영문목차

Preface=xxxv

Acknowledgments=xxxix

The Constitution of the United States=xli

CHAPTER 1. THE FEDERAL JUDICIAL POWER=1

A. The Authority for Judicial Review=1

Marbury v. Madison=2

Notes on Marbury v. Madison=8

Authority for Judicial Review of State Judgments=10

Martin v. Hunter's Lessee=10

Cohens v. Virginia=10

B. Limits on the Federal Judicial Power=11

1. Interpretive Limits=11

How Should the Constitution Be Interpreted? The Second Amendment as an Example=13

District of Columbia v. Heller=13

2. Congressional Limits=33

The Exceptions and Regulations Clause=34

Ex Parte McCardle=35

Notes on Ex Parte McCardle=37

Separation of Powers as a Limit on Congress's Authority=37

United States v. Klein=37

Notes on United States v. Klein=39

Robertson v. Seattle Audubon Society=39

3. Justiciability Limits=40

a. Prohibition of Advisory Opinions=42

Opinion of the Justices=42

Hayburn's Case=42

Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc.=43

Notes on Advisory Opinions=44

Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. v. Wallace=45

b. Standing=45

i. Constitutional Standing Requirements=45

Allen v. Wright=46

Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency=53

Notes on Constitutional Standing Requirements : Injury, Causation, and Redressability=59

City of Los Angeles v. Lyons=59

Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife=61

United States v. Hays=65

Federal Election Commn. v. Akins=65

Linda R. S. v. Richard D.=66

Warth v. Seldin=66

Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization=67

Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc.=67

ii. Prudential Standing Requirements=67

The Prohibition of Third-Party Standing=68

Singleton v. Wulff=68

Barrows v. Jackson=70

Craig v. Boren=71

Gilmore v. Utah=71

The Prohibition of Generalized Grievances=72

United States v. Richardson=72

Flast v. Cohen=75

c. Ripeness=81

Poe v. Ullman=81

Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner=84

United Public Workers v. Mitchell=85

International Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union, Local 37 v. Boyd=85

Regional Rail Reorganization Act Cases=86

Lake Carriers Assn. v. MacMullan=86

d. Mootness=86

Moore v. Ogilvie=87

Roe v. Wade=87

DeFunis v. Odegaard=88

Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services=89

United States Parole Commission v. Geraghty=90

e. The Political Question Doctrine=91

i. The Political Question Doctrine Defined=91

What Is a Political Question? The Issues of Malapportionment and Partisan Gerrymandering=92

Baker v. Carr=93

Vieth v. Jubelirer=96

ii. The Political Question Doctrine Applied : Congressional Self-Governance=105

Powell v. McCormack=105

iii. The Political Question Doctrine Applied : Foreign Policy=106

Goldwater v. Carter=107

iv. The Political Question Doctrine Applied : Impeachment and Removal=110

Nixon v. United States=110

CHAPTER 2. THE FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE POWER=115

A. Introduction : Congress and the States=115

The Framework for Analysis : McCulloch v. Maryland=116

McCulloch v. Maryland=117

What Role Should Concern over Protecting States Have in Defining Congress's Powers?=126

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius=129

B. The Necessary and Proper Clause=151

United States v. Comstock=152

C. The Commerce Power=158

1. The Initial Era : Gibbons v. Ogden Defines the Commerce Power=158

Gibbons v. Ogden=159

2. The 1890s-1937 : A Limited Federal Commerce Power=162

a. What Is "Commerce"?=163

b. What Does "Among the States" Mean?=165

c. Does State Sovereignty Limit Congressional Power?=167

3. 1937-1990s : Broad Federal Commerce Power=168

Key Decisions Changing the Commerce Clause Doctrine=169

NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.=170

United States v. Darby=173

Wickard v. Filburn=175

The Meaning of "Commerce Among the States"=177

Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States=178

Katzenbach v. McClung, Sr. & McClung, Jr.=180

Hodel v. Indiana=182

Perez v. United States=182

The Tenth Amendment Between 1937 and the 1990s=184

Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority=185

4. 1990s-??? : Narrowing of the Commerce Power and Revival of the Tenth Amendment as a Constraint on Congress=190

a. What Is Congress's Authority to Regulate "Commerce Among the States"?=190

United States v. Lopez=190

United States v. Morrison=202

Gonzales v. Raich=210

b. Does the Tenth Amendment Limit Congress's Authority?=220

New York v. United States=220

Printz v. United States=230

Reno v. Condon=238

D. The Taxing and Spending Power=241

For What Purposes May Congress Tax and Spend?=241

United States v. Butler=241

Chas. C. Steward Mach. Co. v. Davis=244

Sabri v. United States=245

Conditions on Grants to State Governments=248

South Dakota v. Dole=248

E. Congress's Powers Under the Post-Civil War Amendments=251

1. Whom May Congress Regulate Under the Post-Civil War Amendments?=251

United States v. Morrison=253

2. What Is the Scope of Congress's Power?=255

Katzenbach v. Morgan & Morgan=256

City of Boerne v. Flores=260

F. Congress's Power to Authorize Suits Against State Governments=266

1. Background on the Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity=266

2. Congress's Power to Authorize Suits Against State Governments=269

a. The Basic Rule : Congress May Authorize Suits Against States Pursuant Only to §5 of the Fourteenth Amendment=269

Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer=269

Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida=270

b. Cases Denying Congress Authority to Act Under §5 to Authorize Suits Against State Governments=275

Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board v. College Savings Bank & United States=276

Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents=280

Board of Trustees, University of Alabama v. Garrett=284

c. Congress's Greater Authority to Legislate Concerning Types of Discrimination and Rights That Receive Heightened Scrutiny=290

Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs=291

Tennessee v. Lane=296

United States v. Georgia=303

3. Congress's Power to Authorize Suits Against State Governments in State Courts=304

Alden v. Maine=304

CHAPTER 3. THE FEDERAL EXECUTIVE POWER=317

A. Inherent Presidential Power=317

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer=318

The Scope of Inherent Power : The Issue of Executive Privilege=327

United States v. Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States=329

B. The Authority of Congress to Increase Executive Power=333

William J. Clinton, President of the United States v. City of New York=333

C. The Constitutional Problems of the Administrative State=338

1. The Nondelegation Doctrine and Its Demise=339

A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States=340

Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan=341

Whitman v. American Trucking Association, Inc.=342

2. The Legislative Veto and Its Demise=344

Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Jagdish Rai Chadha=345

3. Checking Administrative Power=353

The Appointment Power=353

Alexia Morrison, Independent Counsel v. Theodore B. Olson=354

The Removal Power=358

The Impeachment of Andrew Johnson=359

Myers v. United States=359

Humphrey's Executor v. United States=360

Wiener v. United States=362

Bowsher v. Synar=363

Morrison v. Olson=364

Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board=366

D. Separation of Powers and Foreign Policy=369

1. Are Foreign Policy and Domestic Affairs Different?=370

United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp.=370

Notes on Curtiss-Wright=372

2. Treaties and Executive Agreements=373

Dames & Moore v. Regan, Secretary of the Treasury=374

3. War Powers=376

Title 50. War and National Defense ; Chapter 33―War Powers Resolution=377

E. Presidential Power and the War on Terrorism=381

1. Detentions=381

Hamdi v. Rumsfeld=382

Boumediene v. Bush=393

2. Military Tribunals=411

Ex Parte Quirin=411

F. Checks on the President=419

1. Suing and Prosecuting the President=419

Richard Nixon v. A. Ernest Fitzgerald=419

William Jefferson Clinton v. Paula Corbin Jones=422

2. Impeachment=425

CHAPTER 4. LIMITS ON STATE REGULATORY AND TAXING POWER=431

A. Preemption of State and Local Laws=432

1. Express Preemption=434

Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly=434

2. Implied Preemption=441

a. Conflicts Preemption=441

Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul, Director, Department of Agriculture of California=441

b. Preemption Because State Law Impedes the Achievement of a Federal Objective=442

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission=442

c. Preemption Because Federal Law Occupies the Field=446

Arizona v. United States=447

B. The Dormant Commerce Clause=455

1. Why a Dormant Commerce Clause?=457

H.P. Hood & Sons, Inc. v. Du Mond, Commissioner of Agriculture & Markets of New York=457

2. The Dormant Commerce Clause Before 1938=461

Aaron B. Cooley v. The Board of Wardens of the Port of Philadelphia=463

3. The Contemporary Test for the Dormant Commerce Clause=464

a. The Shift to a Balancing Approach=464

South Carolina State Highway Department v. Barnwell Bros., Inc.=464

Southern Pacific Co. v. Arizona ex rel. Sullivan, Attorney General=466

b. Determining Whether a Law Is Discriminatory=469

Facially Discriminatory Laws=469

City of Philadelphia v. New Jersey=469

Hughes v. Oklahoma=472

Facially Neutral Laws=473

Hunt, Governor of the State of North Carolina v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission=474

Exxon Corp. v. Governor of Maryland=476

West Lynn Creamery, Inc. v. Healy, Commissioner of Massachusetts Department of Food & Agriculture=480

State of Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery Co.=482

c. Analysis If a Law Is Deemed Discriminatory=484

Dean Milk Co. v. City of Madison, Wisconsin=484

Maine v. Taylor & United States=485

d. Analysis If a Law Is Deemed Nondiscriminatory=487

Loren J. Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc.=488

Bibb, Director, Department of Public Safety of Illinois v. Navajo Freight Lines, Inc.=490

Consolidated Freightways Corp. of Delaware v. Raymond Kassel=492

Summary=495

e. Exceptions to the Dormant Commerce Clause=496

Congressional Approval=496

Western & Southern Life Insurance Co. v. State Board of Equalization of California=497

The Market Participant Exception=498

Reeves, Inc. v. William Stake=499

White v. Massachusetts Council of Construction Employers, Inc.=501

South-Central Timber Development, Inc. v. Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources of Alaska=501

C. The Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, §2=504

1. Introduction=504

2. Analysis Under the Privileges and Immunities Clause=506

What Are the "Privileges and Immunities of Citizenship"?=506

Toomer v. Witsell=508

United Building & Construction Trades Council of Camden County v. Mayor & Council of the City of Camden=509

Lester Baldwin v. Fish & Game Commission of Montana=511

What Justifications Are Sufficient to Permit Discrimination?=512

Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Kathryn A. Piper=513

CHAPTER 5. THE STRUCTURE OF THE CONSTITUTION'S PROTECTION OF CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES=517

A. Introduction=517

B. The Application of the Bill of Rights to the States=518

1. The Rejection of Application Before the Civil War=518

Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore=519

2. A False Start in Applying the Bill of Rights to the States : The Privileges or Immunities Clause and the Slaughter-House Cases=520

Slaughter-House Cases : Butchers' Benevolent Association of New Orleans v. Crescent City Livestock Landing & Slaughter-House Co.=522

Saenz v. Roe=528

3. The Incorporation of the Bill of Rights into the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment=530

The Debate over Incorporation=532

Palko v. Connecticut=532

Adamson v. California=533

The Current Law as to What's Incorporated=536

Duncan v. Louisiana=536

McDonald v. City of Chicago=539

The Content of Incorporated Rights=547

C. The Application of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution to Private Conduct=548

1. The Requirement for State Action=548

The Civil Rights Cases : United States v. Stanley=548

2. The Exceptions to the State Action Doctrine=552

a. The Public Functions Exception=553

Marsh v. Alabama=553

Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co.=555

Terry v. Adams=558

Evans v. Newton=560

Amalgamated Food Employees Union Local 590 v. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc.=562

Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner=563

Hudgens v. National Labor Relations Board=565

b. The Entanglement Exception=567

Judicial and Law Enforcement Actions=567

Shelley v. Kraemer=567

Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co.=570

Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co.=573

Government Regulation=575

Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority=575

Moose Lodge No. 107 v. Irvis=577

Government Subsidies=580

Norwood v. Harrison=580

Rendell-Baker v. Kohn=582

Blum v. Yaretsky=585

Initiatives Encouraging Violations of Rights=589

Reitman v. Mulkey=589

Entwinement=593

Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association=594

CHAPTER 6. ECONOMIC LIBERTIES=601

A. Introduction=601

Historical Overview=601

Organization of the Chapter=603

B. Economic Substantive Due Process=603

1. Introduction=603

2. The Early History of Economic Substantive Due Process=604

3. Substantive Due Process of the Lochner Era=607

Allgeyer v. Louisiana=607

Lochner v. New York=609

Laws Protecting Unionizing=614

Maximum Hours Laws=615

Muller v. Oregon=616

Minimum Wage Laws=618

Adkins v. Children's Hospital=618

Consumer Protection Legislation=620

Weaver v. Palmer Bros. Co.=620

Nebbia v. New York=621

4. Economic Substantive Due Process Since 1937=623

Pressures for Change=623

The End of Lochnerism=624

West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish=624

United States v. Carolene Products Co.=626

Economic Substantive Due Process Since 1937=627

Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.=628

The Rebirth of Economic Due Process? Constitutional Limits on Punitive Damages=630

BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore=630

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell=635

Philip Morris U.S.A. v. Williams=641

Too Much Deference?=645

C. The Contracts Clause=646

1. Introduction=646

2. The Modern Use of the Contracts Clause=647

Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell=647

Government Interference with Private Contracts=650

Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co.=650

Government Interference with Government Contracts=654

United States Trust Co. v. New Jersey=654

D. The Takings Clause=658

1. Introduction=658

2. Is There a "Taking"?=660

Possessory Takings=660

Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.=660

Regulatory Takings=662

Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon=663

Miller v. Schoene=665

Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City=667

Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council=671

Nollan v. California Coastal Commn.=676

Dolan v. City of Tigard=677

Palazzolo v. Rhode Island=682

Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency=687

3. Is It for "Public Use"?=695

Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff=695

Kelo v. City of New London=698

4. What Is the Requirement for "Just Compensation"?=706

Brown v. Legal Foundation of Washington=707

CHAPTER 7. EQUAL PROTECTION=711

A. Introduction=711

1. Constitutional Provisions Concerning Equal Protection=711

2. A Framework for Equal Protection Analysis=712

Question 1. What Is the Classification?=712

Question 2. What Is the Appropriate Level of Scrutiny?=713

Question 3. Does the Government Action Meet the Level of Scrutiny?=715

The Protection of Fundamental Rights Under Equal Protection=716

B. The Rational Basis Test=717

1. Introduction=717

2. Does the Law Have a Legitimate Purpose?=719

What Constitutes a Legitimate Purpose?=719

Romer v. Evans=720

Must It Be the Actual Purpose, or Is a Conceivable Purpose Enough?=724

3. The Requirement for a "Reasonable Relationship"=726

Tolerance for Underinclusiveness Under Rational Basis Review=726

Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. New York=727

Tolerance for Overinclusiveness Under Rational Basis Review=729

New York City Transit Authority v. Beazer=729

Cases in Which Laws Are Deemed Arbitrary and Unreasonable=733

U.S. Department of Agriculture v. Moreno=733

City of Cleburne, Texas v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.=736

C. Classifications Based on Race and National Origin=740

1. Race Discrimination and Slavery Before the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments=740

Dred Scott v. Sandford=742

Dred Scott v. Sandford=742

The Post-Civil War Amendments=745

2. Strict Scrutiny for Discrimination Based on Race and National Origin=746

3. Proving the Existence of a Race or National Origin Classification=747

a. Race and National Origin Classifications on the Face of the Law=747

Race-Specific Classifications That Disadvantage Racial Minorities=747

Korematsu v. United States=748

Racial Classifications Burdening Both Whites and Minorities=753

Loving v. Virginia=754

Palmore v. Sidoti=756

Laws Requiring Separation of the Races=757

Plessy v. Ferguson=758

Plessy v. Ferguson=758

The Initial Attack on "Separate but Equal"=761

Brown v. Board of Education=762

Brown v. Board of Education=762

The Invalidation of Segregation in Other Contexts=765

Johnson v. California=766

b. Facially Neutral Laws with a Discriminatory Impact or with Discriminatory Administration=771

The Requirement for Proof of a Discriminatory Purpose=771

Washington v. Davis=771

McCleskey v. Kemp=775

City of Mobile v. Bolden=781

Is Proof of a Discriminatory Effect Also Required?=785

Palmer v. Thompson=785

How Is a Discriminatory Purpose Proven?=787

Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney=788

Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.=789

Application : Discriminatory Use of Peremptory Challenges=792

4. Remedies : The Problem of School Segregation=794

Introduction : The Problem of Remedies=794

Brown v. Board of Education=794

Massive Resistance=795

Judicial Power to Impose Remedies in School Desegregation Cases=798

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education=799

Milliken v. Bradley=802

When Should Federal Desegregation Remedies End?=805

Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools v. Dowell=806

Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1=809

5. Racial Classifications Benefiting Minorities=824

The Emergence of Strict Scrutiny as the Test=826

Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co.=827

The Arguments for and Against Strict Scrutiny=837

The Use of Race to Benefit Minorities in College and University Admissions=838

Grutter v. Bollinger=838

Gratz v. Bollinger=855

Drawing Election Districts to Increase Minority Representation=861

Easley v. Cromartie=863

D. Gender Classifications=866

1. The Level of Scrutiny=866

Early Cases Approving Gender Discrimination=867

The Emergence of Intermediate Scrutiny=869

Frontiero v. Richardson=870

Craig v. Boren=872

United States v. Virginia=875

2. Proving the Existence of a Gender Classification=880

When Is It "Discrimination"?=881

Geduldig v. Aiello=881

3. Gender Classifications Benefiting Women=884

Gender Classifications Based on Role Stereotypes=884

Orr v. Orr=884

Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan=886

Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County=889

Rostker v. Goldberg=892

Gender Classifications Benefiting Women as a Remedy=896

Califano v. Webster=896

Classifications Benefiting Women Because of Biological Differences Between Men and Women=897

Nguyen v. Immigration & Naturalization Service=898

E. Alienage Classifications=905

1. Strict Scrutiny as the General Rule=906

Graham v. Richardson=907

2. Alienage Classifications Related to Self-Government and the Democratic Process=909

Foley v. Connelie=909

Ambach v. Norwick=912

3. Congressionally Approved Discrimination=915

4. Undocumented Aliens and Equal Protection=915

Plyler v. Doe=916

F. Discrimination Against Nonmarital Children=921

Laws Denying Benefits to All Nonmarital Children=922

Laws That Provide a Benefit to Some Nonmarital Children=923

G. Other Types of Discrimination : Only Rational Basis Review=924

1. Age Classifications=925

Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia=925

2. Discrimination Based on Disability=928

3. Wealth Discrimination=929

4. Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation=930

CHAPTER 8. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS UNDER DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION=933

A. Introduction=933

The Concept of Fundamental Rights=933

The Ninth Amendment=935

Procedural Due Process=935

B. Framework for Analyzing Fundamental Rights=936

First Issue : Is There a Fundamental Right?=936

Second Issue : Is the Constitutional Right Infringed?=937

Third Issue : Is There a Sufficient Justification for the Government's Infringement of a Right?=938

Fourth Issue : Is the Means Sufficiently Related to the Purpose?=938

C. Constitutional Protection for Family Autonomy=939

1. The Right to Marry=939

Loving v. Virginia=939

Zablocki v. Redhail=940

2. The Right to Custody of One's Children=946

Stanley v. Illinois=946

Michael H. v. Gerald D.=948

3. The Right to Keep the Family Together=955

Moore v. City of East Cleveland, Ohio=955

4. The Right of Parents to Control the Upbringing of Their Children=958

Meyer v. Nebraska=959

Pierce v. Society of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus & Mary=960

Troxel v. Granville=962

D. Constitutional Protection for Reproductive Autonomy=967

1. The Right to Procreate=968

Buck v. Bell=968

Skinner v. Oklahoma=969

2. The Right to Purchase and Use Contraceptives=970

Griswold v. Connecticut=970

Eisenstadt v. Baird=977

3. The Right to Abortion=979

a. The Recognition and Reaffirmation of the Right to Abortion=979

Roe v. Wade=979

Planned Parenthood v. Casey=988

Planned Parenthood v. Casey=988

b. Government Regulation of Abortions=1000

Gonzales v. Carhart=1000

c. Government Restrictions on Funds and Facilities for Abortions=1015

Maher v. Roe=1016

Harris v. McRae=1018

d. Spousal Consent and Notice Requirements=1019

Planned Parenthood v. Danforth=1019

Planned Parenthood v. Casey=1021

e. Parental Notice and Consent Requirements=1026

Bellotti v. Baird=1026

E. Constitutional Protection for Medical Care Decisions=1030

Right to Refuse Treatment=1030

Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health=1031

Right to Physician-Assisted Death=1038

Washington v. Glucksberg=1038

Vacco v. Quill=1044

F. Constitutional Protection for Sexual Orientation and Sexual Activity=1046

Lawrence v. Texas=1046

G. Constitutional Protection for Control over Information=1058

Whalen v. Roe=1059

H. Constitutional Protection for Travel=1062

Saenz v. Roe=1062

Restrictions on Foreign Travel=1068

I. The Right to Vote=1069

1. The Right to Vote as a Fundamental Right=1069

2. Restrictions on the Ability to Vote=1070

Poll Taxes=1071

Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections=1071

Property Ownership Requirements=1072

Kramer v. Union Free School District=1072

Literacy Tests=1075

Prisoners' and Convicted Criminals' Right to Vote=1076

Requirement for Photo Identification for Voting=1077

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board=1078

3. Dilution of the Right to Vote=1089

Reynolds v. Sims=1090

Wesberry v. Sanders=1094

4. Counting "Uncounted" Votes in a Presidential Election : Bush v. Gore=1097

The Events Leading to Bush v. Gore=1097

The Decision=1100

Bush v. Gore=1100

Issues to Consider Concerning Bush v. Gore=1119

J. Constitutional Protection for Access to Courts=1119

Filing Fees=1122

Boddie v. Connecticut=1122

United States v. Kras=1125

Prisoners' Right of Access to the Courts=1130

Bounds v. Smith=1130

Lewis v. Casey=1132

K. Constitutional Protection for a Right to Education=1135

San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez=1135

L. Procedural Due Process=1142

1. What Is a "Deprivation"?=1144

Is Negligence Sufficient to Constitute a Deprivation?=1144

Daniels v. Williams=1144

County of Sacramento v. Lewis=1146

When Is the Government's Failure to Protect a Person from Privately Inflicted Harms a Deprivation?=1148

DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services=1148

Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales=1154

2. Is It a Deprivation of "Life, Liberty, or Property"?=1160

The "Rights-Privileges" Distinction and Its Demise=1160

Goldberg v. Kelly=1161

What Is a Deprivation of Property?=1165

Board of Regents v. Roth=1165

What Is a Deprivation of Liberty?=1170

Reputation as a Liberty Interest=1171

Goss v. Lopez=1171

Paul v. Davis=1174

Liberty Interest for Prisoners=1176

Sandin v. Conner=1179

3. What Procedures Are Required?=1182

Mathews v. Eldridge=1182

Government Employment=1187

Family Rights=1187

Substantive and Procedural Due Process : The Relationship=1189

District Attorney's Office for the Third Judicial District v. Osborne=1189

CHAPTER 9. FIRST AMENDMENT : FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION=1197

A. Introduction=1197

1. Historical Background=1197

2. Why Should Freedom of Speech Be a Fundamental Right?=1199

a. Self-Governance=1200

b. Discovering Truth=1201

c. Advancing Autonomy=1203

d. Promoting Tolerance=1203

e. Conclusion=1204

3. The Issues in Free Expression Analysis=1204

B. Free Speech Methodology=1206

1. The Distinction Between Content-Based and Content-Neutral Laws=1206

a. The Importance of the Distinction=1206

Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission=1206

b. How Is It Determined Whether a Law Is Content-Based?=1211

Boos v. Barry=1211

Republican Party of Minnesota v. White=1213

c. Problems in Applying the Distinction Between Content-Based and Content-Neutral Laws=1222

City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc.=1223

National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley=1226

Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum=1230

2. Vagueness and Overbreadth=1235

a. Vagueness=1236

Coates v. City of Cincinnati=1236

b. Overbreadth=1238

Schad v. Borough of Mount Ephraim=1238

c. Relationship Between Vagueness and Overbreadth=1241

Board of Airport Commissioners of the City of Los Angeles v. Jews for Jesus, Inc.=1241

3. Prior Restraints=1243

a. What Is a Prior Restraint?=1243

b. Are Prior Restraints Really So Bad?=1244

i. Court Orders as a Prior Restraint=1246

Near v. State of Minnesota ex rel. Olson=1246

ii. Court Orders to Protect National Security=1248

New York Times Co. v. United States=1248

iii. Court Orders to Protect Fair Trials=1256

Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart=1256

iv. Court Orders Seizing the Assets of Businesses Convicted of Obscenity Violations=1261

Alexander v. United States=1261

c. Licensing as a Prior Restraint=1263

Lovell v. City of Griffin, Ga.=1263

Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc. v. Village of Stratton=1265

i. Important Reason for Licensing=1270

ii. Clear Standards Leaving Almost No Discretion to the Government=1270

City of Lakewood v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co.=1270

iii. Procedural Safeguards=1272

4. What Is an Infringement of Freedom of Speech?=1273

Civil Liability and Denial of Compensation for Speech=1274

Prohibitions on Compensation=1275

United States v. National Treasury Employees Union=1275

Compelled Speech=1277

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette=1277

Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic & Institutional Rights, Inc.=1280

McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission=1285

Unconstitutional Conditions=1290

Speiser v. Randall=1290

Rust v. Sullivan=1292

Legal Services Corp. v. Velazquez=1296

Government Pressures=1302

C. Types of Unprotected and Less Protected Speech=1304

1. Incitement of Illegal Activity=1305

a. The "Clear and Present Danger" Test=1306

Schenck v. United States=1307

Frohwerk v. United States=1308

Debs v. United States=1309

Abrams v. United States=1310

b. The Reasonableness Approach=1313

Gitlow v. New York=1313

Whitney v. California=1316

c. The Risk Formula Approach=1320

Dennis v. United States=1320

d. The Brandenburg Test=1325

Brandenburg v. Ohio=1326

Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project=1328

2. Fighting Words, the Hostile Audience, and the Problem of Racist Speech=1337

a. Fighting Words=1338

Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire=1338

i. Narrowing the Fighting Words Doctrine=1340

ii. Fighting Words Laws Invalidated as Vague and Overbroad=1341

Gooding v. Wilson=1341

iii. Narrow Fighting Words Laws as Content-Based Restrictions=1343

R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, Minnesota=1343

b. The Hostile Audience Cases=1350

Feiner v. New York=1350

The Problem of Racist Speech=1353

Beauharnais v. Illinois=1354

Virginia v. Black=1358

3. Sexually Oriented Speech=1365

a. Obscenity=1366

i. Supreme Court Decisions Finding Obscenity Unprotected=1366

Roth v. United States=1366

Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton=1368

Miller v. California=1372

ii. Should Obscenity Be a Category of Unprotected Speech?=1374

iii. Should There Be a New Exception for Pornography?=1376

b. Child Pornography=1377

New York v. Ferber=1377

Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition=1380

c. Protected but Low-Value Sexual Speech=1387

i. Zoning Ordinances=1387

Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc.=1387

ii. Nude Dancing=1390

City of Erie v. Pap's A.M.=1392

iii. Should There Be Such a Category as Low-Value Sexual Speech?=1395

d. Government Techniques for Controlling Obscenity and Child Pornography=1396

Stanley v. Georgia=1396

Osborne v. Ohio=1398

e. Profanity and "Indecent" Speech=1399

Cohen v. California=1399

i. The Broadcast Media=1402

Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation=1402

ii. Telephones=1405

iii. The Internet=1406

Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union=1406

iv. Cable Television=1410

4. A New Exception for Violent Speech?=1412

United States v. Stevens=1412

Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association=1419

5. Commercial Speech=1427

a. Constitutional Protection for Commercial Speech=1427

Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc.=1428

Overview of the Section=1433

b. What Is Commercial Speech?=1433

Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp.=1434

c. The Test for Evaluating Regulation of Commercial Speech=1435

Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission of New York=1435

Is Least Restrictive Alternative Analysis Applicable?=1438

d. Advertising of Illegal Activities=1440

e. False and Deceptive Advertising=1441

f. Advertising That Inherently Risks Deception=1441

Restrictions on Trade Names=1442

Friedman v. Rogers=1442

Attorney Solicitation of Prospective Clients=1443

Solicitation by Accountants=1444

g. Regulating Commercial Speech to Achieve Other Goals=1445

i. "For Sale" Signs on Houses=1445

Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township of Willingboro=1446

ii. Alcohol Products=1447

44 Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode Island=1447

iii. Tobacco Products=1450

Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly=1450

iv. Gambling=1458

v. Advertising by Lawyers and Other Professionals=1459

6. Reputation, Privacy, Publicity, and the First Amendment : Torts and the First Amendment=1461

a. Defamation=1461

i. Public Officials as Defamation Plaintiffs=1461

New York Times Co. v. Sullivan=1462

ii. Public Figures as Plaintiffs=1467

Gertz v. Welch=1468

iii. Private Figures, Matters of Public Concern=1474

Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc.=1474

iv. Private Figures, Matters Not of Public Concern=1477

v. Conclusion=1477

b. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress=1477

Hustler Magazine v. Falwell=1478

Snyder v. Phelps=1480

c. Public Disclosure of Private Facts=1484

Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn=1485

Information from Nongovernment Sources=1488

d. Right of Publicity=1489

7. Conduct That Communicates=1489

a. What Is Speech?=1489

b. When Is Conduct Communicative?=1490

c. When May the Government Regulate Conduct That Communicates?=1491

i. The O'Brien Test=1491

United States v. O'Brien=1491

ii. Flag Desecration=1494

Texas v. Johnson=1495

iii. Spending Money as Political Speech=1500

Buckley v. Valeo=1501

Criticisms of Buckley=1508

The Continuing Distinction Between Contributions and Expenditures=1509

When Are Contribution Limits Too Low?=1509

Randall v. Sorrell=1510

Are Corporate Expenditures Protected Speech?=1515

First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti=1515

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission=1519

The Constitutionality of Public Financing of Elections=1537

Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett=1537

D. What Places Are Available for Speech?=1545

1. Government Properties and Speech=1545

a. Initial Rejection and Subsequent Recognition of a Right to Use Government Property for Speech=1545

Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization=1546

Schneider v. New Jersey=1547

b. What Government Property and Under What Circumstances?=1549

c. Public Forums=1550

i. Content Neutrality=1551

Police Department of the City of Chicago v. Mosley=1551

ii. Time, Place, and Manner Restrictions=1553

Hill v. Colorado=1554

iii. Licensing and Permit Systems=1560

iv. No Requirement for Use of the Least Restrictive Alternative=1562

Ward v. Rock Against Racism=1562

d. Designated Public Forums=1563

e. Limited Public Forums=1564

Christian Legal Society Chapter of the University of California, Hastings College of the Law v. Martinez=1565

f. Nonpublic Forums=1576

International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Lee=1577

2. Private Property and Speech=1582

3. Speech in Authoritarian Environments : Military, Prisons, and Schools=1583

a. Military=1583

Parker v. Levy=1583

b. Prisons=1585

Thornburgh v. Abbott=1586

c. Schools=1590

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District=1590

Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser=1594

Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier=1596

Morse v. Frederick=1600

d. The Speech Rights of Government Employees=1609

Garcetti v. Ceballos=1610

E. Freedom of Association=1616

1. Laws Prohibiting and Punishing Membership=1617

2. Laws Requiring Disclosure of Membership=1619

NAACP v. State of Alabama ex rel. Patterson=1619

Campaign Finance Disclosure=1621

3. Compelled Association=1622

Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth=1623

4. Laws Prohibiting Discrimination=1627

Roberts v. United States Jaycees=1627

Boy Scouts of America v. Dale=1632

F. Freedom of the Press=1637

1. Introduction : Are There Special Rights for the Press?=1637

2. Freedom of the Press as a Shield to Protect the Press from the Government=1639

a. Taxes on the Press=1639

Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. v. Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue=1639

b. Application of General Regulatory Laws=1643

Cohen v. Cowles Media Co.=1644

c. Keeping Reporters' Sources and Secrets Confidential=1646

Branzburg v. Hayes=1647

d. Laws Requiring That the Media Make Access Available=1653

Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission=1654

Miami Herald v. Tornillo=1658

3. Freedom of the Press as a Sword : A First Amendment Right of Access to Government Places and Papers?=1660

a. Access to Judicial Proceedings=1661

Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia=1661

b. Prisons=1668

Houchins v. KQED=1668

CHAPTER 10. FIRST AMENDMENT : RELIGION=1673

A. Introduction=1673

1. Constitutional Provisions Concerning Religion and the Tension Between Them=1673

2. History in Interpreting the Religion Clauses=1675

3. What Is Religion?=1676

The Attempt to Define Religion Under the Selective Service Act=1677

United States v. Seeger=1677

Requirement for Sincerely Held Beliefs=1680

United States v. Ballard=1680

The Relevance of Religious Dogma and Shared Beliefs=1683

B. The Free Exercise Clause=1683

1. Introduction : Free Exercise Clause Issues=1683

2. The Current Test=1684

Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith=1684

The Law Before Employment Division v. Smith=1693

Sherbert v. Verner=1694

a. Government Benefit Cases=1696

b. Compulsory Schooling=1697

c. Cases Rejecting Exemptions Based on the Free Exercise Clause=1698

Statutory Protection of Religious Freedom=1701

Cutter v. Wilkinson=1702

3. Is Denial of Funding for Religious Education a Violation of Free Exercise of Religion?=1704

Locke v. Davey=1704

C. The Establishment Clause=1708

1. Competing Theories of the Establishment Clause=1708

a. Strict Separation=1708

b. Neutrality Theory=1709

c. Accommodation=1711

d. The Theories Applied : An Example=1713

County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union, Greater Pittsburgh Chapter=1713

2. Government Discrimination Among Religions=1717

3. The Lemon Test for the Establishment Clause=1719

Lemon v. Kurtzman=1719

The Requirement for a Secular Purpose=1721

The Requirement for a Secular Effect=1722

The Prohibition of Excessive Entanglement=1722

4. Religious Speech and the First Amendment=1723

a. Religious Group Access to School Facilities=1724

b. Student Religious Groups' Receipt of Government Funds=1725

Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of the University of Virginia=1726

c. Student-Delivered Prayers=1730

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe=1730

d. Religious Symbols on Government Property=1735

McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky=1735

Van Orden v. Perry=1748

5. When Can Religion Become a Part of Government Activities?=1761

a. Religion as a Part of Government Activities : Schools=1761

Release Time=1761

School Prayers and Bible Reading=1762

Engel v. Vitale=1762

Lee v. Weisman=1765

Curricular Decisions=1773

b. Religion as a Part of Government Activities : Legislative Chaplains=1773

Marsh v. Chambers=1773

6. When Can Government Give Aid to Religion?=1774

Aid to Parochial Elementary and Secondary Schools=1775

Mitchell v. Helms=1776

Zelman v. Simmons-Harris=1787

Tax Exemptions for Religious Organizations=1804

Aid to Religious Colleges and Universities=1805

Aid to Religious Institutions Other than Schools=1807

Table of Cases=1809

Index=1827