Constitutional Law Commons^™

Cameron V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court In & For Cty. Of Clark, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 28, 445 P.3d 843, Manuel Gurule

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Timmie Cameron filed a writ of mandamus challenging the district court’s ruling to increase both his bail from $25,000 to $100,000 and his level of monitoring from mid-level electronic monitoring to house arrest.The Court ruled the district court did not establish a good cause to warrant the bail increase and writ relief was granted.

U.S. Bank Nat’L Ass’N Nd Vs. Resources Grp., Llc, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 26 (July 3, 2019), Christopher Gonzalez

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) previous case law and the NRS require an HOA that is seeking to foreclose a superpriority lien to send the holder of a recorded first deed of trust a notice of default and notice of sale, even when they have not been formally requested. Additionally, they held that (2) the district court would have to decide questions of fact to determine whether Resources Group was a bona fide purchaser.

Presidential War Powers And Humanitarian Intervention, Michael J. Sherman

Pace Law Review

Does the fact that Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution reserves to Congress the authority to “declare war” mean that the president needs congressional approval before using military force? As this Article discusses, there are a range of answers to this question. The Article examines this debate in the context of humanitarian intervention, i.e. military actions taken, not for purposes of conquest, but instead to stop largescale, serious violations of human rights. If the president wishes to use the military for these purposes, should he have more authority under the Constitution to do so? Less? The same? …

The Venue Shuffle: Forum Selection Clauses & Erisa, Christine P. Bartholomew, James A. Wooten

Journal Articles

Forum selection clauses are ubiquitous. Historically, the judiciary was hostile to contracts limiting a plaintiff’s venue options. The tide has since turned. Today, lower courts routinely enforce such clauses. This Article challenges this reflexive response in the special context of ERISA cases. It mines ERISA’s statutory text, rich legislative history, and historical context to supply an in-depth exploration of ERISA’s unique policy goal of providing employees “ready access to the Federal courts.” The Article then explains how forum selection clauses undermine this goal and thus should be invalid under controlling Supreme Court jurisprudence.

From Language To Law: Interpretation And Construction In Early American Judicial Practice, Hillary Chutter-Ames

Northwestern University Law Review

This Note surveys evidence concerning how early American Supreme Court Justices approached interpretation and construction based on an analysis of Supreme Court opinions from 1795 to 1805. An evaluation of this evidence indicates two main trends. First, the Justices engaged in interpretation and construction as a single process, alternating between textual and normative reasoning to determine the intent of the Framers or of Congress. In some cases, textual reasoning seemed determinative; in others, normative reasoning was decisive. This finding illustrates some tension between the idea of limiting judicial discretion in construction and applying methods of interpretation and construction that would …

Anderson (Arnold) V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 37 (Sept. 5, 2019), Alexandra Matloff

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court held that if a trial court determines by a preponderance of the evidence that a witness is unable to testify because the defendant wrongfully procured the witness’s unavailability and acted with intent to do so, the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exception can be applied in order to deny a defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. The Court also held that in determining whether the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exception applies, the trial court must hear the opposing parties’ arguments in the absence of a jury.

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.

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.

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.

Limiting The Property Clause, Jeffrey M. Schmitt

Nevada Law Journal

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the Property Clause of the Constitution grants Congress the power to regulate the public lands “without limitation.” This Article argues that the Court’s interpretation of the Property Clause is inconsistent with constitutional history, antithetical to structure principles of federalism, and undesirable from the standpoint of environmental law. When the country originally debated the meaning of the Property Clause, the leading statesmen of the early Republic rejected a broad interpretation of federal power. They believed that, while Congress had a police power over the territories, it had no more regulatory authority over federal land …

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

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

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

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

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.

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 …

E-Notice And Comment On Due Process, Sergio J. Campos

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Need For A Wealth Inequality Amendment, Stuart Ford

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

"23 And Plea": Limiting Police Use Of Genealogy Sites After Carpenter V. United States, Antony Barone Kolenc

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …