The Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law
Not a member yet
5983 research outputs found
Sort by
Models and Mirrors in Constitutional Theory
No full textThe Saint John Paul II Guild of Catholic Lawyers, a student-led organization that promotes justice in the law and advances the intrinsic value of the human person through events at The Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law (Catholic Law), sponsored its annual Mirror of Justice lecture on Monday, February 26, in the Walter A. Slowinski Courtroom. This year’s lecture—part of the Guild’s longstanding series which recognizes legal scholars and encourages them to advance through law the pursuit of peace with justice—was delivered by Catholic Law professor J. Joel Alicea, Co-Director of the Project on Constitutional Originalism and the Catholic Intellectual Tradition.
Alicea’s lecture focused on the Marian epithet “Mirror of Justice” as found in the Catholic prayer of petition known both as the Litany of the Blessed Virgin Mary and as the Litany of Loreto. He noted that Mary, in her complete dedication to the Lord Jesus, serves as a model of Christian discipleship, and it is because she has modeled herself on her Son that she, in her purity, is a mirror of His justice. Alicea drew an analogy to constitutional theory: just as we need Mary as a model of Christian discipleship to distinguish good from poor discipleship, we need a sound moral framework to distinguish good from poor moral justifications for a constitutional theory
The Antidote of Free Speech: Censorship During the Pandemic
Full text linkFree speech in America stands at a precipice. The nation must decide if the First Amendment protects controversial, unconventional, and unpopular speech, or only that which is mainstream, fashionable, and government-approved. This debate is one of many legal battles brought to the fore during Covid-19. But the fallout of the free speech question will transcend Covid-19.
During the pandemic, the federal government took unprecedented steps to pressure private entities to push messages it approved and squelch those it did not. The Supreme Court will soon grapple with the issue of censorship during the pandemic. This article examines this litigation, along with the speech restrictions enacted by social media platforms at the behest of federal officials. It does so through a historical lens as it applies to free speech and prior restraint. Tracing this lineage is vital to understanding the importance of the right to think freely in the Covid era and how to apply historical concepts of free speech to contemporary challenges.
I conclude the solution to the problem of misinformation is more speech, not suppression. Unconventional speech thus warrants constitutional protection. The First Amendment is designed to preserve an uninhibited marketplace of ideas where truth will ultimately prevail. That process is difficult, time consuming, and not without error. However, it is the most prudent alternative to reliance on the government intrusion of prior restraint and viewpoint discrimination
What Case or Controversy? A Discussion of “Standing” in 303 Creative, Inc. v. Elenis
No full textOn March 27, the newly established student organization, Gender & Sexuality Law Forum (GSLF) at Catholic Law, hosted its inaugural event titled, What Case or Controversy? A Discussion of “Standing” in 303 Creative, Inc. v. Elenis. The program provided a platform for an open and informative discussion on the Supreme Court’s decision in 303 Creative, Inc. v. Elenis and its implications for legal standing. Samantha Pearl (3L), GSLF president, welcomed attendees and introduced the speakers: Professor Kevin Walsh and David Post.
Professor Walsh set the stage with an insightful overview of the standing requirement to bring suit in federal court. David Post, an Adjunct Scholar at the Cato Institute and formerly a professor at Beasley School of Law at Temple University, provided the keynote remarks, sharing his perspectives on the case while raising important considerations for future standing-related issues.
The event concluded with a Q&A session, during which attendees posted questions to both speakers. The Q&A was moderated by Alexandra Van Cleef (2L), GSLF community engagement chair
The Very Idea of Tradition in the Law
Full text linkThis lecture was delivered in connection with the St. John Henry Newman Chair in Law at The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law, and as part of a conference on St. John Henry Newman, Tradition, and Law. It reflects on the worth of the idea of tradition in life, law, and Christianity
A Major Question for Administrative Law: How are Courts Applying the Major Questions Doctrine Post \u3ci\u3eWest Virginia v. EPA?
Full text linkOn June 30, 2022, judicial deference toward actions of administrative agencies took a significant hit. In West Virginia v. EPA, the Court formally recognized—for the first time—the major questions doctrine, which requires agencies to identify clear congressional authorization when claiming the authority to make decisions of vast economic and political significance. Since June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court has utilized the major questions doctrine in decisions of national importance, including topics ranging from environmental protection efforts to cancelling student debt. This note offers a snapshot of how the major questions doctrine has been applied by federal courts across the country since West Virginia was decided. Beginning with the nondelegation doctrine, this note traces the rise and the beginning of the fall of congressional delegations of power to administrative agencies. This note then summarizes the major questions doctrine and shows how the doctrine has been applied by federal courts in 46 cases since West Virginia was decided
§230 and Tinfoil Hats: What Conspiracy Theories Teach Us About the Marketplace of Ideas and Online Speech
Full text linkFamously imputed into First Amendment jurisprudence by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, the Marketplace of Ideas is a foundational paradigm in free speech theory. However, current trends in social discourse suggest the Marketplace has crashed. Conspiracy theories illustrate this crash as a story of unintended consequences and, paradoxically, a consequence of judicial and legislative efforts to prevent it. Acknowledging the popularity and widespread use of the internet and social media, I explore solutions to rejuvenate the Marketplace of Ideas and better align its prominence in First Amendment doctrine with the reality of the current speech landscape