Constitutional Law Commons^™

Cooperative Federalism: Nevada’S Indigent Defense Crisis And The Role Of Federal Courts In Protecting The Right To Counsel In Non-Capital Cases, Randolph Fiedler, Megan Hoffman, Jonathan Kirshbaum

Nevada Law Journal Forum

In Martinez v. Ryan, the United States Supreme Court held the ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel, or the lack of representation in a state post-conviction proceeding, provides cause to allow a federal habeas petitioner to overcome a procedural default on an ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim. This represented a radical shift in the criminal justice system. Prior to Martinez, state post-conviction proceedings—the typical mechanism for a criminal defendant to challenge the performance of his trial attorney—were not heavily scrutinized. It was understood and accepted that defendants did not have the right to counsel in these post-conviction proceedings. Whether a …

Intermediate Scrutiny For Corporate Political Contributions, Joseph K. Leahy

Florida State University Law Review

A corporation contributes to a Super PAC that supports a candidate for public office. A shareholder sues, alleging that management breached its duty of loyalty by making the contribution to promote its own political views rather than to serve the corporation’s best interests—i.e., by acting in bad faith. What standard will a Delaware court apply when reviewing management’s decision to cause the corporation to make the contribution?

Myriad scholars have opined that the court will apply the standard of review for ordinary business decisions: the management-friendly business judgment rule. Unfortunately for our shareholder plaintiff, this rule presumes that management acts …

Judicial Supremacy Revisited: Independent Constitutional Authority In American Constitutional Law And Practice, Mark A. Graber

William & Mary Law Review

The Supreme Court exercises far less constitutional authority in American law and practice than one would gather from reading judicial opinions, presidential speeches, or the standard tomes for and against judicial supremacy. Lower federal court judges, state court justices, federal and state elected officials, persons charged with administering the law, and ordinary citizens often have the final say on particular constitutional controversies or exercise temporary constitutional authority in ways that have more influence on the parties to that controversy than the eventual Supreme Court decision. In many instances, Supreme Court doctrine sanctions or facilitates the exercise of independent constitutional authority …

Can The Japanese Supreme Court Overcome The Political Question Hurdle?, Po Liang Chen, Jordan T. Wada

Washington International Law Journal

In 1947, a new Japanese Constitution (“Kenpō”) was born and its pacifist ideal was embodied in Article 9. Meanwhile, judicial review was transplanted, mainly from the United States (“U.S.”), into Japan. While the U.S. Supreme Court has narrowed its political question doctrine since Baker v. Carr in 1962, Japan developed its constitutional avoidance and political question doctrine in part to avoid deciding the merits of Article 9 disputes, including the legitimacy of Japan’s Self-Defense Force, the Security Treaty between the US and Japan, and the stationing of U.S. Forces in Japan. The Japanese Supreme Court (“SCJ”) adopted a deferential …

Drinking From The Fire Hose: How Massive Self-Surveillance From The Internet Of Things Is Changing The Face Of Privacy, Steven I. Friedland

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

It’S Time For An Intervention!: Resolving The Conflict Between Rule 24(A)(2) And Article Iii Standing, Gregory R. Manring

Fordham Law Review

This Note argues that federal courts should employ an approach that is more related to maintaining the benefits of Rule 24 without running afoul of Article III—a task the yes-or-no approach is ill equipped to handle. Ultimately, an approach that is based on employing a standing analysis only where the Case or Controversy Clause is implicated anew allows the greatest access to the intervention device without running the risk of entertaining nonjusticiable disputes.

A First Amendment Deference Approach For Reforming Anti-Bullying Laws, Emily Suski

Faculty Publications

This Article examines the anti-bullying laws and their response to the problem of bullying in light of both the nature of the problem itself, the interventions the laws call for, and the laws’ First Amendment implications. Bullying has many varied, negative consequences, some tragic, and is widespread. Yet, the anti-bullying laws disproportionately focus schools’ responses to bullying on school exclusion, meaning suspending, expelling or otherwise excluding students who bully from school. This is so even though social science literature has found school exclusion ineffective and sometimes counterproductive as a method for addressing bullying. What is more, because much of bullying …

Four Unconstitutional Constitutions And Their Democratic Foundations, Richard Albert

Cornell International Law Journal

The present fascination with the global phenomenon of an unconstitutional constitutional amendment has left open the question whether a constitution can be unconstitutional. To declare an entire constitution unconstitutional seems different in both kind and degree from invalidating a single amendment for violating the architectural core of a constitution, itself undoubtedly an extraordinary action. In this Article, I illustrate and evaluate four different conceptions of an unconstitutional constitution. Each conception draws from a different constitution currently in force around the world, specifically the Constitutions of Canada, Mexico, South Africa and the United States. Despite their unconstitutionality in different senses of …

“Illegal” Migration Is Speech, Daniel I. Morales

Indiana Law Journal

Noncitizens must comply with immigration laws just because citizens say so. The citizenry takes for granted its monopoly on immigration control, but the legitimacy of this arrangement has been called into question by cutting-edge political theorists. One prominent theorist argues, for example, that basic democratic principles require that noncitizens living outside the United States have a say in the formation of immigration law since they must obey it. This Article provides a legal response to these political theory developments, assimilating them, along with the facts on the ground, into an account of “illegal” migration as First Amendment speech.

If noncitizens’ …

Rethinking The Fourth Amendment In The Age Of Supercomputers, Artificial Intelligence, And Robots, Melanie Reid

West Virginia Law Review

In an era of diminishing privacy, the Internet of Things ("loT") has become a consensual and inadvertent tool that undermines privacy protection. The loT, really systems of networks connected to each other by the Internet or other radio-type device, creates consensual mass self-surveillance in such domains as fitness and the Fitbit, health care and heart monitors, "smart" houses and cars, and even "smart" cities. The multiple networks also have created a degree of interconnectivity that has opened up a fire hose of information for companies and governments alike, as well as making it virtually insuperable to live "off the grid" …

Keeping Gideon’S Promise: Using Equal Protection To Address The Denial Of Counsel In Misdemeanor Cases, Brandon Buskey, Lauren S. Lucas

Fordham Law Review

The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees criminal defendants the right to counsel, and the U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that right is applicable to all defendants in felony cases, even those unable to afford a lawyer. Yet, for defendants facing misdemeanor charges, only those defendants whose convictions result in incarceration are entitled to the assistance of counsel. The number of misdemeanor prosecutions has increased dramatically in recent years, as have the volume and severity of collateral consequences attached to such convictions; yet, the Court’s right to counsel jurisprudence in this area has remained stagnant. Critics of the …

Keeping Gideon'S Promise: Using Equal Protection To Address The Denial Of Counsel In Misdemeanor Cases, Brandon Buskey, Lauren Sudeall Lucas

Faculty Publications By Year

The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees criminal defendants the right to counsel, and the U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that right is applicable to all defendants in felony cases, even those unable to afford a lawyer. Yet, for defendants facing misdemeanor charges, only those defendants whose convictions result in incarceration are entitled to the assistance of counsel.

The number of misdemeanor prosecutions has increased dramatically in recent years, as have the volume and severity of collateral consequences attached to such convictions; yet, the Court’s right to counsel jurisprudence in this area has remained stagnant. Critics of the …

Post-Racialism And The End Of Strict Scrutiny, David Schraub

Indiana Law Journal

In recent years, a growing social consensus has emerged around the aspiration of a “post-racial” America: one where race is no longer a fault line for social strife or, perhaps, a morally significant trait whatsoever. This ambition, however, lies in tension with the most basic constitutional principle governing our treatment of race in the public sphere: that of “strict scrutiny.” Post-racialism seeks to diminish the salience of race to near negligibility. The strict scrutiny of racial classifications, by contrast, significantly enhances the salience of race by treating it differently from virtually every other personal attribute or characteristic—including hair or eye …

Eliminating Circuit-Split Disparities In Federal Sentencing Under The Post-Booker Guidelines, Elliot Edwards

Indiana Law Journal

This Note will explore the rarely discussed consequences that result when courts of appeals freely interpret the Sentencing Guidelines. This Note will not address appellate review of sentences in general, nor will it discuss disparities caused by trial courts. Instead, the discussion below will address a very specific situation, namely when a court of appeals vacates a sentence because, in its estimation, the trial court misapplied the Guidelines. Part I will relate the history of the recent sentencing re-form movement in America, noting particularly which bodies have the authority to decide sentencing policy. Part II will then analyze the interpretive …

I Am Not Law Enforcement! Why The Special Needs Exception To The Fourth Amendment Should Apply To Caseworkers Investigating Allegations Of Child Abuse, Lauren Kobrick

Cardozo Law Review

The note examines the application of the Fourth Amendment's special needs doctrine in child abuse investigations, advocating for the adoption of a primary purpose test to determine the doctrine's applicability. It critiques the inconsistent approaches across circuits and proposes this test to clarify when warrantless searches and seizures by caseworkers are constitutional, ensuring a balance between child protection and Fourth Amendment protections.

Is The Chinese Exclusion Case Still Good Law? (The President Is Trying To Find Out), Michael Kagan

Nevada Law Journal Forum

In this Essay, I want to make the argument that the validity of the Chinese Exclusion Case is the central question in the challenges to President Trump’s travel bans. The facts are closely analogous. Moreover, the Chinese Exclusion Case is the seminal, canonical decision establishing vast federal power over immigration control. Resolving the present challenges to the Trump Executive Orders requires us to determine, once and for all, if that 1889 decision was rightly decided. But if that case cannot survive given what we know of constitutional law in the twenty first century, we must be precise about what exactly …

The Supreme Court’S Countermajoritarianism? What Impact Does Public Opinion Have On The Supreme Court Decisions?, Evan Tompkins

Political Science Theses and Capstones

Although normative questions about the role of the Supreme Court as a countermajoritarian institution have been commonly debated in political science research, an updated empirical question on Mishler and Sheehan’s (1993), study on public opinion and its impact on the Court must be asked. It has been 25 years since the publication of their study and numerous high profile cases such as Bush v. Gore, Citizens United v. FEC, and Obergefell v. Hodges have brought nationwide attention to the Supreme Court and how it interacts with public opinion. Results from empirical measurements of the Supreme Court’s decisions and what impact …

Are All Charter Rights And Freedoms Really Non-Absolute?, Brian Bird

Dalhousie Law Journal

This article challenges the conventional legal wisdom that no right or freedom in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is absolute. Section 1 of the Charter is the most commonly cited source of this wisdom, but this provision merely sets out the standard that the state must meet to justify a limit on a Charter right or freedom. Section 1 does not provide advance confirmation that limits satisfying this standard exist for all Charter rights and freedoms. This interpretation, if correct, does not automatically render any of the rights or freedoms in the Charter absolute. Indeed, the standard in …

R. V Comeau And Section 121 Of The Constitution Act, 1867: Freeing The Beer And Fortifying The Economic Union, Malcolm Lavoie

Dalhousie Law Journal

A recent decision from the New Brunswick Provincial Court may have significant implications for Canada's constitutional structure. R. v. Comeau held that s. 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867, the constitution's internal free trade provision, prohibits both interprovincial tariffs as well as non-tariff trade barriers. In doing so, the court departed from a line of precedents holding that s. 121 prohibits only the erection of outright tariffs or duties on interprovincial trade. Ultimately the court held that s. 134(b) of New Brunswick's Liquor Control Act, which effectively prohibits the possession of all but small quantities of liquor purchased out of …

Of Malls And Campuses: The Regulation Of University Campuses And Section 2(B) Of The Charter, Sarah E. Hamill

Dalhousie Law Journal

There have been a number of recent cases from across Canada about whether the Charter applies to public universities. Courts in Alberta have suggested that the Charter will apply to public universities while courts in British Columbia and Ontario have refused to apply the Charter to such cases. In this article I focus on the cases that also involve a claim to use university space, that is, those cases where there is an argument that by failing to allow an event on campus the university has violated the free expression guarantee in the Charter. If the Charter does apply and …