RocketTheme Joomla Templates
Home

Latest Featured Articles

“Mosaic Theory” and Megan's Laws


Wayne A. Logan     In law as in life, a change in perspective can sometimes afford an opportunity to conceive of a once settled matter in a new, more meaningful way.  Such an opportunity is now presented by the D.C. Circuit’s recent decision in United States v. Maynard, which held that the Fourth Amendment is violated when police, acting without a search warrant, make prolonged use of Global Positioning System (GPS) technology to create a “mosaic” of information of an individual’s public travel by car.  The decision, authored by on...

Read More...

Mandatory Minimums: Don't Give Up On the Court

Michael O'Hear  Erik Luna and Paul Cassell have given us an extraordinarily thorough and persuasive treatment of an important topic.  I have little doubt that the world would be a better place if Congress heeded their advice and adopted the reform...
Read more...

A Proactive Judicial Branch: Confronting the Crisis of the Unrepresented

Hon. Jonathan Lippman       I am so honored and pleased that Dean Diller invited me to deliver the Cardozo Law School Dean’s Lecture.  I hope that my remarks today will serve to spur your interest in the evolving role of the state courts as ...
Read more...

Pulitzer Plagiarism: The Malamud-Beilis Connection

Jay Beilis     Jeremy Simcha Garber     Mark S. Stein     INTRODUCTION      One of the great trials of the twentieth century was the 1913 blood-libel trial of Mendel Beilis in Czarist Russia.  Beilis, a Jew, was arrested in 1911 b...
Read more...

The U.N. Consolidated List: Effect of Committee Dynamics on Creation and Compliance

Kalyani Munshani       The Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Committee (the “Committee”) was created by United Nations Resolution 1267 (1999).  The fundamental responsibility entrusted to the Committee is the proscribing of individuals and ent...
Read more...

Letter to Professor Burch

Jack B. Weinstein     Dear Professor Burch:      I enjoyed your A New Way Forward.  Your views about ways to deal with mass torts—as well as massive civil rights, discrimination, and institutional abuses—largely accord with my own.  Be...
Read more...

Funerals, Fire and Brimstone



Introduction


     Albert Snyder won a jury verdict and a substantial monetary judgment against the Westboro Baptist Church after they protested at his son's funeral.  The Fourth Circuit reversed.  Snyder v. Phelps has captured the nation’s attention in part because the behavior o...

Read More...

The Road Not Taken: How the Fourth Circuit Reached the Right Result for the Wrong Reason in Snyder v. Phelps

J. Joshua Wheeler As a father grieving the loss of a son who sacrificed his young life in service of his country, Albert Snyder deserves only sympathy and compassion.  Unfortunately, members of the W...
Read more...

Freedom of Speech and the Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Tort

Eugene Volokh      The defendants’ speech in Snyder v. Phelps is uncommonly contemptible.  But many more ideas than just the Phelpsians’ would be endangered if the Court allowed the intention...
Read more...

Free Speech at What Cost?: Snyder v. Phelps and Speech-Based Tort Liability

Jeffrey Shulman      The constitutional law on speech-based tort claims is something akin to a doctrinal funhouse.  A bewilderment of public and private mirrors, fact and opinion trapdoors, it is...
Read more...

Two Wrongs Almost Make a “Right”: The 4th Circuit’s Bizarre Use of the Already Bizarre “Milkovich” Case in Snyder v. Phelps

Richard Weisberg      The Fourth Circuit’s decision in Snyder v Phelps gives a boost to a seriously wrong-headed High Court opinion, now 20 years old: the otherwise under-examined Rehnquist dec...
Read more...

Snyder v. Phelps: Searching for a Legal Standard

Leslie C. Griffin      The case of Snyder v. Phelps offers an array of legal issues in search of clearer legal standards. The original lawsuit by plaintiff Albert Snyder, father of the deceased so...
Read more...

Death, Grief, and Freedom of Speech: Does the First Amendment Permit Protection Against the Harassment and Commandeering of Funeral Mourners?

Alan Brownstein & Vikram David Amar      It is often said, albeit sometimes for rhetorical effect, that the First Amendment protects the speech we hate just as rigorously as the speech we value. ...
Read more...

Holy Headache: Is Bufferin’ an Adequate Prescription for the Rev. Phelps?

Ayesha Khan & Michael Blank      Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder died for his country in the line of duty on March 3, 2006.  His funeral in Westminster, Maryland, was an occasion for his fa...
Read more...

Would Other Countries Protect the Phelpses’ Funeral Picketing?

Stephen R. McAllister      I must begin with a few caveats.  First, I serve on a part-time basis as the Solicitor General of Kansas, and in that capacity I was a primary author of an amicus brief...
Read more...

Snyder v. Phelps: A Prediction Based on Oral Arguments and the Supreme Court's Established Speech-Tort Jurisprudence

Deana Pollard Sacks      Predicting the decisions of a virtually unbounded and sometimes inconsistent “naked power organ” can be hazardous. At the same time, Members of the Court sometimes re...
Read more...

Latest de•novo Articles

“Mosaic Theory” and Megan's Laws


Wayne A. Logan     In law as in life, a change in perspective can sometimes afford an opportunity to conceive of a once settled matter in a new, more meaningful way.  Such an opportunity is now presented by the D.C. Circuit’s recent decision in United States v. Maynard, which held that the Fourth Amendment is violated when police, acting without a search warrant, make prolonged use of Global Positioning System (GPS) technology to create a “mosaic” of information of an individual’s public travel by car.  The decision, authored by on...

Read More...

Mandatory Minimums: Don't Give Up On the Court

Michael O'Hear  Erik Luna and Paul Cassell have given us an extraordinarily thorough and persuasive treatment of an important topic.  I have little doubt that the world would be a better place if Congress heeded their advice and adopted the reform...
Read more...

Snyder v. Phelps: A Slice of the Facts and Half an Opinion

Deana Pollard Sacks      The first sentence in Chief Justice Roberts’s opinion in Snyder v. Phelps foreshadows the result: “A jury held members of the Westboro Baptist Church liable for millions of dollars in damages for picketing near a sold...
Read more...

Investigating Patent Law’s Presumption of Validity, Part II: An Empirical Analysis of How Unconsidered Evidence and Evidentiary Standards Affect Jury Verdicts

Etan S. Chatlynne, Stephen Kenny & Lucas Watkins      Before 1982, rebutting a patent’s presumption of validity generally required clear and convincing evidence.  The standard would shift to a preponderance of the evidence, however, if a vali...
Read more...

Afterthoughts on Snyder v. Phelps

Alan Brownstein & Vikram David Amar      From a scholarly and professional perspective, the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Snyder v. Phelps added little to the development of free speech doctrine.  As a normative matter, the Cour...
Read more...

Epic Considerations: The Speech that the Supreme Court Would Not Hear in Snyder v. Phelps

Jeffrey Shulman      In declining to consider the “epic” posted by the Westboro Baptist Church on its web site, the Supreme Court took most (but not quite all) of the good constitutional stuff out of Snyder v. Phelps.  The Court may have...
Read more...

Latest Print Issue

CARDOZO LAW REVIEW

VOLUME 33 DECEMBER 2011 NUMBER 2Copyright © 2011 by Yeshiva University
All rights reserved



CONTENTS

Symposium     Innovative Approaches to Immigrant Representation:
     Exploring New Partnerships
 
 ForewordRobert A. Katzmann 331

Revised Remarks to the Symposium on Innovati...

Read More...
Mandatory Minimums: Don't Give Up On the Court

Michael O'Hear

 Erik Luna and Paul Cassell have given us an extraordinarily thorough and persuasive treatment of an important topic.  I have little doubt that the world would be a better place if Congress heeded their advice and adopted the reforms they propose for federal mandatory minimum sentencing laws.  Will Congress actually do so?  Drawing on an eclectic mix of insights from behavioral science, political science, and legal theory, Luna and Cassell present a case for guarded optimism.  On the other hand, in his insightful response to Luna and Cassell, Ronald Wright identifies various institutional features of congressional decisionmaking that seem likely to blunt the gathering momentum for mandatory minimum reform.  Whether or not Wright is ultimately too pessimistic regarding Congress, his argument should cause us to consider whether other branches of government might realistically be expected to fill the void created by legislative inertia and timidity.

 

Read more...
 

Cardozo Law Review

Editor-in-Chief
Todd GrabarskyThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Executive Editor
Bryon MoserThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Managing Editor
Daniel GoldmintzThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Head de•novo Editor
Erin SmithThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Senior Articles Editors
Nicholas LaSpina
Nick Sirabella

Senior Notes Editor
Elizabeth LangstonThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

de•novo Editor
Daniel DavidsonThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Submissions Editors
Seth Lubin This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Kathleen PrystowskyThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Symposia Editor
Karissa SchwartzThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Business Manager
Eliza GabaiThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Cardozo Law Review
55 Fifth Avenue, Suite 531
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 790-0355

Print Journal
cardozolawreview@yu.edu This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

de•novo
cardozodenovo@yu.edu This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it