with respect to judicial disregard of potentially unconstitutional laws when identifying rules of decision in constitutional adjudication.

This retrieval makes use of the act/potency distinction from Scholastic philosophy, Thomas Aquinas’s distinction between ius and lex, and John Marshall’s canonical account of the judicial application of the Constitution as a rule of decision in Marbury v. Madison to diagnose the cause of contemporary severability doctrine’s problems and to identify a basic framework for replacement doctrine.

I contend that the doctrinal pieces for the replacement …

Confrontation, The Legacy Of Crawford, And Important Unanswered Questions, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The right to confront has a long history. In the United States, the Confrontation Clause provides: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right… to be confronted with the witnesses against him[.]” One of the most troublesome areas of Confrontation Clause jurisprudence has been the Clause’s application to “hearsay statements offered against a criminal defendant pursuant to a hearsay exception or exemption[.]” The Supreme Court’s confrontation analysis in this situation once hinged on the statement’s reliability, with the traditional hearsay rule and its exceptions and exemptions as a guide. But in Crawford v. Washington, the Court considered …

Editor-In-Chief’S Forward, Zoë Grimaldi

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

“It’S Not Ok To Not Be Ok”: Suicide, California’S Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, And The Constitution, Christina Strohmann

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

Individuals who commit suicide are not incompetent or even making an irrational decision. Yet state laws, such as the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act in California, continue to allow mental health professionals to lock up suicidal patients in psychiatric facilities against the patient’s will. These commitments, however, are not always beneficial, and in many instances are detrimental to both the patient and the mental health professional. Patients can be traumatized from the experience, feel more suicidal from lack of hope and feelings of betrayal. Mental health professionals cannot effectively treat suicidal patients when providers are fearful of liability or when their patients refuse …