June 2, 2012: Massachusetts V. United States Department Of Health And Human Services,
2012
Duquesne University
June 2, 2012: Massachusetts V. United States Department Of Health And Human Services, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “ MASSACHUSETTS v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
When The Cheering (For Gideon ) Stops: The Defense Bar And Representation At Initial Bail Hearings,
2012
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
When The Cheering (For Gideon ) Stops: The Defense Bar And Representation At Initial Bail Hearings, Douglas L. Colbert
Faculty Scholarship
This article suggests that the absence of representation at the beginning of a State criminal prosecution must come to a screeching halt. The criminal defense bar should take a leadership role and dedicate Gideon's anniversary to making certain that an accused's right to the effective assistance of counsel begins at the initial bail hearing. Indeed, guaranteeing vigorous representation should be the defense bar's number one priority.
An Early Tragedy Of Comparative Constitutionalism: Frank Goodnow And The Chinese Republic,
2012
University of Washington School of Law
An Early Tragedy Of Comparative Constitutionalism: Frank Goodnow And The Chinese Republic, Jedidiah Kroncke
Washington International Law Journal
This article recovers a lost episode in the neglected early history of comparative constitutionalism in the United States. In 1913, pioneering comparative lawyer Frank Goodnow went to China to assist the new Chinese Republic in the writing of its first constitution. Goodnow’s mission reflected the growing interest of the United States in China’s legal development in this era, and his constitution-writing project won broad support from the U.S. legal profession. Goodnow’s tenure ultimately generated great controversy when he advised China’s leaders to adopt a constitutional monarchy rather than continue on as a republic. This article describes this controversy and how …
The Future Of The Establishment Clause In Context: A Response To Ledewitz,
2012
Chicago-Kent College of Law
The Future Of The Establishment Clause In Context: A Response To Ledewitz, Christopher C. Lund
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
Higher Law Secularism: Religious Symbols, Contested Secularisms, And The Limits Of The Establishment Clause,
2012
Chicago-Kent College of Law
Higher Law Secularism: Religious Symbols, Contested Secularisms, And The Limits Of The Establishment Clause, Zachary R. Calo
Chicago-Kent Law Review
There are two dominant traditions of understanding the secular, both with long genealogical resonance in western thought: Christian secularity and secularism. The former links the secular to a theological narrative, while the latter defines the secular as standing over and against religion. Constitutional debate has commonly framed the issue of religious symbols as demanding resolution in favor of one of these traditions. Rather than offering a way to overcome the divide and the culture war it generates, the Court's jurisprudence has instead concretized the binary. Only by cultivating a new understanding of the secular in law might there emerge an …
The Constitutional Politics Of The Establishment Clause,
2012
Chicago-Kent College of Law
The Constitutional Politics Of The Establishment Clause, Richard Albert
Chicago-Kent Law Review
In these reflections presented at a Symposium hosted by Duquesne University School of Law on "The Future of the Establishment Clause in Context: Neutrality, Religion, or Avoidance?" I examine the constitutional politics driving the interpretation of the Establishment Clause. I suggest that the Supreme Court's recent case law on taxpayer standing may signal a return to the founding design of the Establishment Clause. At the founding, the Establishment Clause constrained the actions of only the national government, disabled only Congress from establishing a religion, and vigorously protected the sovereignty of states. Each of these three signposts—national interdiction, congressional disability, and …
Toward A Meaning-Full Establishment Clause Neutrality,
2012
Chicago-Kent College of Law
Toward A Meaning-Full Establishment Clause Neutrality, Bruce Ledewitz
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Some form of government neutrality toward religion, in contrast to a more pro-religion stance or a turn toward nonjusticiability, is the only interpretation of the Establishment Clause that can potentially lead to a national consensus concerning the proper role of religion in American public life. But to achieve that goal, neutrality theory must acknowledge and engage the need for the expressions of deep meaning on public occasions and in the public square generally. Current neutrality doctrine promotes a silent and empty public square. This article proposes an interpretation of neutrality that would allow a symbol-rich, meaning-full public square without violating …
Court Reform And Breathing Space Under The Establishment Clause,
2012
Chicago-Kent College of Law
Court Reform And Breathing Space Under The Establishment Clause, Mark C. Rahdert
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Flast v. Cohen held that federal taxpayers have standing to challenge government spending for religion. While Frothingham v. Mellon generally prohibits taxpayer standing in federal courts, the Court reasoned that the Establishment Clause specifically prohibits taxation in any amount to fund unconstitutional religious spending. For several decades Flast has been settled law that supplied jurisdiction in many leading establishment cases. But Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. and Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn signal that Flast may soon be overruled. This jurisdictional ferment raises two questions: Why this sudden shift? And what does it signify for the …
What Can The Brothers Malone Teach Us About Ficher V. University Of Texas?,
2012
University of Michigan Law School
What Can The Brothers Malone Teach Us About Ficher V. University Of Texas?, Charlie Gerstein
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
In 1975, the Brothers Malone took the entrance exam for the Boston Fire Department. At the time, the Department was under a court-ordered affirmative action plan: it divided its pool of test-takers into groups of black and white applicants and gave substantial preference to those in the former. The Brothers listed themselves as white and didn't make the cut. In 1977, the Brothers Malone again took the entrance exam for the Boston Fire department, this time listing themselves as black. The Brothers became firemen. Within a few years, someone at the Fire Department grew suspicious of the Malones. An investigation …
Foreign Affairs Federalism And The Limits On Executive Power,
2012
University of Chicago Law School
Foreign Affairs Federalism And The Limits On Executive Power, Zachary D. Clopton
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
On February 23 of this year, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated a California statute permitting victims of the Armenian genocide to file insurance claims, finding that the state's use of the label "Genocide" intruded on the federal government's conduct of foreign affairs. This decision, Movsesian v. Versicherung AG, addresses foreign affairs federalism—the division of authority between the states and the federal government. Just one month later, the Supreme Court weighed in on another foreign affairs issue: the separation of foreign relations powers within the federal government. In Zivotofsky v. Clinton, the Supreme Court ordered the lower courts to …
The Future Of The Establishment Clause In Context: Neutrality, Religion, Or Avoidance?,
2012
Chicago-Kent College of Law
The Future Of The Establishment Clause In Context: Neutrality, Religion, Or Avoidance?, Nicholas P. Cafardi
Chicago-Kent Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Look At The Establishment Clause Through The Prism Of Religious Perspectives: Religious Majorities, Religious Minorities, And Nonbelievers,
2012
Chicago-Kent College of Law
A Look At The Establishment Clause Through The Prism Of Religious Perspectives: Religious Majorities, Religious Minorities, And Nonbelievers, Samuel J. Levine
Chicago-Kent Law Review
As a number of commentators have observed, the Supreme Court's record in adjudicating the free exercise claims of religious minorities—in particular, unfamiliar and unpopular religious minorities—is vulnerable to the critique that the Court's rhetoric and, at times, the Court's holdings demonstrate an inability or unwillingness to look beyond majoritarian religious perspectives. Building on this scholarship, this article analyzes the Court's adjudication of Establishment Clause cases in the context of different religious perspectives, including those of religious minorities, religious minorities, and nonbelievers.
In exploring these questions, this article traces the Court's Establishment Clause jurisprudence through several decades, examining a number of …
Of Speech And Sanctions: Toward A Penalty-Sensitive Approach To The First Amendment,
2012
Louisiana State University Law Center
Of Speech And Sanctions: Toward A Penalty-Sensitive Approach To The First Amendment, Michael Coenen
Journal Articles
Courts confronting First Amendment claims do not often scrutinize the severity of a speaker’s punishment. Embracing a “penalty-neutral” understanding of the free-speech right, these courts tend to treat an individual’s expression as either protected, in which case the government may not punish it at all, or unprotected, in which case the government may punish it to a very great degree. There is, however, a small but important body of “penalty-sensitive” case law that runs counter to the penalty-neutral norm. Within this case law, the severity of a speaker’s punishment affects the merits of her First Amendment claim, thus giving rise …
Congress, The Constitution, And
Supreme Court Recusal,
2012
Washington and Lee University School of Law
Congress, The Constitution, And Supreme Court Recusal, Louis J. Virelli Iii
Washington and Lee Law Review
Recusal is one of the most hotly contested issues facing the Supreme Court. From the wide-ranging debate over Supreme Court recusal, however, a singular theme has emerged: Congress must do more to protect the integrity and legitimacy of the Court by regulating the Justices’ recusal practices. Herein lies the problem. Rather than solve the puzzle of Supreme Court recusal, direct congressional regulation has created an impasse between Congress and the Court that has consequences for the reputation, efficacy, and legitimacy of both Branches. In a precursor to this Article, I recast the issue of Supreme Court recusal as a constitutional …
Dubious Delegation: Article Iii Limits On Mental Health Treatment Decisions,
2012
University of Michigan Law School
Dubious Delegation: Article Iii Limits On Mental Health Treatment Decisions, Adam Teitelbaum
Michigan Law Review
A common condition of supervised release requires a defendant, post-incarceration, to participate in a mental health treatment program. Federal district courts often order probation officers to make certain decisions ancillary to these programs. However Article III delegation doctrine places limits on such actions. This Note addresses the constitutionality of delegating the "treatment program" decision, in which a probation officer decides which type of treatment the defendant must undergo; the choice is often between inpatient treatment and other less restrictive alternatives. The resolution of this issue ultimately depends on whether this decision constitutes a "judicial act." Finding support in lower court …
Naim V. Naim,
2012
University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law
Nigro V. United States: The Most Disingenuous Supreme Court Opinion, Ever,
2012
University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law
Nigro V. United States: The Most Disingenuous Supreme Court Opinion, Ever, A. Christopher Bryant
Nevada Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Making The Most Of United States V. Jones In A Surveillance Society: A Statutory Implementation Of Mosaic Theory,
2012
Vanderbilt University Law School
Making The Most Of United States V. Jones In A Surveillance Society: A Statutory Implementation Of Mosaic Theory, Christopher Slobogin
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In the Supreme Court's recent decision in United States v. Jones, a majority of the Justices appeared to recognize that under some circumstances aggregation of information about an individual through governmental surveillance can amount to a Fourth Amendment search. If adopted by the Court, this notion sometimes called "mosaic theory"-could bring about a radical change to Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, not just in connection with surveillance of public movements-the issue raised in Jonesbut also with respect to the government's increasingly pervasive record-mining efforts. One reason the Court might avoid the mosaic theory is the perceived difficulty of implementing it. This article …
The Constitutionality Of Federal Jurisdiction-Stripping Legislation And The History Of State Judicial Selection And Tenure,
2012
Vanderbilt University Law School
The Constitutionality Of Federal Jurisdiction-Stripping Legislation And The History Of State Judicial Selection And Tenure, Brian T. Fitzpatrick
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Few questions in the field of Federal Courts have captivated scholars like the question of whether Congress can simultaneously divest both lower federal courts and the U.S. Supreme Court of jurisdiction to hear federal constitutional claims and thereby leave those claims to be litigated in state courts alone. Such a divestiture is known today as “jurisdiction stripping,” and, despite literally decades of scholarship on the subject, scholars have largely been unable to reconcile two widely held views: jurisdiction stripping should be unconstitutional because it deprives constitutional rights of adjudication by independent judges and jurisdiction stripping is nonetheless perfectly consistent with …
Comments On Michel Rosenfeld's The Identity Of The Constitutional Subject: Selfhood, Citizenship, Culture, And Community,
2012
University of Virginia School of Law
Comments On Michel Rosenfeld's The Identity Of The Constitutional Subject: Selfhood, Citizenship, Culture, And Community, Deborah Hellman
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
