Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Illusory Right To Counsel, Eve Brensike Primus

Articles

Imagine a woman wrongly accused of murdering her fiance. She is arrested and charged with first-degree murder. If convicted, she faces a mandatory sentence of life without the possibility of parole. Her family scrapes together enough money to hire two attorneys to represent her at trial. There is no physical evidence connecting her to the murder, but the prosecution builds its case on circumstantial inferences. Her trial attorneys admit that they were so cocky and confident that she would be acquitted that they did not bother to investigate her case or file a single pre-trial motion. Rather, they waived the …

Juvenile Life Without Parole: Unconstitutional In Michigan?, Kimberly A. Thomas

Articles

Last term, in Graham v Florida,1 the United States Supreme Court found unconstitutional the sentence of life without parole for a juvenile who committed a non-homicide offense. This attention to the sentencing of juvenile offenders is a continuation of the Court's decision in Roper v Simmons,2 in which the Court held that juvenile offenders could not constitutionally receive the death penalty. This scrutiny should be a signal to Michigan to examine its own jurisprudence on juveniles receiving sentences of life without parole. Michigan has the second-highest number of persons serving sentences of life without parole for offenses committed when they …

On The Difficulties Of Generalization – Pcaob In The Footsteps Of Myers, Humphrey’S Executor, Morrison And Freytag, Peter L. Strauss

Faculty Scholarship

In considering what to write for this welcome occasion, I was struck by a certain resonance among Paul's scholarship – at least that of which I was first aware, and which I have often used to impress on students the problems of due process analysis – the important post he now holds, and a story our joint mentor, Walter Gellhorn, liked to tell on himself. In the wake of the Supreme Court's paradigm-shifting opinion in Goldberg v. Kelly, with its confident pronouncement of eight procedural elements that, it reasoned, minimal due process must always require of administrative procedures, Paul made …

The Constitutional And Contractual Controversy Of Suspicionless Drug Testing Of Public School Teachers, Amanda H. Cooley, Marka B. Fleming, Gwendolyn Mcfadden Wade

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pro-Gun Property Regulation: How The State Of Oklahoma Controls The Property Rights Of Employers Through Firearm Legislation, J. Blake Patton

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Cooperative Federalism And Police Reform: Using Congressional Spending Power To Promote Police Accountability, Kami Chavis Simmons

Faculty Publications

Police misconduct and corruption persist in our nation's local police departments. Recognizing the organizational roots of police misconduct, Congress granted the U.S. Department of Justice (the "DOJ") the authority to seek injunctive relief to implement institutional reforms within local law enforcement agencies. While the federal government's current strategy represents a promising model for reform, the DOJ's efforts cannot reach many local police departments that require intervention. Furthermore, the local primacy of criminal-justice issues, particularly issues related to police practices, implicates important federalism concerns. Although federal intervention is appropriate to address persistent patterns of misconduct, states and local entities must play …

Snyder V. Phelps: A Hard Case That Did Not Make Bad Law, Paul E. Salamanca

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In Snyder v. Phelps, the Court stood by the First Amendment in hard times. A religious group conducted a protest some 1,000 feet from a fallen marine's funeral, holding such pickets as “God Hates the USA,” “Thank God for Dead Soldiers,” and “You're Going to Hell.” Despite the empathy that virtually anyone would feel for the marine's grieving father, the Court held by a vote of eight to one that his action for intentional infliction of emotional distress and intrusion upon seclusion could not survive, owing largely to the public nature of the issues the protesters had raised. “Hard …

Sigtarp And The Executive-Legislative Clash: Confronting A Bowsher Issue With An Eye Toward Preserving The Separation Of Powers During Future Crisis Legislation, Aaron R. Sims

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Interference With Effective Assistance Of Counsel, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

A lawyer’s ineffective representation of a client may be attributable to a lawyer’s own personal failings. However, impairment of the right to effective assistance of counsel may also come from a trial judge’s conduct, and can takes many forms, and occur in varying circumstances. It is therefore difficult to formulate clear principles to cover all of the various situations in which a judge can undermine effective representation. The Borukhova and Mallayev case is only the most recent illustration of the way a ruling of a judge – forcing the lawyer to sum up his case without giving the lawyer adequate …

Lies, Honor, And The Government’S Good Name: Seditious Libel And The Stolen Valor Act, Christina E. Wells

Faculty Publications

Although the Supreme Court declared the crime of seditious libel inconsistent with the First Amendment long ago, the Stolen Valor Act, which punishes anyone who falsely represents themselves to have been awarded certain military medals, revives something very like that crime. the connection between the two crimes is not immediately obvious, but the government's underlying reasoning is nearly identical in both. Officials justified seditious libel prosecutions by claiming, without proof, that criticism of the government undermined its authority and reduced the public's respect for it, ultimately threatening national security. Contemporary government officials also argue, without proof, that the Act is …

Secular Not Secularist America, Michael Scaperlanda

Campbell Law Review

Other contributors to this symposium see "liberalism"' as the problem and "God" as the solution.' To a large extent, Ithink they have it backwards. "God" is the problem to which "liberalism" provides a particularly creative solution. Power hates a rival,' and God - or allegiance to an all-embracing monotheistic God - poses a significant threat to power because the wild faith of the martyr cannot be tamed by civil authority.

The Equal Protection Implications Of Government's Hateful Speech, Helen Norton

Publications

Under what circumstances should we understand government's racist or otherwise hateful speech to violate the Equal Protection Clause? Government speech that communicates hostility or animus on the basis of race, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, or other class status can facilitate private parties' discriminatory behavior, deter its targets from certain important opportunities or activities, and communicate a message of exclusion and second-class status. Contemporary equal protection doctrine, however, does not yet fully address the harms that such government expression potentially poses. The recent emergence of the Court's government speech doctrine--which to date has emphasized the value of government expression without …

An Article I Theory Of The Inherent Powers Of The Federal Courts, Benjamin H. Barton

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Standard For Salvation: Evaluating “Hybrid-Rights” Free-Exercise Claims, William J. Haun

Catholic University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Children's Constitutional Rights, Anne Dailey

Faculty Articles and Papers

This Article presents a developmental theory of children’s constitutional rights that focuses on the fundamental role of children’s rights in the socialization process leading to adult autonomy. The long history of denying children the full range of constitutional rights has its roots in a choice theory of rights that understands rights as deriving from the decision-making autonomy of the individual. From the perspective of choice theory, children do not enjoy most constitutional rights because they lack the capacity for autonomous choice. Choice theory not only justifies the long history of denying children rights, but it also serves to explain the …

First Amendment Investigations And The Inescapable Pragmatism Of The Common Law Of Free Speech, Lawrence Rosenthal

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Costs Of Heightened Pleading, Alexander A. Reinert

Indiana Law Journal

In Conley v. Gibson, the Supreme Court announced its commitment to a liberal pleading regime in federal civil cases, and for decades thereafter was steadfast in resisting ad hoc heightened pleading rules adopted by lower courts. Thus, from 1957 until a few years ago, most litigants could count on surviving a motion to dismiss a complaint for failure to state a claim so long as their pleading provided some minimal notice to the defendant of the nature of their claim. Enter Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly. Iqbal and Twombly, by many accounts, two-stepped the Court from …

Signing Unconstitutional Laws, William Baude

Indiana Law Journal

It has become fairly common for Presidents to sign laws that they think are unconstitutional, at least in part. Some scholars argue that this is unconstitutional. Others defend it, but on pragmatic grounds, as if one cannot afford to be a constitutional formalist in today’s government.

Both sides are wrong. In a wide range of cases, there is nothing wrong with signing unconstitutional laws. Indeed, it is required. Yet the President must exercise this power responsibly. He must have other constitutional duties that justify signing the remainder of the bill into law, and he must be prepared to use his …

Reviewing Associational Freedom Claims In A Limited Public Forum: An Extension Of The Distinction Between Debate-Dampening And Debate-Distorting State Action, Alan Brownstein, Vikram Amar

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

In this article, Professors Brownstein and Amar critically examine the important freedom of association and viewpoint discrimination arguments raised in the Christian Legal Society v. Martinez case. The authors agree with the Christian Legal Society ("CLS") that the Hastings nondiscrimination policy imposes serious burdens on the associational freedom of registered student groups ("RSOs") at the law school. To determine if that policy is constitutional, however, it is necessary for the Supreme Court to determine for the first time the extent to which freedom of association receives first amendment protection in a limited public forum. That analysis requires the translation of …

The Tea Party And The Constitution, Christopher W. Schmidt

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

This Article considers the Tea Party as a constitutional movement. I explore the Tea Party's ambitious effort to transform the role of the Constitution in American life, examining both the substance of the Tea Party's constitutional claims and the tactics movement leaders have embraced for advancing these claims. No major social movement in modern American history has so explicitly tied its reform agenda to the Constitution. From the time when the Tea Party burst onto the American political scene in early 2009, its supporters claimed in no uncertain terms that much recent federal government action overstepped constitutionally defined limitations. A …