Constitutional Law Commons^™

Back To The Future: Permitting Habeas Petitions Based On Intervening Retroactive Case Law To Alter Convictions And Sentences, Lauren Casale

Fordham Law Review

In 1948, Congress enacted 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which authorizes a motion for federal prisoners to “vacate, set aside or correct” their sentences, with the goal of improving judicial efficiency in collateral review. Section 2255(e), known as the “savings clause,” allows federal inmates to challenge the validity of their imprisonments with writs of habeas corpus if § 2255 motions are “inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of [their] detention[s].” Due to the U.S. Supreme Court’s and Congress’s silence regarding what suffices as “inadequate or ineffective,” the circuit courts have adopted varied standards. The Sixth and Seventh Circuits hold that …

Law Library Blog (March 2019): Legal Beagle's Blog Archive, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Law Library Newsletters/Blog

No abstract provided.

[Dis]Integration: Second-Order Diversity And Schools, Anders Walker

All Faculty Scholarship

This article challenges the prevailing definition of diversity in schools. Borrowing from legal theorist Heather Gerken, it argues that diversity is best understood not simply as a rationale for creating integrated spaces, but also [dis]integrated ones, places where minority students and faculty can occupy majority positions, and are able to exercise majority control. Such spaces serve legitimate pedagogical goals that are different from those associated with statistical integration, and therefore warrant consideration by courts tasked with reviewing the use of race in university admissions.

Custodial Compulsion, Kyron J. Huigens

Articles

In cases that fall under Miranda v Arizona, police interrogators not only give a suspect reasons to confess; they also suggest that the suspect ought to confess. In doing so, interrogators effectively invoke the Wigmorean duty of a citizen to produce any evidence he has in his possession, including his own confession. That is, they invoke the duty against which the Self Incrimination Clause stands, so that the clause is applicable to police interrogations, and is violated where it is not waived. This means that “a Miranda violation” is a violation of the Self Incrimination Clause in the field, just …

Rediscovering The Journal Clause: The Lost History Of Legislative Constitutional Interpretation, Nicholas Handler

Faculty Scholarship

Article I, Section 5 of the United States Constitution requires that each house of Congress keep a Journal of its proceedings. Contemporary observers have largely ignored this provision, treating it as a vestigial record-keeping requirement with little significance for modern law. This dismissive attitude is misguided. Historically, legislative Journals were one of the primary mechanisms by which Parliament, and later Congress, made and interpreted constitutional law. Journals are the official histories of legislatures’ activity. They record what legislatures do as institutions—what powers they exercise, what procedures they use, and what actions by the coordinate branches they protest or resist. In …

A Modest Proposal On Supreme Court Unanimity To Constitutionally Invalidate Laws, Kyle S. Mckay

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

February 28, 2019: The Communitarian Collapse In America, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The Communitarian Collapse in America“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

A Modest Proposal On Supreme Court Unanimity To Constitutionally Invalidate Laws, Dwight G. Duncan

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

Henry V. Nev. Comm'n On Judicial Discipline, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 5 (Feb. 28, 2019) (En Banc), James Puccinelli

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court held that NRS § 1.428 is constitutional. Thus, hearing masters are subject to the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline’s jurisdiction.

Asymmetric Normalcy, Deborah Pearlstein

Online Publications

Say what you will about sports metaphors in legal writing, but Professor Mark Tushnet’s “constitutional hardball” descriptor has proven remarkably useful in capturing one of the most vexing political dynamics of our time: the political parties’ resort to “claims and practice…that are without much question within the bounds of existing constitutional doctrine and practice but that are nonetheless in some tension with…the ‘go without saying’ assumptions that underpin working systems of constitutional government.”

Trump V. Hawaii: Dissecting The Controversy Over Presidential Immigration Policies, Paul Taske

Immigration and Human Rights Law Review

No abstract provided.

February 23, 2019: Opening Of The Memphis Talk On Court-Packing, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Opening of the Memphis talk on Court-Packing“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Protecting The Fifth Amendment: The Residual Clause In The Mandatory Guidelines Is Void For Vagueness, Olivia M. Tourgee

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

The first part of this Note will address the specific problem the Mandatory Guidelines present. First, the Mandatory Guidelines will be defined, and the mandatory and binding nature of these Mandatory Guidelines will be explored in depth. Second, this Note will explain the significance of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Booker that declared the Mandatory Guidelines unconstitutional. Third, this Note will evaluate Beckles, where the Supreme Court held that the Advisory Guidelines were not subject to vagueness challenges. Thus, the first part of this Note will set the stage for the problem that the Mandatory Guidelines present.

The second …

March 21, 2019: My Op-Ed On The Bladesnburg Cross, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “ My op-ed on the Bladesnburg Cross“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Too Plain To Be Misunderstood: Sovereign Immunity Under The Arkansas Constitution, Robert C. Dalby

Arkansas Law Review

The framers of the constitution certainly knew that instances of hardship would result from the prohibition of suits against the State, but they nevertheless elected to write that immunity into the constitution. The language is too plain to be misunderstood, and it is our duty to give effect to it. Given the fluid nature of the law, time is often the greatest enemy of clarity in court precedent. From law students to experienced judges, anyone who has tried to research the doctrine of sovereign immunity under the Arkansas Constitution has surely struggled with that enemy as they sift through the …

Medical Marijuana In Arkansas: The Risks Of Rushed Drafting, Carol Goforth, Robyn Goforth

Arkansas Law Review

Arkansas voters passed the Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment to the state constitution in late 2016. Almost certainly, the vast majority of voters did so without reading or understanding the intricacies of the initiative, and instead voted simply to affirm their desire to permit the medical use of marijuana in the state. Among many other provisions, the amendment imposed a 120 day time limit (later extended by the Arkansas legislature to 180 days) within which the Arkansas Department of Health and other agencies were to adopt rules implementing the voter mandate. While six months might seem like plenty of time in …

The Constitutional Rights Of Advanced Robots (And Of Human Beings), R. George Wright

Arkansas Law Review

Constitutional rights create and destroy otherwise available options for the rights-bearer, for governments, and for affected third parties. Thus, conferring a constitutional right always requires at least some minimal defense. But conferring a constitutional right can certainly be appropriate if the recipient of the right seems to deserve or otherwise qualify for the right in question, or if conferring the right makes sense on other, perhaps partly pragmatic, grounds.

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Thirteenth Amendment, Prison Labor Wages, And Interrupting The Intergenerational Cycle Of Subjugation, Josh Halladay

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment argues that meager or no compensation for prisoners, who are disproportionately black and other persons of color, entraps them and their children in a cycle of subjugation that dates back to the days of slavery, and this Comment proposes to interrupt this cycle by setting a minimum wage for prisoners and creating college savings accounts for their children. As part of the cycle, when people enter prisons and the doors behind them close, so do their families’ bank accounts and the doors to their children’s schools. At the same time, the cells next to them open, ready to …

When A Tent Is Your Castle: Constitutional Protection Against Unreasonable Searches Of Makeshift Dwellings Of Unhoused Persons, Evanie Parr

Seattle University Law Review

This Note will argue that all jurisdictions should follow the Washington State Court of Appeals, Division II in validating makeshift dwellings used by people experiencing homelessness as spaces protected from unwarranted police intrusions by shifting evaluations of “reasonable expectations of privacy” to a more equitable standard that appreciates the realities of economic disparity. This approach to constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures is imperative to protect the rights of people experiencing homelessness, given that such individuals are regularly subjected to invasions of privacy and heightened exposure to the criminal justice system.