Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Militia: A Definition And Litmus Test, Marcus Armstrong

St. Mary's Law Journal

The United States Supreme Court, in its decision in Perpich v. Department of Defense, ruled that members of the National Guard are “troops” as that word is used in the Constitution. In doing so, the Court negated a long-standing, but obsolete, definition of the militia. However, this move away from an obsolete definition of the militia posed considerable difficulties that the Court was unable to rectify in its Perpich decision. In this Article, the author hopes to help rectify these difficulties by proposing four necessary characteristics that define the militia: first, the militia is a military force; second, the …

“We” The Jury: The Problem Of Peremptory Strikes As Illustrated By Flowers V. Mississippi, Kayley A. Viteo

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

Plea Bargains: Justice For The Wealthy And Fear For The Innocent, Emily Stauffer

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

The Supreme Court has consistently recognized the hardships of the poor in the criminal justice system and has set a precedent that if a person cannot afford access to any level of the criminal justice system, the state must remove that financial barrier. Prosecutorial tactics in the plea-bargaining process coerce the poor into waiving their right to trial. The unequal access to trial between the poor and non-poor violates the Fourteenth Amendment, which requires that states remove any barrier that restricts the poor from the criminal justice system. The Court has left the states to decide which solutions will work …

Statehood Admissions Codification As A Protection Of Voting Rights, James Caleb Uhl

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

Historically, the process for admitting territories into the United States as states has been ambiguous and subsequently discriminatory. This ambiguity, when viewed in conjunction with the inherent voting rights of United States citizens, proves a systematic violation of said rights. By defining the statehood admission process, the voting rights of United States citizens residing in territories will no longer be violated. This article proposes legislation that includes five distinct criteria intended to rectify the ambiguity and subsequent discrimination in current admissions procedures while still allowing Congress to retain its constitutionally delegated processional authority.

Giving Due Process Its Due: Why Deliberate Indifference Should Be Confined To Claims Arising Under The Cruel And Unusual Punishment Clause, Shad M. Brown

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

This Note discusses culpability requirements for claims brought by pretrial detainees and convicted prisoners. The initial focus is on deliberate indifference, a culpability requirement formulated under the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause but symmetrically applied to claims arising under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Note then shifts to Kingsley v. Hendrickson, a landmark Supreme Court decision that casts doubt on the application of Eighth-Amendment standards to Fourteenth-Amendment claims. Finally, this Note advocates for the application of objective unreasonableness, a different culpability requirement, to claims arising under the Due Process Clause. It does so on the …

"Eco" Your Own Way: An Argument For State-Specific Climate Change Legislation, Amanda Voeller

Fordham Environmental Law Review

The consequences of climate change seriously and immediately threaten the American way of life, but proposed federal legislation like the Green New Deal is overly broad, unrealistic, and inefficient. The most effective way for the United States to combat climate change is not with a one-size-fits-all plan like the Green New Deal, but with federal legislation that incentivizes states and cities to enact and enforce individualized, local climate legislation. Different states and cities have different climates, available energy sources, and transportation needs, so the federal government should use financial incentives to encourage states and cities to pass tailor-made bills and …

The Catholic Church And The Paycheck Protection Program: Assessing Nondiscrimination After Trinity Lutheran And Espinoza, Elizabeth Totzke

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note argues the inclusion of houses of worship and the subsequent dispersal of PPP funds to the Catholic Church was explicitly constitutional. Applying the lens of the Supreme Court’s recently announced nondiscrimination principle, this Note considers the ramifications of the SBA’s official policy and explores the constitutional justification for the SBA’s ad hoc PPP policy. In fact, under the nondiscrimination principle, this Note concludes that the SBA’s policy shift was not just constitutionally permissible, but probably constitutionally required.

The Federalist Constitution: Foreword, David S. Schwartz, Jonathan Gienapp, John Mikhail, Richard A. Primus

Articles

Over the past twenty years, constitutional law has taken a decidedly historical turn, both in academia and in the courts. The U.S. Supreme Court’s constitutional decisions are increasingly filled with extended historical inquiries, and not just by self-described originalists. Yet much of this historical inquiry is severely distorted. Twenty-first-century lawyers and judges enjoy improved and ever-widening access to a rich array of primary sources from the founding era and the early republic, but the ability of modern interpreters to make sense of these materials is pervasively affected by present biases. Many of these biases stem directly from long-standing received narratives …

Reframing Article I, Section 8, Richard Primus

Articles

Constitutional lawyers usually think of the Constitution's enumeration of congressional powers as a device for limiting the federal government's legislative jurisdiction. And there's something to that. But considered from the point of view of the Constitution's drafters, it makes more sense to think of the enumeration of congressional powers as primarily a device for empowering Congress, not limiting it. The Framers wanted both to empower and to limit the general government, and the Constitution's enumeration of congressional powers makes more sense as a means of empowerment than as a means of limitation. The major exception--that is, the one significant way …

The Demographics Of Death: An Early Look At Covid-19, Cultural And Racial Bias In America, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Lawrence J. Trautman

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

During late 2019, reports emerged that a mysterious coronavirus was resulting in high contagion and many deaths in Wuhan, China. In just a few weeks, cases rose quickly in Seattle, spread to California, and the first in- stance of the virus appeared in New York (from Iran) on March 1, 2020. As the months pass, it is abundantly clear that less wealthy Americans have far fewer options amid the new normal of shelter-in-place orders, school closings, and shuttered businesses. For example, the poor and other populations may be genetically pre-disposed to heart disease and diabetic issues, but poverty also dictates …

Recapturing Democracy: Covid-19 And The 2020 Presidential Election, John Taschner

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

America is in the business of selling and maintaining democracy around the world. Through aid, provision, humanitarian relief, guidance, and forcible action if need be, the United States stands for democracy. At the birth of the country, the biggest threat to the founding fathers was someone assuming the highest position of leadership in the country and, thereafter, becoming unwilling to transition power. In the aftermath of the 2020 Presidential Election, this exact worst-case-scenario from more than two hundred years had played out amidst numerous lawsuits and demands for recounted votes in order to have only the “legal” votes counted towards …

Preventing A Permanent Underclass: Why In-State Tuition For Daca Students Just Makes Sense, Christian Bowcutt, Eliza Allen

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

In the landmark 1982 Supreme Court Case "Plyler v. Doe", the right to a free education was guaranteed to undocumented students. One of the reasons for this was to "prevent a permanent underclass". Today, we have a similar opportunity to lift our fellow peers by passing legislation to guarantee in-state tuition to DACA recipients. DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) is a program that grants temporary citizenship to qualifying children and youth who are brought to the United States with their parent(s) or guardian(s). Currently, the majority of states have not guaranteed this right to DACA students. With tuition rates …

Foreword, Richelle Joy Gernan

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Masthead

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Nebraska Press Association V. Stuart: A Synopsis And Archive For A First Amendment Landmark, Sydney Brun-Ozuna

Honors Program: Senior Projects (Public)

This project explores in depth the background, arguments, precedents, and impact of the First Amendment Supreme Court case, Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart. This project utilizes newspaper coverage of the trial that informed the case and the case’s journey to the United States Supreme Court, as well as files obtained from the chambers of multiple former U.S. Supreme Court justices, publicly available oral arguments made before the court, and the ultimate decision from the Supreme Court, to create a holistic image of this case. Given the importance of this case in securing the right of the press to report on …

Increasing Substantive Fairness And Mitigating Social Costs In Eviction Proceedings: Instituting A Civil Right To Counsel For Indigent Tenants In Pennsylvania, Robin M. White

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The U.S. Constitution provides criminal defendants the right to a court-appointed attorney but gives no similar protection to civil litigants. Although federal law does not supply any categorical rights to counsel for civil litigants, all 50 states have instituted the right in at least one category of civil law that substantially impacts individuals’ rights. Since 2017, several U.S. cities have enacted such a right for tenants facing eviction. In so doing, these cities responded to American families’ increasing rent burden, the recent publication of nationwide eviction data, the sociological research concerning the impact of eviction, and the lack of procedural …

Enforcement Of The Reconstruction Amendments, Alexander Tsesis

Washington and Lee Law Review

This Article analyzes the delicate balance of congressional and judicial authority granted by the Reconstruction Amendments. The Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments vest Congress with powers to enforce civil rights, equal treatment, and civic participation. Their reach extends significantly beyond the Rehnquist and Roberts Courts’ narrow construction of congressional authority. In recent years, the Court has struck down laws that helped secure voter rights, protect religious liberties, and punish age or disability discrimination. Those holdings encroach on the amendments’ allocated powers of enforcement.

Textual, structural, historical, and normative analyses provide profound insights into the appropriate roles of the Supreme Court …

Pregnancy And The Carceral State, Khiara M. Bridges

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Policing the Womb: Invisible Women and the Criminalization of Motherhood. by Michele Goodwin.

A Perfectly Empty Gift, Christina D. Ponsa-Kraus

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Almost Citizens: Puerto Rico, the U.S. Constitution, and Empire. by Sam Erman.

Some Objections To Strict Liability For Constitutional Torts, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

Qualified immunity protects officials from damages for constitutional violations unless they have violated "clearly established" rights. Local governments enjoy no immunity, but they may not be sued on a vicarious liability theory for constitutional violations committed by their employees. Critics of the current regime would overturn these rules in order to vindicate constitutional rights and deter violations.

This Article argues that across-the-board abolition of these limits on liability would be unwise as the costs would outweigh the benefits. In some contexts, however, exceptions may be justified. Much of the recent controversy surrounding qualified immunity involves suits in which police officers …