9571 research outputs found
Sort by
Inadequate Diabetes Care in Correctional Facilities & the Need for Relief Under the ADA and Section 504
Get PDFStigma in the Sunshine State: How the Eleventh Circuit Ignored Important Equal Protection Considerations and Contributed to the Panic Against the Transgender Community
Get PDFCase Brief: \u3ci\u3eState v. Flow\u3c/i\u3e–Did the Trial Court Put the Cart Before the Horse?
Get PDFWhy Study State Constitutional Law?
No full textIn light of the Supreme Court retrenching on certain rights in recent years, more Americans are paying attention to state constitutions. This moment therefore offers an opportunity to explain why scholars, lawyers, and ordinary citizens should take state constitutions as seriously as they do the U.S. Constitution, and consider studying them an intellectually rewarding and important endeavor. In this essay, I attempt to do that. Earlier in our history, state constitutions helped define what it meant to be American. Through the process of drafting and interpreting constitutions, prior generations decided what popular sovereignty meant, who qualified as part of “the people,” and what “liberty” meant. The U.S. Constitution has proven resistant to change because of its difficult amendment process. But state constitutions are in the process of changing as we speak. Engaging with them gives us an opportunity to decide questions like what popular sovereignty and liberty mean in the twenty-first century. That is to say, studying state constitutions allows us to contribute to the ongoing discussion about what America means in the twenty-first century in a way no other area of law does. In this essay, I also argue that there are three practical benefits to approaching state constitutions from this perspective: (1) increasing respect for state constitutions; (2) ensuring constitutional stability and avoiding constitutional crisis; and (3) preserving American democracy
Rational Investing or Speculative Fever?: SPACs, Robinhood, and Digital Assets—Securities Markets or Casinos?
No full textThis Article focuses on one of the recurring themes, not only in Professor Markham’s most recent volume but also in the earlier ones as well—speculation in the financial markets. The 2010–2020 decade set the stage for a new round of speculative activity starting in 2021. In the Article that follows, I reflect on a new wave of speculation and three current examples of speculative activity. The Article concludes that regulators should be cautious about over-regulation of special-purpose acquisition companies (“SPACs”) and gamified trading. The article also supports the regulation of digital assets (cryptocurrencies and NFTs) as securities
Standing and Criminal Law
No full textAccording to the Supreme Court, the “irreducible constitutional minimum of Article III standing” is a concrete, particularized injury in fact that is traceable to the defendant and redressable by a favorable judgment. But this set of requirements does not apply in criminal cases. The federal government has authority to bring prosecutions for any violation of federal criminal law, regardless of whether the crime caused concrete harm to the United States or anyone else, and even though the punishment for the crime does not redress an injury in any conventional sense. This Article argues that the difference in standing requirements between civil and criminal cases is unwarranted. The various justifications provided for standing—the text of Article III, historical practice, principles of separation of powers, and a host of practical considerations—all support imposing the same standing requirements in civil and criminal cases. Moreover, maintaining the different standing requirements has various undesirable consequences. It results in the government having broader access to the courts to enforce its interests than individuals to enforce their rights, and it tends to devalue civil rights relative to government interests. It also encourages the proliferation of criminal laws. Because a lower standing threshold applies to criminal cases, criminal law is a more robust and flexible tool for regulation than civil laws conferring individual rights. This advantage incentivizes Congress to regulate through criminal law—thus contributing to the problems of overcriminalization and mass incarceration