A Warrant Requirement Resurgence: The Fourth Amendment In The Roberts Court,
2019
FAMU College of Law
A Warrant Requirement Resurgence: The Fourth Amendment In The Roberts Court, Benjamin Priester
Journal Publications
Over many years, the United States Supreme Court has developed an extensive body of precedent interpreting and enforcing the provisions of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement agents conducting criminal investigations. Commonly called the "warrant requirement," one key component of this case law operates to deem some police investigatory techniques to be unconstitutional unless they are conducted pursuant to a search warrant issued in advance by a judge. The terms of the doctrine and its exceptions also authorize other investigatory actions as constitutionally permissible without a search warrant. The …
Recording As Heckling,
2019
University of Colorado Law School
Recording As Heckling, Scott Skinner-Thompson
Publications
A growing body of authority recognizes that citizen recording of police officers and public space is protected by the First Amendment. But the judicial and scholarly momentum behind the emerging “right to record” fails to fully incorporate recording’s cost to another important right that also furthers First Amendment principles: the right to privacy.
This Article helps fill that gap by comprehensively analyzing the First Amendment interests of both the right to record and the right to privacy in public while highlighting the role of technology in altering the First Amendment landscape. Recording information can be critical to future speech and, …
Taxing Combat,
2019
Barry University School of Law
Taxing Combat, Samuel Kan
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
When you are being shot at or dodging landmines you are in a combat zone. Diplomatic niceties aside, these brave warriors are in danger because of the policies of their Government and we must take care of them. Quite frankly, we must act to insure that we do not have a repeat of what happened in Somalia. In Somalia, the families of the soldiers who lost their lives could not receive the benefits that should have gone to them under the Tax Code because the President never declared it a combat zone.
We don’t know exactly where we’re at in …
Bandimere V. Sec: Significant Authority Exists Without Finality,
2019
University of Oklahoma College of Law
Bandimere V. Sec: Significant Authority Exists Without Finality, Abbey Zuech
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
Detaining Isis: Habeas And The Phantom Menace,
2019
University of Oklahoma College of Law
Detaining Isis: Habeas And The Phantom Menace, Ernesto Hernández-López
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Historical Case For Constitutional "Concepts",
2019
University of Richmond
The Historical Case For Constitutional "Concepts", Glenn E. Chappell
University of Richmond Law Review
The concepts/conceptions dichotomy is prominent in both the philosophy of language and the field of constitutional interpretation. It is most prominently illustrated through the provisions in the Constitution that contain broad, open-ended moral language. Those who hold the “conceptions” view believe that the legal content of those provisions includes both abstract moral concepts and its communicators’ subjective beliefs about, or conceptions of, how those concepts should apply. Under this view, the judge’s role is mostly empirical: he is tasked with examining historical evidence to ascertain those conceptions, which in turn supply applicational criteria by which he can decide specific cases. …
Enforcing The Right To Public Education,
2019
FAMU College of Law
Enforcing The Right To Public Education, Areto A. Imoukuede
Journal Publications
This paper suggests that although each state within the United States currently recognizes a right to public education, the states do not provide meaningful and consistent judicial enforcement of the right. Recognizing a federal fundamental right to public education would be a step towards ensuring meaningful and consistent judicial enforcement of the right.
Municipal Minimum Wage Ordinances In Ohio: A Home Rule Analysis,
2019
Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
Municipal Minimum Wage Ordinances In Ohio: A Home Rule Analysis, Paul J. Lysobey
Cleveland State Law Review
In 2016, a grassroots proposal in Cleveland, Ohio sought to raise the minimum wage in the City of Cleveland to fifteen dollars per hour. But before Cleveland residents could vote on the proposal, the Ohio legislature enacted Senate Bill 331, prohibiting Ohio municipalities from setting their own minimum wage rates. However, the Ohio Home Rule Amendment gives municipalities the right to self-governance in certain instances, and there is question as to whether the Ohio legislature’s action is a violation of the right to home rule for Ohio cities. This Note evaluates the constitutionality of Senate Bill 331’s minimum wage provision …
Hardball Vs. Beanball: Identifying Fundamentally Antidemocratic Tactics,
2019
Fordham University School of Law
Hardball Vs. Beanball: Identifying Fundamentally Antidemocratic Tactics, Jed H. Shugerman
Faculty Scholarship
The “constitutional hardball” metaphor used by legal scholars and political scientists illuminates an important phenomenon in American politics, but it obscures a crisis in American democracy. In baseball, hardball encompasses legitimate tactics: pitching inside to brush a batter back but not injure, hard slides, hard tags. Baseball fans celebrate hardball. Many of the constitutional hardball maneuvers previously identified by scholars have been legitimate, if aggressive, constitutional political moves. But the label “hardball” has been interpreted too broadly to include illegitimate, fundamentally undemocratic tactics. I suggest a different baseball metaphor for such tactics: beanball, pitches meant to injure and knock out …
Aedpa As Forum Allocation: The Textual And Structural Case For Overruling Williams V. Taylor,
2019
Georgetown University Law Center
Aedpa As Forum Allocation: The Textual And Structural Case For Overruling Williams V. Taylor, Carlos Manuel Vázquez
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In Williams v. Taylor, the Supreme Court read a section of the Anti- Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) to change the long-prevailing de novo standard of review of federal habeas petitions by state prisoners. In holding that Congress had denied the lower federal courts the power to grant habeas relief to prisoners in custody pursuant to wrong but reasonable state court decisions, the Court departed from the provision’s text and relied instead on its perception of a generalized congressional purpose to cut back on habeas relief and on the non-redundancy canon of statutory construction. On both scores, …
The Privileges Or Immunities Clause Abridged: A Critique Of Kurt Lash On The Fourteenth Amendment,
2019
Georgetown University Law Center
The Privileges Or Immunities Clause Abridged: A Critique Of Kurt Lash On The Fourteenth Amendment, Randy E. Barnett, Evan Bernick
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was virtually eliminated by the Supreme Court in three cases: The Slaughter-House Cases, Bradwell v. Illinois, and United States v. Cruikshank. Today, most constitutional scholars agree that this was a terrible mistake, the effects of which continue to reverberate through our constitutional law. But, as evidenced by the Court’s decision in McDonald v. City of Chicago, both the “left” and “right” sides of the Court are reluctant to open the “Pandora’s Box” of uncertainty created by the phrase “privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” …
On Being Old Codgers: A Conversation About A Half Century In Legal Education,
2019
Harvard Law School
On Being Old Codgers: A Conversation About A Half Century In Legal Education, Mark Tushnet, Louis Michael Seidman
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This conversation, conducted over three evenings, captures some of our thoughts about the last half century of legal education as both of us near retirement. We have edited the conversations so as to eliminate verbal stumbles and present our ideas more coherently, slightly reorganized a small part of the conversation, and added a few explanatory footnotes. However, we have attempted to keep the informal tone of our discussions.
Constitutional Confessions: In Favor Of A "Loewy Plus' Approach,
2019
University of Oklahoma College of Law
Constitutional Confessions: In Favor Of A "Loewy Plus' Approach, Tracy Hresko Pearl
Faculty Articles
Professor Arnold Loewy famously argues that, given the failings of Fifth Amendment jurisprudence, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel should attach at interrogation rather than at the onset of adversarial proceedings. His proposal is wise and should be adopted. However, given the failure of the Court's ruling in Miranda v. Arizona to reduce psychological coercion during custodial interrogations, several additional reforms are needed. Namely, it should be significantly more difficult for suspects to waive their right to counsel during interrogation, all custodial interrogations should be recorded, and particularly coercive interrogation techniques – like lying about evidence – should be banned.
The Constitutional Risks Of Ridesharing: Fourth Amendment Protections Of Passengers In Uber And Lyft,
2019
J.D. candidate, 2019, Florida International University (FIU) College of Law
The Constitutional Risks Of Ridesharing: Fourth Amendment Protections Of Passengers In Uber And Lyft, Genesis Martinez
FIU Law Review
No abstract provided.
Thoughts On Hayden C. Covington And The Paucity Of Litigation Scholarship,
2019
Co-director, History Book Festival. Former Harold S. Shefelman Scholar, University of Washington School of Law
Thoughts On Hayden C. Covington And The Paucity Of Litigation Scholarship, Ronald K.L. Collins
FIU Law Review
No abstract provided.
“Good Orthodoxy” And The Legacy Of Barnette,
2019
University of Dayton Law School
“Good Orthodoxy” And The Legacy Of Barnette, Erica Goldberg
FIU Law Review
No abstract provided.
Barnette And Masterpiece Cakeshop: Some Unanswered Questions,
2019
Leonard F. Manning Professor of Law, Fordham Law School
Barnette And Masterpiece Cakeshop: Some Unanswered Questions, Abner S. Greene
FIU Law Review
No abstract provided.
“Fixed Star” Or Twin Star?: The Ambiguity Of Barnette,
2019
Warren Distinguished Professor of Law, University of San Diego
“Fixed Star” Or Twin Star?: The Ambiguity Of Barnette, Steven D. Smith
FIU Law Review
No abstract provided.
Justice Jackson In The Jehovah’S Witnesses’ Cases,
2019
Professor of Law, St. John’s University School of Law, New York City
Justice Jackson In The Jehovah’S Witnesses’ Cases, John Q. Barrett
FIU Law Review
No abstract provided.
Not Such A Fixed Star After All: West Virginia State Board Of Education V. Barnette, And The Changing Meaning Of The First Amendment Right Not To Speak,
2019
University of Chicago Law School
Not Such A Fixed Star After All: West Virginia State Board Of Education V. Barnette, And The Changing Meaning Of The First Amendment Right Not To Speak, Genevieve Lakier
FIU Law Review
No abstract provided.
