Constitutional Law Commons^™

Azucena V. State Of Nevada, 135 Nev. Ad. Op. (Sep. 5, 2019), Mia Mallette

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that the trial judge’s actions during jury selection rose to the level of judicial misconduct in response to a prospective juror indicating she could not be unbiased. These actions could have impeded Azucena’s right to a fair trial with an impartial jury as the court feared that the potential jurors would not have been able to answer candidly about any biases they may have had.

Limiting The Property Clause, Jeffrey M. Schmitt

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Need For A Wealth Inequality Amendment, Stuart Ford

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The First Amendment, Social Media, And The Public Schools: Emergent Themes And Unanswered Questions, Watt Lesley Black Jr., Elizabeth A. Shaver

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Unshackled: The Post-Sanchez-Gomez Scrutiny And Security Conundrum, Christian Ogata

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Hard Cases Make Bad Law: Extraterritorial Application Of The United States Constitution, Brendan O. Beutell

West Virginia Law Review

The Constitution’s extraterritorial scope does not arise often in litigation. Two recent decisions broached the issue. Both arrived at opposite conclusions. And these decisions share a common thread: They confuse more than they clarify while begetting novel questions of law. Does the Constitution protect noncitizens abroad? If so, how? If not, why not? This Note addresses each of these questions in turn. Ultimately, this Note concludes that the Constitution does not have any extraterritorial application whatsoever to noncitizens abroad.

Forgotten Limits On The Power To Amend State Constitutions, Jonathan L. Marshfield

Northwestern University Law Review

There seem to be no limits on what can pass through state constitutional amendment procedures. State amendments have targeted vulnerable minorities, deeply entrenched specific fiscal strategies, and profoundly restructured institutions. The malleability of state constitutions is significant because in many states there are legitimate fears that special interests dominate amendment politics, and that fundamental change is occurring with minimal opportunities for constructive deliberation or inclusive participation. The state doctrine of “referendum sovereignty” is a key condition fueling this dynamic. The doctrine holds that there are no substantive limits on any state amendment processes so long as amendments comply with federal …

The Case Of The Exemption Claimants: Religion, Conscience, And Identity, Steven D. Smith

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Andersen V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 42 (Sept. 12, 2019) (En Banc), Erika Smolyar

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In light of recent statutes limiting the right to bear arms for people convicted of misdemeanor battery constituting domestic violence, the Court determined that because the Legislature reclassified misdemeanor battery in that context to constitute a serious offense, those convicted of it are entitled to a jury trial.

August 31, 2019: Is Hallowed Secularism Any Longer The Question?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Is Hallowed Secularism Any Longer the Question?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Hamama V. Adducci: Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, Margo Schlanger

Appellate Briefs

Question Presented:

Petitioners are Iraqis with final orders of removal who lived for years or decades in the United States under orders of supervision, because Iraq would not accept their repatriation. In 2017 Iraq indicated it might change its policy; it allowed repatriation of several Iraqis with final orders. Petitioners and others similarly situated were suddenly detained and threatened with immediate removal, without the opportunity to challenge their removal in immigration court. Petitioners, who include Christians, Yezidis, Kurds, and other religious and ethnic minorities in Iraq, faced likely torture and death in Iraq. After their final orders of removal were …

Administrative Balance, David Russell

Arkansas Law Review

Two of the most discussed administrative-law theories in contemporary discussion are executive preemption and big waiver. Executive preemption is the idea that agency regulations preempt state law by extension of the federal statutes the agencies are charged with enforcing. Big waiver is the idea that Congress delegates, to administrative agencies, the power to waive statutory provisions. The constitutional questions raised by executive preemption and big waiver can be put in the following terms. Executive preemption raises constitutional issues as regulatory agencies go farther and farther away from the “clear statement” of a given statute. Thus, one wonders whether agencies are …

Financial Oversight And Management Board For Puerto Rico V. Aurelius Investment, Llc, Rafael Cox Alomar

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

August 24, 2019: Would I Help Donald Trump?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Would I Help Donald Trump?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Symposium: 50 Years With The 25th Amendment: Interpreting The Twenty-Fifth Amendment: Major Controversies, Harold Hongju Koh

ConLawNOW

In recent months, probably no constitutional provision has been more discussed, but less well understood, than Section Four of the Twenty-fifth Amendment. In its fifty-year history, the provision has never been triggered. But were that to happen, that constitutional provision could lead to the permanent separation of an American President from his powers and duties within less than one month. The Amendment's text raises numerous interpretive questions. This lecture functions as a reader's guide to Yale Law School Rule of Law Clinic's Reader's Guide to the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which seeks to answer those questions. The …

August 20, 2019: Change Point In The Culture, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Change Point in the Culture“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2019 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens

Seattle University Law Review

This survey is intended to serve as a resource to which Washington lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, and others can turn as an authoritative starting point for researching Washington search and seizure law. In order to be useful as a research tool, this Survey requires periodic updates to address new cases interpreting the Washington constitution and the U.S. Constitution and to reflect the current state of the law. Many of these cases involve the Washington State Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Washington constitution. Also, as the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to examine Fourth Amendment search and seizure jurisprudence, its …

August 18, 2019: How Unfriendly Is The Internet?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “How Unfriendly Is the Internet?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

August 15, 2019: What Would “Bends Toward Justice” Mean To Doris Lessing?, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “What Would “Bends Toward Justice” Mean to Doris Lessing?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Allen V. Cooper: Brief Of Public Law Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Samuel Bagenstos

Appellate Briefs

Amici are scholars of constitutional law, federal jurisdiction, and civil rights law who have taught and written about the Eleventh Amendment and state sovereign immunity for many years. We present this brief in an effort to make our scholarship and experience useful to the Court.

This brief suggests a path for resolving this important case that is faithful to the Constitution's text and history, minimizes disruption to this Court's state sovereign immunity jurisprudence, and maximizes the chance for consensus on the Court. The key is this Court's unanimous decision, authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, in United States v. Georgia, …