John Payton Visits W&M ACS

November 26, 2007 | Comments Off on John Payton Visits W&M ACS

On November 12, over fifty students crowded into room 124 to hear John Payton, a partner at the D.C. law firm of Wilmer Hale. Payton’s talk was on the new races cases and the legacy of Brown v. Board of Education, and he led of by stating that he intended to be provocative. In the […]

Food For Thought…

November 8, 2007 | Comments Off on Food For Thought…

…and possibly an olive branch? There was a big to-do in the Supreme Court on Wednesday as the Justices heard oral arguments in the Danforth v. Minnesota case. The issue in that case is, if the Supreme Court recognizes a new rule of criminal procedure and says it will not apply retroactively, whether state courts […]

John Payton, a partner at the D.C. law firm WilmerHale, will be the featured ACS speaker next Monday, Nov. 12 from 1-2 p.m. in Room 124. Mr. Payton was lead counsel for the University of Michigan affirmative action cases Gratz and Grutter. Mr. Payton’s talk is titled, “Race and the Roberts Court: The Battle Over […]

Granted Cert: Admissibility of Search Incident to Unlawful Arrest

September 25, 2007 | Comments Off on Granted Cert: Admissibility of Search Incident to Unlawful Arrest

Virginia law provides that an officer may not arrest someone detained for a misdemeanor, but must rather rely on a summons and release them. In this case David Moore was stopped on suspicion of driving on a suspended license, he was arrested, and in a subsequent search police found 16 grams of crack cocaine (an […]

Massachusetts v. EPA

April 7, 2007 | Comments Off on Massachusetts v. EPA

This is the case many have been waiting for. Massachusetts, along with many other petitioners, sued the EPA for failing to regulate carbon emissions, thereby putting the Massachusetts coastline at risk from the hazards of global warming. Massachusetts was countered by an equally impressive list of states and figures filing amicus briefs opposing its position. […]

Re-Cap: A Pretentious President or a Cavalier Congress?

April 7, 2007 | Comments Off on Re-Cap: A Pretentious President or a Cavalier Congress?

On Wednesday April 4th in room 119 students gathered for the annual American Constitution Society/Federalist Society debate. The topic for this year was, “A Pretentious President or a Cavalier Congress?: The Separation of Powers During Wartime.” Representing the American Constitution Society was Neil Kinkopf, an associate professor of law at Georgia State University, and representing […]

Per Curium: A Windup for the Court on Standing

March 30, 2007 | Comments Off on Per Curium: A Windup for the Court on Standing

After Colorado’s legislature failed to pass a redistricting plan in 2000, its courts stepped in to do the job.  The Elections Clause of the Constitution provides that the “Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law […]

Invalidating California’s Sentencing Scheme: Reasonableness Alone Doesn’t Satisfy the Jury Requirement

March 1, 2007 | Comments Off on Invalidating California’s Sentencing Scheme: Reasonableness Alone Doesn’t Satisfy the Jury Requirement

Cunningham was convicted of continuous sexual abuse of a child under 14, which carries a 6 to 12 year sentence, or 16 years if accompanied by aggravating factors. His received the elevated sentence of 16 years under California’s Determinate Sentancing Law (DSL), which allows the trial judge (not the jury), by a preponderance of the […]

Philip Morris May Not Have Won Very Much

February 22, 2007 | Comments Off on Philip Morris May Not Have Won Very Much

Despite what you may have read in the newspapers or heard on the radio, the recent Supreme Court decision may not have been much of a victory for Philip Morris. In fact, it is entirely possible that on retrial a jury would come to the very same conclusion After his death, Jesse Williams’ widow sued […]

We learn in law school that courts have constructed an internal policy to avoid issuing decrees on Constitutional issues whenever there is an opportunity for them to do so. This policy extends from a county traffic court all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. We can understand that it is perhaps not a […]

« go backkeep looking »