Constitutional Law Commons^™

The First Amendment And The Police In The Digital Age, Kermit V. Lipez

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—Extraditing The Foreign Fugitive: Disentitlement In Civil Forfeiture, United States V. All Assets Listed In Attachment A, 89 F. Supp. 3d 817 (E.D. Va. 2015), Nicole Murray

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is The “Arising Under” Jurisdictional Grant In Article Iii Self-Executing?, David R. Dow

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Deconstructing Juryless Fact-Finding In Civil Cases, Shaakirrah R. Sanders

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In many states, legislatures have mandated juryless fact-finding in common law–based civil cases by imposing compensatory damage caps that effectively lessen the jury’s traditional and historic role as injury valuator. The primary purpose of most caps was to reign in “excessive” civil jury verdicts, which allegedly caused “skyrocketing” medical malpractice insurance premiums and litigation costs. But no legislatively imposed cap is triggered by a preliminary finding of excessiveness. Trial judges have no authority to determine whether application of a cap is just or fair to the (often) severely injured plaintiff. Despite a shared interpretive methodology with regards to the nature …

Real Bite: Legal Realism And Meaningful Rational Basis In Dog Law And Beyond, Ann L. Schiavone

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

But First, (Don’T) Let Me Take A Selfie: New Hampshire’S Ban On Ballot Selfies And First Amendment Scrutiny, Emily Wagman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Rfra And The Affordable Care Act: Does The Contraception Mandate Discriminate Against Religious Employers?, Alisa Lalana

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Presidential Constitutional Interpretation, Signing Statements, Executive Power And Zivotofsky, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.

Law Faculty Publications

This Article explores whether the President should interpret the Constitution aggressively and, if so, whether the President should act on such aggressive interpretations. Part I examines whether the presidential oath and other constitutional duties obligate the President to interpret the Constitution. Part II considers constitutional signing statements as the manifestation of an aggressive approach to presidential constitutional interpretation. Part III considers whether the Constitution is a legal document or a political document, and how that determination might affect how aggressive the President should be when interpreting the Constitution. Part IV considers how the Supreme Court's and Congress's constitutional interpretations might …

Constitution Day Lectures, Maxwell L. Stearns, Paula A. Monopoli, Larry S. Gibson, Robert Koulish, David J. Maher

Maryland Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

Normative History And Congress's Enforcement Power Under The Reconstruction Amendments, Edward Cantu

Faculty Works

As an originalist matter, what degree of logistical power did the Framers of the Reconstruction Amendments want Congress to have in actualizing the substantive guarantees of those amendments? In the 1990s the Court, seeking to revive its federalism vigilance, answered: "relatively limited power." Scholars pounced, and it quickly became "settled" in the scholarly literature that the Court had misread the historical record regarding the Framers' intent. Despite the scholarly reactions, the Roberts Court has carried the Rehnquist Court's torch on this interpretative matter. As such, strident accusations of conservative judicial activism toward the Roberts Court have paralleled the charges leveled …

Standing Up For Legislators: Reevaluating Legislator Standing In The Wake Of Kerr V. Hickenlooper, William D. Gohl

Northwestern University Law Review

Hornbook constitutional law establishes that Congress and state legislatures are bodies of limited, enumerated powers, and common sense suggests they should get their act together and exercise them more often. But should legislators be permitted to sue in order to exercise their powers when another branch of government infringes on them unconstitutionally, or the body they represent unconstitutionally limits them? This Note argues that, at least in certain circumstances, they should. Following on the heels of the Tenth Circuit’s recent treatment of the issue in its Kerr v. Hickenlooper decisions, this Note proposes a redefinition of the legislator standing doctrine …

Exploiting Ambiguity In The Supreme Court: Cutting Through The Fifth Amendment With Transferable Development Rights, Trevor D. Vincent

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

From Economic Inequality To Economic Freedom: Constitutional Political Economy In The New Gilded Age, K. Sabeel Rahman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

An Empirical Study Of Implicit Takings., James E. Krier, Stewart E. Sterk

Articles

Takings scholarship has long focused on the niceties of Supreme Court doctrine, while ignoring the operation of takings law "on the ground" in the state and lower federal courts, which together decide the vast bulk of all takings cases. This study, based primarily on an empirical analysis of more than 2000 reported decisions ovcr the period 1979 through 2012, attempts to fill that void. This study establishes that the Supreme Court's categorical rules govern almost no state takings cases, and that takings claims based on government regulation almost invariably fail. By contrast, when takings claims arise out of government action …

Free Speech And Civil Liberties In The Second Circuit, Floyd Abrams

Fordham Law Review

Much of the development of First Amendment law in the United States has occurred as a result of American courts rejecting well-established principles of English law. The U.S. Supreme Court has frequently rejected English law, permitting far more public criticism of the judiciary than would be countenanced in England, rejecting English libel law as being insufficiently protective of freedom of expression and holding that even hateful speech directed at minorities receives the highest level of constitutional protection. The Second Circuit has played a major role in the movement away from the strictures of the law as it existed in the …

The Death Knell For The Death Penalty And The Significance Of Global Realism To Its Abolition From Glossip V. Gross To Brumfield V. Cain, Linda A. Malone

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence regarding the death penalty, whether or not cruel, has most certainly been unusual in the annals of criminal punishment. In the short span of four years, the Court foreclosed and then reopened this form of punishment in Furman v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia. One year later the Court would categorically exclude the punishment for the rape of an adult. Five years later the Court would again preclude the punishment, for any defendant convicted of felony-murder who did not participate or share in the homicidal act or intent. In 1986 the Court would struggle with …

The Senate Has No Constitutional Obligation To Consider Nominees, Jonathan H. Adler

Faculty Publications

[After Justice Antonin Scalia's death in 2016 and i]n response to the Senate Republican leadership's stated intention to refuse to consider any nominee to replace Justice Scalia, some began to argue that the Senate has a constitutional obligation to act on a Supreme Court nomination.

The argument that the Senate has a constitutional obligation to act on a Supreme Court nomination is anything but "clear." This claim finds no support in the relevant constitutional text, constitutional structure, or the history of judicial nominations. While there are strong policy and prudential arguments that the Senate should promptly consider any and all …

Apple Watch-Ing You: Why Wearable Technology Should Be Federally Regulated, Grant Arnow

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

War By Legislation: The Constitutionality Of Congressional Regulation Of Detentions In Armed Conflicts, Christopher M. Ford

Northwestern University Law Review

In this essay, Ford considers provisions of the 2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which place restrictions on the disposition of detainees held in Guantánamo Bay. These provisions raise substantial separation of powers issues regarding the ability of Congress to restrict detention operations of the Executive. These restrictions, and similar restrictions found in earlier NDAAs, specifically implicate the Executive's powers in foreign affairs and as Commander in Chief. Ford concludes that, with the exception of a similar provision found in the 2013 NDAA, the restrictions are constitutional.

The Modern Treaty-Executing Power: Constitutional Complexities In Contemporary Global Governance, Carlo Felizardo

Northwestern University Law Review

Treaties have evolved significantly since the ratification of the United States Constitution, leading to uncertainty as to the constitutional limits on their domestic execution. This Note adapts existing constitutional doctrine on treaty execution to two distinct complications arising in the contemporary treaty regime. First, voluntary treaties imposing aspirational obligations on signatories raise the issue of the extent of obligations that Congress may domestically enforce by federal statute. Second, originating treaties which create international organizations and authorize them to adopt rule- and adjudication-type post-treaty pronouncements bring up a question of when, if ever, to incorporate those pronouncements into U.S. law, and …