Fourteenth Amendment Commons^™

The Active Administrative Law Judge: Is There Harm In An Alj Asking?, Allen E. Shoenberger

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Security Clearance Review: Employees Of American Industry Vis-A-Vis Civil Servants And Military Members, Robert Robinson Gales

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Richard Ortega, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. United States Immigration And Customs Enforcement, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants: Reply Brief Of Appellant, Patricia E. Roberts, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Alison R.W. Toepp

Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic

No abstract provided.

Connecticut Department Of Public Safety V. Doe: The Supreme Court's Clarification Of Whether Sex Offender Registration And Notification Laws Violate Convicted Sex Offenders' Right To Procedural Due Process, Gabriel Baldwin

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Hiv Reporting In California: By Name Or By Number?, Nicole Kamm

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Special Populations: Mobilization For Change

Touro Law Review

This Article is based on a transcript of a break-out discussion which took place at An Obvious Truth: Creating an Action Blueprint for a Civil Right to Counsel in New York State, held at Touro Law Center, Central Islip, New York, in March 2008. The discussion was moderated by Karen L. Nicolson, Michael Williams, and Toby Golick.

This Article assesses the needs of various special populations and the possible strategies and solutions to create change through enacting a civil right to counsel. The Article is intended to capture information and viewpoints of the people who participated in the break-out discussion …

Gideon Meets Goldberg: The Case For A Qualified Right To Counsel In Welfare Hearings, Stephen Loffredo, Don Friedman

Touro Law Review

In Goldberg v. Kelly, the Supreme Court held that welfare recipients have a right under the Due Process Clause to notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard before the state may terminate assistance. However, the Court stopped short of holding due process requires states to appoint counsel to represent claimants at these constitutionally mandated hearings. As a result, in the vast majority of administrative hearings involving welfare benefits, claimants- desperately poor, and often with little formal education- must appear pro se while trained advocates represent the government. Drawing on the theory of underenforced constitutional norms, first articulated by Dean …

Clark V. Martinez: Striking A Balance Between United States Security And Due Process Rights Of Illegal Immigrants, Michelle Mitsuye Shimasaki

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Practicalities And Peculiarities: The Heightened Due Process Standard For Notice Under Jones V. Flower, Emily Riley

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Catch Twentywu The Oral Argument In Fisher V. University Of Texas And The Obfuscation Of Critical Mass, Sheldon Bernard Lyke

NULR Online

No abstract provided.

Fair Play: The Tension Between An Athletic Association's Regulatory Power And Free Speech Rights Of Member Schools - The Practical Implications Of Tennessee V. Brentwood, Aaron Echols

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This case note focuses on the development of free speech rights and how those free speech rights co-exist with the rights of administrative bodies to regulate the speech and behavior of members. In particular, this case note examines the tension between the free speech rights of member schools trying to advertise the benefits of attending their school and the regulatory interests of an athletic association seeking to ensure fair athletic competition and academic priority over athletics.

Due Process; A Detached Judge; And Enemy Combatants, Julian Mann Iii

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

In the landmark administrative law decision of Goldberg v. Kelly, Justice Brennan stated that an “impartial decision maker is essential” to procedural due process. As a corollary, in the more recent decision of Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Justice O'Connor stated that “due process requires a neutral and a detached judge in the first instance.” Thus, the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution require that the essential element of neutrality remain an integral part of any administrative hearing. There can be no departure from this fundamental guarantee of constitutional due process for the administrative hearings …

Civil Procedure—Be More Specific: Vague Precedents And The Differing Standards By Which To Apply “Arises Out Of Or Relates To” In The Test For Specific Personal Jurisdiction, Ryne H. Ballou

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

"That's The Guy!": Federal Rule Of Evidence 801(D)(1)(C) And Out-Of-Court Statements Of Identification, Gilbert M. Rein

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Equality Arguments For Abortion Rights, Neil S. Siegel, Reva B. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

Roe v. Wade grounds constitutional protections for women’s decision wheth­er to end a pregnancy in the Due Process Clauses. But in the four decades since Roe, the U.S. Supreme Court has come to recognize the abortion right as an equality right as well as a liberty right. In this Essay, we describe some distinctive features of equality arguments for abortion rights. We then show how, over time, the Court and individual Justices have begun to employ equal­ity arguments in analyzing the constitutionality of abortion restrictions. These arguments first appear inside of substantive due process case law, and then as claims …

Incorporation Of The Establishment Clause Against The States: A Logical, Textual, And Historical Account, Frederick Mark Gedicks

Indiana Law Journal

Incorporation of the Establishment Clause against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment is logically and textually impossible—so say most academics, a few lower-court judges, and a Supreme Court Justice. They maintain that because the Clause was originally understood as a structural limitation that protected state power against the federal government, it cannot restrain state power or fit within the Fourteenth Amendment texts that protect personal rights— indeed, that attempts to show that it does are laughable.

This purported incoherence and textual inconsistency enable anti-incorporation critics to avoid serious engagement of the anti-establishment dimensions of Reconstruction history. They also undermine the …

Buying A Judicial Seat For Appeal: Caperton V. A.T. Massey Coal Company, Inc., Is Right Out Of A John Grisham Novel, Richard Gillespie

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Knowledge Is Power: The Fundamental Right To Record Present Observations In Public, Travis Gunn

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Richard Ortega, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. United States Immigration And Customs Enforcement, Et Al., Defendants-Appellants: Brief Of Appellant, Patricia E. Roberts, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Alison R.W. Toepp

Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic

No abstract provided.

Juvenile Justice And The Equal Protection Clause: First Class, Tourist, Or Luxury Coach, James M. Mcgoldrick

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.