Jurisprudence Commons^™

Timing Legal Parenthood, Noy Naaman

Arkansas Law Review

When does a parent become a parent? This Article examines this question through a novel framework that analyzes the tension between an individual’s evolving self-identification as a parent and the law’s acknowledgment of the individual’s parental status. It focuses on two forms of that tension. The first concerns a scenario occurring after the birth of a child, when the self-identification as a parent is established but the law has yet to formalize the parental status. The second involves a scenario occurring before the birth, when the self-identification as a parent-to-be—the process of becoming—is legally overlooked. This Article argues that this …

The Future Of The Allen Charge In The New Millennium, Caleb Epperson

Arkansas Law Review

"In matters of truth and justice, there is no difference between large and small problems, for issues concerning the treatment of people are all the same." Following the death of George Floyd on May 25, 2020, social and political movements grew rapidly nationwide to combat the prevalence of police brutality against African-American communities. The impact of the ongoing Black Lives Matter movement has been observed in both cities across the United States and in related movements internationally. This movement highlights the necessity for police reform and catalyzes the public’s growing call for greater criminal justice reform. To achieve the goals …

Can't We Just Talk About This First?: Making The Case For The Use Of Discovery Depositions In Arkansas Criminal Cases, Bryan Altman

Arkansas Law Review

“[T]he quest for better justice is a ceaseless quest, that the single constant for our profession is the need for continuous examination and reexamination of our premises as to what law should do to achieve better justice.” From time to time, it is important that we take stock of our legal surroundings and ask ourselves if our procedures are still properly serving us, or if there is need for change and improvement. In this Article, I argue that the time has come for Arkansas to provide the criminal defense bar with the affirmative power to conduct discovery depositions. Arkansas criminal …

Court Legitimacy & The Shadow Docket, Colton Tilley

Honors Capstones

No abstract provided.

Rewriting Whren V. United States, Devon W. Carbado, Jonathan Feingold

Faculty Scholarship

In 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Whren v. United States—a unanimous opinion in which the Court effectively constitutionalized racial profiling. Despite its enduring consequences, Whren remains good law today. This Article rewrites the opinion. We do so, in part, to demonstrate how one might incorporate racial justice concerns into Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, a body of law that has long elided and marginalized the racialized dimensions of policing. A separate aim is to reveal the “false necessity” of the Whren outcome. The fact that Whren was unanimous, and that even progressive Justices signed on, might lead one to conclude that …

How To Decide Religious Liberty Cases: An Analysis Of Balancing Versus Principalism, Marc A. Clauson

Helm's School of Government Conference - 2021-2024

No abstract provided.

The Local Community Standard: Modernizing The Supreme Court's Obscenity Jurisprudence, Jacob S. Gordon

Helm's School of Government Conference - 2021-2024

Paper presentation on the Supreme Court's outdated case law on obscenity and how it needs to be modernized to in order to combat the dissemination of inappropriate materials in the age of decentralized digital media.

Unsettled Law: Social-Movement Conflict, Stare Decisis, And Roe V. Wade, Mary Ziegler

Connecticut Law Review

With President Donald Trump’s third Supreme Court nomination, the reexamination of Roe v. Wade has become a probability. An increasingly conservative Court will almost certainly not embrace the idea of abortion rights. Instead, the fate of abortion rights will likely turn on the meaning of stare decisis, a doctrine requiring the Court to pay some deference to its past decisions. Stare decisis has recently played a starring role in abortion jurisprudence. In his controlling concurrence in June Medical Services L.L.C. v. Russo, Chief Justice Roberts invoked stare decisis while gutting the substantive rule written into the precedent to which he …

A Random Stroll Amongst Anthony Trollope's Lawyers, James J. Fishman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Anthony Trollope (1815-1882) resides in the pantheon of nineteenth century English literature. Overcoming a miserable childhood, he became an official with the post office and is credited with introducing the familiar red mailbox. While working full time in his postal position until 1867, he still managed to publish 47 novels, travel books, biographies, short stories, collections of essays, and articles on various topics. Trollope has been described as the novelist of the ordinary for his realistic description of English society. Law and legal issues flow through Trollope’s fiction. The legal system held a special importance to him as the skeleton …

The Eleventh Circuit's Misguided "Arm-Of-The-State" Analysis In Pellitteri V. Prine, Asher Lipsett

Georgia State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Pledge Of Allegiance And Compelled Speech Revisited: Requiring Parental Consent, Caroline Mala Corbin

Articles

Since the Supreme Court decided West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette in 1943, free speech law has been clear: public schools may not force students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Nevertheless, in two states -Texas and Florida- students may decline to participate only with parental permission. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law on the grounds that the parental requirement furthered parents' substantive due process right to control the upbringing of their children.

The Eleventh Circuit decision is flawed both in its understanding of the First Amendment right to be free of compelled speech and …

Bad Acts, Worse Responses: Reconsidering The Moral Foundations Of The Us Criminal Justice System, Christian N. Futch

Honors College Theses

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the contemporary criminal justice system in the United States, offering moral and pragmatic critiques to its current construction, and proposing an alternative construction that is both more successful pragmatically and morally. In this paper, I first establish the connection between morality and the law through the consideration of jurisprudential theories of law. After arguing for this connection, I then offer critiques of the current criminal justice system in the United States. After this, I evaluate the four general theories of punishment using the scholarship of Thom Brooks, finding that retributive and deterrent …

Fair Construction To Living Constitution: Analyzing Constitutional Interpretation Throughout United States History, Joshua Lloyd

Senior Honors Theses

The proper method of constitutional interpretation has been debated throughout the history of the Supreme Court. This debate has been defined by the tension between the originalist and living constitution jurisprudences. Each has been dominant at one point in United States history. A fair construction jurisprudence was almost universally utilized by the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution according to its original meaning until Plessy v. Ferguson. Then, due to an alliance between evangelicals and progressive scholars, a broader, more lenient living constitution jurisprudence developed which allowed justices to interpret the Constitution in light of changing social norms. Finally, …

Truth And Reconciliation: The Ku Klux Klan Hearings Of 1871 And The Genesis Of Section 1983, Tiffany R. Wright, Ciarra N. Carr, Jade W.P. Gasek

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Over the course of seven months in 1871, Congress did something extraordinary for the time: It listened to Black people. At hearings in Washington, D.C. and throughout the former Confederate states, Black women and men—who just six years earlier were enslaved and barred from testifying in Southern courts—appeared before Congress to tell their stories. The stories were heartbreaking. After experiencing the joy of Emancipation and the initial hope of Reconstruction, they had been subjected to unspeakable horror at the hands of white terrorists. They had been raped and sexually humiliated. Their children and spouses murdered. They had been savagely beaten …

How In The World Could They Reach That Conclusion?, Hon. Carlton Reeves

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

No abstract provided.

The Original Meaning Of “Due Process Of Law” In The Fifth Amendment, Max Crema, Lawrence B. Solum

Faculty Scholarship

The modern understanding of the Fifth Amendment Due Process of Law Clause is dramatically different from the original meaning of the constitutional text. The Supreme Court has embraced both substantive due process—a jurisprudence of unenumerated rights—and procedural due process—a grab bag of doctrines that touch upon almost every aspect of administrative and judicial procedures. We demonstrate that the original meaning of the Clause is much narrower. In 1791, “due process of law” had a narrow and technical meaning: the original sense of the word “process” was close to the modern sense that the word has when used in the phrase …

Getting To Phi: The Case For Excusatory Derogations From Iccpr Rights, Benjamen F. Gussen

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

This Article highlights the need for excusatory derogations from human rights. Currently, there is exclusive reliance on justification when upholding derogations from International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ("ICCPR ) rights. In contrast, an excusatory derogation accentuates the requisite international policy intervention to assist national and subnational governments toward a proportional response to public emergencies. The right to mobility under the ICCPR, and its renditions in the constitutions of Australia and Canada, are used to illustrate this proposition. Border closures in response to the coronavirus pandemic provide context to elucidate how different types of public emergencies dictate different approaches …

Deep-State Constitutionalism, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this review, I explain how "Common Good Constitutionalism" taps into a deficiency of the conservative legal movement: namely, its exclusive focus on the law "as it is" at the expense of the underlying abstract normative principles that justify the positive law of our written Constitution. Due to this deficiency, the conservative legal movement gives short shrift to the Declaration of Independence and the Ninth Amendment and the natural rights to which both refer. This deficiency is in need of correction. But any such correction does not justify the jettisoning of originalism as Vermeule proposes. Nor does Vermeule defend his …

The Politics Of Proportionality, Nelson Tebbe, Micah Schwartzman

Michigan Law Review

A Review of How Rights Went Wrong: Why Our Obsession With Rights Is Tearing America Apart. By Jamal Greene.

The Roberts Court's Transformative Religious Freedom Cases: The Doctrine And The Politics Of Grievance, Stephen M. Feldman

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article argues that the Roberts Court has adopted a conservative approach in religious freedom cases, shifting toward a jurisprudence that favors Christianity and undermines the separation of church and state. This approach, rooted in tradition and a de facto Christian America, has led to significant changes in both Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause doctrines. The Court's decisions increasingly protect Christian practices and institutions while marginalizing non-Christian religions, reflecting a broader ideological shift toward judicial engagement and away from principles of federalism and judicial restraint.