Recovering The Tort Remedy For Federal Official Wrongdoing,
2021
Laghi Distinguished Chair in Law at the University of St. Thomas School of Law (Minnesota)
Recovering The Tort Remedy For Federal Official Wrongdoing, Gregory Sisk
Notre Dame Law Review
As the Supreme Court weakens the Bivens constitutional tort cause of action and federal officers avoid liability for unlawful behavior through qualified immunity, we should recollect the merit of the common-law tort remedy for holding the federal government accountable for official wrongdoing. For more than a century after ratification of the Constitution, federal officers who trespassed on the rights of American citizens could be held personally liable under common-law tort theories, but then routinely were indemnified by the government.
The modern Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) roughly replicates the original regime for official wrongdoing by imposing liability directly on the …
Prosecutor-General Of Namibia V Namoloh And Others 2020 (3) Nr 839 (Sc),
2021
Walter Sisulu University
Prosecutor-General Of Namibia V Namoloh And Others 2020 (3) Nr 839 (Sc), Dunia P. Zongwe
SAIPAR Case Review
Namoloh is the leading case on the definition of an accused in Namibia. It is true that, so far, there have been quite some confusion on the definition of ‘accused.’ For instance, the Criminal Procedure Act does not describe the accused and actually refer to the person through the sentencing process ‘the accused’ even if the accused has already been ‘convicted’. The Namoloh case therefore stabilizes criminal law in Namibia by clarifying who does and who does not qualify as an ‘accused’.
Nonetheless, the way in which the Supreme Court resolved the question of permanent stays of prosecution contradicts the …
Is The Constitutional Court Fanning The Flames Of Potential Unrest? A Review Of Recent Political Cases,
2021
University of Zambia
Is The Constitutional Court Fanning The Flames Of Potential Unrest? A Review Of Recent Political Cases, O'Brien Kaaba, Felicity Kayumba Kalunga, Pamela Towela Sambo
SAIPAR Case Review
The cases we discuss in this article raise fundamental questions about access to justice. Inefficient delivery of judgments, issuance of unreasoned or thinly reasoned rulings, inordinate delay in hearing matters, and awarding of unwarranted costs in public interest matters all militate against access to justice. Access to justice is important in maintaining law and order and promoting the rule of law. As US Supreme Court Judge, Stevens, stated in Bush v Gore 531 US 98 (2000), ‘It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law.’ Where …
The Inconsistent Originalism Of Judge-Made Remedies Against Federal Officers,
2021
Charles Alan Wright Chair in Federal Courts, University of Texas School of Law
The Inconsistent Originalism Of Judge-Made Remedies Against Federal Officers, Stephen I. Vladeck
Notre Dame Law Review
Professor Carlos V´azquez and I have explained in depth why the Supreme Court’s evisceration of damages remedies for constitutional violations by federal officers is analytically and historically incoherent. And I have written elsewhere about the extent to which modern constitutional remedies doctrine has turned a remarkably blind eye to foundational principles of federalism—paying little more than lip service to the robust availability of common-law damages (and habeas) remedies against federal officers in state courts from the Founding through the Civil War—and, at least for damages, well into the twentieth century. I don’t mean to rehash (or relitigate) either argument here. …
Going Rogue: The Supreme Court's Newfound Hostility To Policy-Based Bivens Claims,
2021
Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law
Going Rogue: The Supreme Court's Newfound Hostility To Policy-Based Bivens Claims, Joanna C. Schwartz, Alexander Reinert, James E. Pfander
Notre Dame Law Review
In Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843 (2017), the Supreme Court held that a proposed Bivens remedy was subject to an exacting special factors analysis when the claim arises in a “new context.” In Ziglar itself, the Court found the context of the plaintiffs’ claims to be “new” because, in the Court’s view, they challenged “large-scale policy decisions concerning the conditions of confinement imposed on hundreds of prisoners.” Bivens claims for damages caused by unconstitutional policies, the Court suggested, were inappropriate.
This Essay critically examines the Ziglar Court’s newfound hostility to policy-based Bivens claims. We show that an …
Bivens And The Ancien Régime,
2021
Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center
Bivens And The Ancien Régime, Carlos M. Vázquez
Notre Dame Law Review
This Essay considers the relevance for Bivens claims of the Court’s shift to a nouveau régime to address the implication of private rights of action under statutes. Part I describes and assesses the Court’s reasons for shifting to the nouveau régime in the statutory context. Part II explains why the Court’s shift to a nouveau régime for implying damage remedies under federal statutes does not justify a similar shift with respect to constitutional remedies. The Constitution’s omission of specific remedies for violation of the Constitution’s substantive provisions does not reflect the Founders’ belief that such remedies are unnecessary to give …
Lessons For Bivens And Qualified Immunity Debates From Nineteenth-Century Damages Litigation Against Federal Officers,
2021
Professor and John D. Feerick Research Chair, Fordham Law School
Lessons For Bivens And Qualified Immunity Debates From Nineteenth-Century Damages Litigation Against Federal Officers, Andrew Kent
Notre Dame Law Review
This Essay was written for a symposium marking the fiftieth anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics. As the current Court has turned against Bivens—seemingly confining it to three specific contexts created by Bivens and two follow-on decisions in 1979 and 1980—scholars and litigants have developed a set of claims to respond to the Court’s critique. The Court now views the judicially created Bivens cause of action and remedy as a separation-of-powers foul; Congress is said to be the institution which should weigh the costs and benefits …
Was Bivens Necessary?,
2021
William Minor Lile Professor of Law and Armistead M. Dobie Research Professor of Law, University of Virginia
Was Bivens Necessary?, Ann Woolhandler, Michael G. Collins
Notre Dame Law Review
Some federal common-law skeptics have provided criteria for keeping federal common law in check. Although not specifically addressing Bivensactions, Professor Nelson has argued that when engaged in federal common lawmaking, federal courts should see themselves as more tied to custom, general principles of the common law, and precedent, rather than seeing themselves as engaged in a freewheeling search for the best policy. This methodology makes federal common law less subject to criticism as usurping the lawmaking roles of other government actors. Professor Merrill has argued that federal common law needs to be specifically intended by the framers of a …
A Scapegoat Theory Of Bivens,
2021
Assistant Professor of Law, William & Mary Law School
A Scapegoat Theory Of Bivens, Katherine M. Crocker
Notre Dame Law Review
Some scapegoats are innocent. Some warrant blame, but not the amount they are made to bear. Either way, scapegoating can allow in-groups to sidestep social problems by casting blame onto out-groups instead of confronting such problems—and the in-groups’ complicity in perpetuating them—directly.
This Essay suggests that it may be productive to view the Bivens regime’s rise as countering various exercises in scapegoating and its retrenchment as constituting an exercise in scapegoating. The earlier cases can be seen as responding to social structures that have scapegoated racial, economic, and other groups through overaggressive policing, mass incarceration, and inequitable government conduct more …
Judicial Autonomy V. Executive Authority: Which Prevails In The Case Of A Postcommutation Collateral Attack?,
2021
Candidate for Juris Doctor, Notre Dame Law School, 2022
Judicial Autonomy V. Executive Authority: Which Prevails In The Case Of A Postcommutation Collateral Attack?, Vincent A. Marrazzo
Notre Dame Law Review
An inmate with a commuted sentence will sometimes collaterally attack his already commuted sentence. This raises the question: Does an act of executive clemency divest the courts of authority to hear the collateral attack? In other words, does clemency moot the issues involved in the collateral attack? While multiple circuit courts have weighed in on this question, the Fourth and Sixth Circuits have developed the most robust discussions, disagreeing about whether federal courts may hear these cases. The Fourth Circuit has held that a collateral attack postcommutation is moot as the “President’s commutation order simply closes the judicial door.” In …
Sovereign Authority And Rule Of Law: The Effect Of U.S. Use Of Torture On Political Legitimacy,
2021
East Tennessee State University
Sovereign Authority And Rule Of Law: The Effect Of U.S. Use Of Torture On Political Legitimacy, Sydney Bradley
Undergraduate Honors Theses
Governmental sovereignty is created and maintained by mutual respect for the rule of law by the government and citizens. To maintain legitimacy, a government must act within the bounds of the contract that created it. Otherwise, the relationship founded by said contract would be nullified, as would the duties and obligations that flow from that relationship. Torture exemplifies an ultra vires act used by the United States to show the consequences of over-extended authority on political legitimacy and the rule of law. Founded on the philosophies of Hugo Grotius, Thomas Hobbes, and Christine Korsgaard, this research investigates the nature of …
Stare Decisis As Authority And Aspiration,
2021
Associate Dean for Faculty Development and Academic Affairs and Diane & M.O. Miller II Research Professor of Law, Notre Dame Law School
Stare Decisis As Authority And Aspiration, Randy J. Kozel
Notre Dame Law Review
The doctrine of stare decisis remains a defining feature of American law despite challenges to its legitimacy and efficacy. Even so, there is space between the role that stare decisis currently plays and the potential that it offers. The gap is evident in the jurisprudence of the U.S. Supreme Court. Though the Justices continue to underscore the fundamental status of stare decisis, the Court’s opinions sometimes seem quick to depart from precedents whose reasoning has fallen out of favor.
Using Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents as a case study, this Article explains how the Court can invigorate the doctrine …
The Right Against Self-Incrimination Under Indian Constitution & The Admissibility Of Custodial Statements Under The Indian Evidence Act, 1872,
2021
Maurer School of Law - Indiana University
The Right Against Self-Incrimination Under Indian Constitution & The Admissibility Of Custodial Statements Under The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Khagesh Gautam
Maurer Theses and Dissertations
This work argues that the constitutional validity of section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is highly suspect on the ground that it violates the right against self-incrimination protected by article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution. Section 27 codifies the doctrine of confirmation by subsequent recovery, an old British rule of admission according to which self-incriminatory custodial statements and/or confessions obtained by the police or the investigation agency are admissible into evidence on the ground that contents of such statement have been confirmed by recovery of incriminating physical evidence. Chapter I locates the Indian criminal justice system within the …
Reconsidering Section 1983'S Nonabrogation Of Sovereign Immunity,
2021
William & Mary Law School
Reconsidering Section 1983'S Nonabrogation Of Sovereign Immunity, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Publications
Motivated by civil unrest and the police conduct that prompted it, Americans have embarked on a major reexamination of how constitutional enforcement works. One important component is 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which allows civil suits against any "person" who violates federal rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has long held that "person" excludes states because Section 1983 flunks a condition of crystal clarity.
This Article reconsiders that conclusion--in legalese, Section 1983's nonabrogation of sovereign immunity--along multiple dimensions. Beginning with a negative critique, this Article argues that because the Court invented the crystal-clarity standard so long after Section 1983's enactment, the caselaw …
Free Speech In The Internet Era: Reviewing Policies Seeking To Modify Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act Of 1996,
2021
University of Rhode Island
Free Speech In The Internet Era: Reviewing Policies Seeking To Modify Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act Of 1996, Jacob Cordeiro
Senior Honors Projects
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), has for over two decades provided “interactive computer services” a legal liability shield for defamatory or otherwise actionable user-generated content posted on their platforms and, for lawsuits stemming over unequal enforcement of their content policies provided enforcement efforts are taken in “good faith.” This law, passed in the early days of the Internet, incubated the Internet and social media, giving it the regulatory freedom it needed to grow into a platform where hundreds of millions of Americans can exchange ideas and engage in political and social discourse. Yet, for all the good …
Constitutional Structure, Institutional Relationships And Text: Revisiting Charles Black’S White Lectures,
2021
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
Constitutional Structure, Institutional Relationships And Text: Revisiting Charles Black’S White Lectures, Richard C. Boldt
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Fundamental questions about constitutional interpretation and meaning invite a close examination of the complicated origins and the subsequent elaboration of the very structure of federalism. The available records of the Proceedings in the Federal Convention make clear that the Framers entertained two approaches to delineating the powers of the central government relative to those retained by the states. The competing approaches, one reliant on a formalist enumeration of permissible powers, the other operating functionally on the basis of a broad dynamic concept of state incompetence and national interest, often are presented as mutually inconsistent narratives. In fact, these two approaches …
May 2021 Era Update,
2021
Columbia Law School
May 2021 Era Update, Center For Gender And Sexuality Law
Center for Gender & Sexuality Law
The campaign to finalize the Equal Rights Amendment is being waged on several fronts. One in the courts, one in Congress. Last week, there were developments in two important lawsuits seeking to have the Equal Rights Amendment declared finalized and a valid part of the U.S. Constitution, thus securing explicit sex equality protections in the Constitution.
Corporatizing Administrative Law For Economic Constitutionalism In Ghana: An African Legal Study,
2021
Maurer School of Law - Indiana University
Corporatizing Administrative Law For Economic Constitutionalism In Ghana: An African Legal Study, Rowland Atta-Kesson
Maurer Theses and Dissertations
As the Government of Ghana partners the private sector to promote district industrialization in Ghana under what is locally called “one-district-one factory” (1D1F), this study argues that it is important to foster economic constitutionalism with legal and institutional innovations. One such innovation is this study’s emergent or grounded theory of corporatized administrative law. The study is unique because it contributes to the so-called new administrative law theory with fresh evidence from Ghana on the interface between the public and private sectors under the district industrialization program. The key problem is the challenge that democratic policy discontinuity poses to business protection …
“Lawyers’ Work”: Does The Court Have A Legitimacy Crisis?,
2021
St. Mary's University
“Lawyers’ Work”: Does The Court Have A Legitimacy Crisis?, Lackland Bloom
St. Mary's Law Journal
Talk of the Supreme Court’s legitimacy is pervasive. It can’t be avoided by anyone paying attention. The question this article addresses is does the Supreme Court have a legitimacy crisis. The title “Lawyers’ Work” is taken from Justice Scalia’s dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey in which he declared that as long as the Court decides cases by engaging in “Lawyers’ Work” the public will leave it alone. This article concludes that Justice Scalia was partially though not entirely correct.
The article begins by considering the concept of judicial legitimacy as developed and studied by political scientists. Next it …
Critical Reflections On Fraser: What Equality Are We Seeking?,
2021
Osgoode Hall Law School of York University
Critical Reflections On Fraser: What Equality Are We Seeking?, Sonia Lawrence
Articles & Book Chapters
In this brief comment, I contextualise and complicate the conventional reading of Fraser v Canada as a victory for equality seeking groups.1 Instead, or at least alongside that reading, I want to suggest some other stories about the trajectory of equality in Canada since the Charter2 era began, and about what future doctrinal developments Fraser might lead us to predict.
1 Fraser v Canada (Attorney General), 2020 SCC 28 [Fraser]. 2 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11.
