November 10, 2016: Don’T Forget That The Game Is Still Rigged,
2016
Duquesne University
November 10, 2016: Don’T Forget That The Game Is Still Rigged, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “Don’t Forget that the Game is Still Rigged“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
United States Federal Courts And Inter-Branch War Powers,
2016
University of Louisville
United States Federal Courts And Inter-Branch War Powers, Erica Lindsey Fields
Posters-at-the-Capitol
US Federal Courts and Inter-Branch War Powers
Author: Erica Fields, with Dr. Jasmine Farrier and Dr. Laura Moyer
Department of Political Science- University of Louisville
Introduction
When a separation of powers issue arises between the branches of the United States government, they can seek remedy in the federal courts. This has become especially relevant in the area of war powers. Over the past 40 years, members of Congress have challenged Presidential encroachment of war powers 10 times in the courts.
Purpose
To determine if the rulings in the 10 war powers cases could best be explained by the ideologies of …
November 6, 2016: “Nobody Believes The Numbers Anyway",
2016
Duquesne University
November 6, 2016: “Nobody Believes The Numbers Anyway", Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “Nobody Believes the Numbers Anyway“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
The Religious Freedom Waltz: Going Forward While Moving Back,
2016
The University of Akron
The Religious Freedom Waltz: Going Forward While Moving Back, Audra L. Savage
ConLawNOW
Although religious freedom has the distinction as the “first freedom,” it is not first in terms of protected rights. Religious freedom is under attack and if not shielded from potential threats, this quintessential American right may be lost altogether. Or at least, this is what U.S. law professors Andrew Koppelman and Steven D. Smith would have one believe, according to books each professor recently published. Unfortunately, they are not exaggerating. Volumes of articles and tomes have been written questioning, critiquing and criticizing (and lamenting, blasting and ridiculing) the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court adjudicating the religion clauses of the …
The Politics Of Electoral Systems In The Former Yugoslav Republic Of Macedonia,
2016
Indiana University Maurer School of Law
The Politics Of Electoral Systems In The Former Yugoslav Republic Of Macedonia, Dardan Berisha
Indiana Journal of Constitutional Design
The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (“FYROM”) experienced four major changes to its electoral system in the eight parliamentary elections held between 1990 and 2014. The Macedonian 1990 and 1994 parliamentary elections were held under a majority system, in which 120 members of the Parliament were elected from 120 constituencies, one member per constituency. A mixed-majority/proportional representation (“PR”) system was adopted for the 1998 elections, in which eighty-five seats were elected under the majority system from the constituencies, and thirty-five seats were elected proportionally from a nation-wide electoral district. Yet another system was adopted for the 2002 elections, in which …
November 2, 2016: What Comey Did,
2016
Duquesne University
November 2, 2016: What Comey Did, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “What Comey Did“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
Televising Judicial Proceedings - A Denial Of Due Process?,
2016
St. John's University School of Law
Televising Judicial Proceedings - A Denial Of Due Process?
The Catholic Lawyer
No abstract provided.
Is The Supreme Court Disabling The Enabling Act, Or Is Shady Grove Just Another Bad Opera?,
2016
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
Is The Supreme Court Disabling The Enabling Act, Or Is Shady Grove Just Another Bad Opera?, Robert J. Condlin
Faculty Scholarship
After seventy years of trying, the Supreme Court has yet to agree on whether the Rules Enabling Act articulates a one or two part standard for determining the validity of a Federal Rule. Is it enough that a Federal Rule regulates “practice and procedure,” or must it also not “abridge substantive rights”? The Enabling Act seems to require both, but the Court is not so sure, and the costs of its uncertainty are real. Among other things, litigants must guess whether the decision to apply a Federal Rule in a given case will depend upon predictable ritual, judicial power grab, …
Brief Of Appellant, John Hill V. State Of Maryland, No. 2740,
2016
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
Brief Of Appellant, John Hill V. State Of Maryland, No. 2740, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Silva Georgian
Court Briefs
No abstract provided.
The Bill Of Rights As A Term Of Art,
2016
Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law
The Bill Of Rights As A Term Of Art, Gerard N. Magliocca
Notre Dame Law Review
This Article argues that the use of the “Bill of Rights” to describe the first
set of constitutional amendments emerged long after the Founding as a justification
for expanding federal power at home and abroad. In making that
claim, I challenge two common misconceptions about the Bill of Rights. One
is that the first set of amendments was known by that name from the start.
This is not true. James Madison never said that what was ratified in 1791 was
a bill of rights, and that label was not widely used for those provisions until
after 1900. The second fallacy …
One Federalism And The Judicial Role: Enforcing The Limits Of Article I,
2016
Notre Dame Law School
One Federalism And The Judicial Role: Enforcing The Limits Of Article I, Alexa R. Baltes
Notre Dame Law Review
Part I of this Note offers a brief account of the two main theories of
federalism protection: the political safeguards (or process federalism) and
judicial review. Part II then suggests a dual-safeguards approach as the single
constitutionally grounded theory, and proceeds to situate the procedural
safeguards and, importantly, judicial review, in the history, text, and structure
of the Constitution. Next, delving into the Court’s New Federalism line of
decisions, Part III analyzes the implications for these two constitutionally
grounded safeguards to deduce the proper framework for their respective
applications. It suggests that while political safeguards may be conceived in
terms …
A Non-Contentious Account Of Article Iii's Domestic Relations Exception,
2016
Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
A Non-Contentious Account Of Article Iii's Domestic Relations Exception, James E. Pfander, Emily K. Damrau
Notre Dame Law Review
Scholars and jurists have long debated the origins and current scope of the so-called domestic relations exception to Article III. Rooted in the perception that certain family law matters lie beyond the power of the federal courts, the exception was first articulated in the nineteenth-century decisional law of the Supreme Court and has perplexed observers ever since. Scholarly debate continues, despite the Court’s twentieth-century decision to place the exception firmly on statutory grounds in an effort to limit its potentially disruptive force.
This Article offers a novel, historically grounded account of the domestic relations exception, connecting its origins to the …
Making The Premises About Constitutional Meaning Express: The New Originalism And Its Critics,
2016
Brigham Young University Law School
Making The Premises About Constitutional Meaning Express: The New Originalism And Its Critics, Andre Leduc
Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law
No abstract provided.
Taking Stock: Why The Supreme Court’S Decision To Apply The Market-Value Standard In Horne Ii Further Complicates The Just Compensation Requirement,
2016
University of New Hampshire School of Law
Taking Stock: Why The Supreme Court’S Decision To Apply The Market-Value Standard In Horne Ii Further Complicates The Just Compensation Requirement, Greg Seidner
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
The Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause does not prevent the federal (or a state) government from taking private property. It merely sets as a condition that the government pay the owner “just compensation” for the taking. Precisely what constitutes just compensation, however, is a tricky matter. One method for determining just compensation is the “market-value” method, which requires the government to pay the owner the property’s market value. But where a taking is only partial, that is, where the government takes only a portion of private property, the property that remains with the owner may see an increase or decrease in …
Punishing Sexual Fantasy,
2016
William & Mary Law School
Punishing Sexual Fantasy, Andrew Gilden
William & Mary Law Review
The Internet has created unprecedented opportunities for adults and teenagers to explore their sexual identities, but it has also created new ways for the law to monitor and punish a diverse range of taboo sexual communication. A young mother loses custody of her two children due to sexually explicit Facebook conversations. A teenager is prosecuted for child pornography crimes after sending a naked selfie to her teenage boyfriend. An NYPD officer is convicted for conspiracy to kidnap several women based on conversations he had on a “dark fetish” fantasy website. In each of these cases, online sexual exploration and fantasy …
The Dormant Commerce Clause As A Limit On Personal Jurisdiction,
2016
University of Richmond
The Dormant Commerce Clause As A Limit On Personal Jurisdiction, John F. Preis
Law Faculty Publications
For over 70 years, the Due Process Clause has defined the law of personal jurisdiction. This makes sense, because being forced to stand trial in a far-off state will sometimes be fundamentally unfair. What does not make sense, however, is the Dormant Commerce Clause’s apparent irrelevance to personal jurisdiction. The Dormant Commerce Clause addresses state laws affecting interstate commerce, and a plaintiff’s choice of forum is often a commercially driven choice between different state courts. So why isn’t the Dormant Commerce Clause part of personal jurisdiction doctrine?
This Article makes the case for its relevance, and demonstrates how the Dormant …
It Is Time For Washington State To Take A Stand Against Holmes's Bad Man: The Value Of Punitive Damages In Deterring Big Business And International Tortfeasors,
2016
University of Michigan Law School
It Is Time For Washington State To Take A Stand Against Holmes's Bad Man: The Value Of Punitive Damages In Deterring Big Business And International Tortfeasors, Jackson Pahlke
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
In Washington State, tortfeasors get a break when they commit intentional torts. Instead of receiving more punishment for their planned bad act, intentional tortfeasors are punished as if they committed a mere accident. The trend does not stop in Washington State—nationwide, punitive damage legislation inadequately deters intentional wrongdoers through caps and outright bans on punitive damages. Despite Washington State’s one hundred and twenty-five year ban on punitive damages, it is in a unique and powerful position to change the way courts across the country deal with intentional tortfeasors. Since Washington has never had a comprehensive punitive damages framework, and has …
Amendment Creep,
2016
University of Arkansas School of Law
Amendment Creep, Jonathan L. Marshfield
Michigan Law Review
To most lawyers and judges, constitutional amendment rules are nothing more than the technical guidelines for changing a constitution’s text. But amendment rules contain a great deal of substance that can be relevant to deciding myriad constitutional issues. Indeed, judges have explicitly drawn on amendment rules when deciding issues as far afield as immigration, criminal procedure, free speech, and education policy. The Supreme Court, for example, has reasoned that, because Article V of the U.S. Constitution places no substantive limitations on formal amendment, the First Amendment must protect even the most revolutionary political viewpoints. At the state level, courts have …
Our Prescriptive Judicial Power: Constitutive And Entrenchment Effects Of Historical Practice In Federal Courts Law,
2016
William & Mary Law School
Our Prescriptive Judicial Power: Constitutive And Entrenchment Effects Of Historical Practice In Federal Courts Law, Ernest A. Young
William & Mary Law Review
Scholars examining the use of historical practice in constitutional adjudication have focused on a few high-profile separation of powers disputes, such as the recent decisions in NLRB v. Noel Canning and Zivotofsky v. Kerry. This Article argues that “big cases make bad theory”—that the focus on high-profile cases of this type distorts our understanding of how historical practice figures into constitutional adjudication more generally. I shift focus here to the more prosaic terrain of federal courts law, where practice plays a pervasive role. That shift reveals two important insights: First, while historical practice plays an important constitutive role structuring and …
Hearsay And The Confrontation Clause,
2016
University of Baltimore School of Law
Hearsay And The Confrontation Clause, Lynn Mclain
All Faculty Scholarship
This speech was delivered to the Wicomico Co. Bar Association on October 28th, 2016. It is an updated version of the 2012 speech, available at http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/all_fac/924/ .
Overview: Only an out-of-court statement ("OCS") offered for the truth of the matter that was being asserted by the out-of-court declarant ("declarant") at the time when s/he made the OCS ("TOMA") = hearsay ("HS"). If evidence is not HS, the HS rule cannot exclude it. The Confrontation Clause also applies only to HS, but even then, only to its subcategory comprising "testimonial hearsay." Cross-references to "MD-EV" are to section numbers of L. MCLAIN, …
