Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Roberts Court And Freedom Of Speech, Erwin Chemerinsky

Federal Communications Law Journal

This is an edited version of a speech delivered on December 16, 2010 in Washington, D.C., as part of the Federal Communications Bar Association's Distinguished Speaker Series.

This speech was given by Dean Erwin Chemerinsky in December 2010 as part of the FCBA's Distinguished Speaker Series. In the speech, Dean Chemerinsky offers his perspectives on and analysis of the Supreme Court's position on freedom of speech in recent years. He highlights important recent freedom of speech decisions made by the Roberts Court, and gives some projections as to where the court is heading in the years to come, given its …

International Media Law Reform And First Amendment Agnosticism: Review Of Lee Bollinger’S Uninhibited, Robust, And Wide-Open: A Free Press For A New Century, Enrique Armijo

Federal Communications Law Journal

Lee Bollinger's Uninhibited, Robust, and Wide-Open argues that in an increasingly globalized world, the United States must seek to export First Amendment free press principles to other countries. His project, however, is belied by the fact that media law is a product of context and history as much as legalism. His proposals for reconceptualizing our own animating vision for a free press here in the States are also in many important respects inconsistent with the First Amendment itself.

Wikileaks Would Not Qualify To Claim Federal Reporter’S Privilege In Any Form, Jonathan Peters

Federal Communications Law Journal

This Article addresses whether WikiLeaks could claim a federal reporter's privilege if the U.S. government or a U.S. entity tried to compel one of the site's staff members to disclose the source(s) of any documents it has released. After exploring the origins of the First Amendment-based privilege, the Author argues that WikiLeaks would not be able to claim it. First, the website does not engage in investigative reporting. Second, it has not taken steps consistently to minimize harm. He also discusses congressional attempts to pass a federal shield law, paying special attention to H.R. 985 and S. 448, the two …

Reasoning About The Irrational: The Roberts Court And The Future Of Constitutional Law, H. Jefferson Powell

Washington Law Review

Commentary on the future direction of the Roberts Court generally falls along lines that correlate with the commentators’ political views on the desirability of the Court’s recent decisions. A more informative approach is to look for opinions suggesting changes in the presuppositions with which the Justices approach constitutional decision making. In footnote 27 in his opinion for the Court in the District of Columbia v. Heller Second Amendment decision, Justice Scalia suggested a fundamental revision of the Court’s assumptions about the role of judicial doctrine, and the concept of rationality, in constitutional law. Justice Scalia would eliminate the normative aspects …

History Repeats Itself: The Post-Furman Return To Arbitrariness In Capital Punishment, Lindsey S. Vann

University of Richmond Law Review

Part I of this comment provides a brief review of Furmanandthe circumstances leading to the decision. Part II discusses thefactors indicating current arbitrariness and other recurring factors surrounding the American death penalty. Part III examines the development of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause since Furman. Finally, Part IV discusses how the Supreme Court should apply its contemporary Eighth Amendment doctrine to the current circumstances surrounding the imposition of the death penalty.

Smith In Theory And Practice, Nelson Tebbe

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Employment Division v. Smith controversially held that general laws that were neutral toward religion would no longer be presumptively invalid, regardless of how much they incidentally burdened religious practices. That decision sparked a debate that continues today, twenty years later. This symposium Essay explores the argument that subsequent courts have in fact been less constrained by the principal rule of Smith than advocates on both sides of the controversy usually assume. Lower courts administering real world disputes often find they have all the room they need to grant relief from general laws, given exceptions written into the decision itself and …

The Unconstitutionality Of The Filibuster, Josh Chafetz

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This Article, written for the Connecticut Law Review's 2010 "Is Our Constitutional Order Broken?" symposium, argues that the filibuster, as currently practiced, is unconstitutional.

After a brief introduction in Part I, Part II describes the current operation of the filibuster. Although the filibuster is often discussed in terms of "unlimited debate," this Part argues that its current operation is best understood in terms of a sixty-vote requirement to pass most bills and other measures through the Senate.

Part III presents a structural argument that this supermajority requirement for most Senate business is unconstitutional. This Part argues that the words "passed" …

The Viability Of Certification In Federal Appellate Procedure, Kevin G. Crennan

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreign Law As Legislative Fact In Constitutional Cases, A. Christopher Bryant

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Employment Division V. Smith: "The Sky That Didn't Fall", David B. Frohnmayer

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Religion Clauses As Mutually Reinforcing Mandates: Why The Arguments For Rigorously Enforcing The Free Exercise Clause And Establishment Clause Are Stronger When Both Clauses Are Taken Seriously, Alan Brownstein

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Political (And Other) Safeguards Of Religious Freedom, Richard W. Garnett

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Religious Use Of Copyrighted Works After Smith, Rfra, And Eldred, Steven D. Jamar

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Politics Of Free Exercise After Employment Division V. Smith: Same-Sex Marriage, The "War On Terror," And Religious Freedom, Richard Schragger

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Smith In Theory And Practice, Nelson Tebbe

Cardozo Law Review

Employment Division v. Smith controversially held that general laws that were neutral toward religion would no longer be presumptively invalid, regardless of how much they incidentally burdened religious practices. That decision sparked a debate that continues today, twenty years later. This symposium Essay explores the argument that subsequent courts have in fact been less constrained by the principal rule of Smith than advocates on both sides of the controversy usually assume. Lower courts administering real world disputes often find they have all the room they need to grant relief from general laws, given exceptions written into the decision itself and …

Religious Truth, Pluralism, And Secularization: The Shaking Foundations Of American Religious Liberty, Daniel O. Conkle

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In this Essay, I recount John Locke’s 1689 Letter Concerning Toleration and explain how religious liberty continues to rest on Lockean and related justifications. These various justifications depend in part on religious-moral reasoning (both Christian and non-Christian) and in part on political-pragmatic considerations. I then discuss recent and ongoing developments in the American religious landscape, including a radical increase in religious diversity, the modernization of traditional faiths, the individualization or "spiritualization" of religion, and the increasing secularization of individual belief structures. I suggest that these developments, over time, may seriously threaten the underlying religious-moral and political-pragmatic foundations of religious liberty …

Dangerous People Or Dangerous Weapons: Access To Firearms For Persons With Mental Illness, Lawrence O. Gostin, Katherine L. Record

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The recent attempted assassination of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords has once again focused the nation’s attention on the danger of the wide availability of firearms.  The Supreme Court has ruled that gun restrictions may only be imposed on those deemed “prohibited persons” under the Gun Control Act of 1968.  Although some are easily identifiable (e.g., children, convicted felons), one widely inclusive group is not – the mentally ill.

The current system designed to bar the mentally ill from purchasing or possessing firearms is ineffectual due to a lack of reporting and the existence of loopholes.  What’s more, no state has developed …

The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly Of Employment Division V. Smith For Family Law, James G. Dwyer

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Password Protected? Can A Password Save Your Cell Phone From A Search Incident To Arrest?, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

Over the last few years, dozens of courts have authorized police to conduct warrantless searches of cell phones when arresting individuals. Under the “search incident to arrest” doctrine, police are free to search text messages, call histories, photos, voicemails, and a host of other data if they arrest an individual and remove a cell phone from his pocket. Given that courts have offered little protection against cell-phone searches, this Article explores whether individuals can protect themselves by password protecting their phones. The Article concludes, unfortunately, that password protecting a cell phone offers minimal legal protection when an individual is lawfully …

Finding Equilibrium: Exploring Due Process Violations In The Whistleblower Provisions Of The Fraud Enforecement And Recovery Act Of 2009, Laura Hough

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.