FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2104749613> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2104749613 startingPage "923" @default.
• W2104749613 abstract "ABSTRACT The Justices of the Supreme Court have a great deal in common with the gifted pachyderm from the Walt Disney animated classic feature Dumbo. Like Dumbo's magic feather that purportedly enabled him to exercise his natural ability to fly, the tradition limitation on the Court's jurisprudence on unenumerated fundamental constitutional rights provides a more-apparent-than-real constraint on the Court's almost unlimited ability to nullify legislative and executive action. In all too many substantive due process cases, reason seems to follow a predetermined result, rather than the result in the case following from the applicable governing principles. In this Article, Professor Krotoszynski argues that substantive due process would benefit immeasurably if the Dumbo's feather of tradition could be reworked into something resembling an operational test that not only serves as a justification for results that a majority of the Justices might like to reach, but also as a brake against results that a majority of the Justices might like to reach--but that tradition, or consensus, does not yet sanction. In particular, Professor Krotoszynski argues that state counting could provide an important means of cabining judicial discretion in substantive due process cases, by making the application of the tradition test turn less on subjective considerations. A carefully theorized and operationalized effort at state counting might provide a useful way of identifying and protecting the traditions from which we have broken, which are no less deserving of constitutional protection than those traditions from which we have come. A commitment to maintain tradition as a living concept deserves no less. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION I. THE EMERGENCE OF TRADITION AS THE LYNCHPIN OF SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS DOCTRINE A. Early Use of Tradition: The Incorporation Debates B. Defining Tradition: A Brief Overview of Five General Approaches II. EXPLORING THE SUPREME COURT'S METHODOLOGIES FOR APPLYING THE TRADITION TEST A. Reviewing English and Early American Legal Sources: The Ascertained Through Original Intent Approach B. Counting States C. Using Past Precedents as Proof of an Existing Tradition D. Using Foreign Law To Inform Contemporary Tradition E. Dispensing with the Tradition Requirement Entirely III. STATE COUNTING, OR CONSENSUS, AS h MEANS OF DEFINING TRADITION A. State Counting in the Specific Context of the Eighth Amendment B. State Counting in General Substantive Due Process Cases IV. AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION OUTSIDE THE FOUR CORNERS OF ARTICLE V A. Tradition Reconsidered as a Means of Limiting Government Power To Abrogate Individual Autonomy B. The Theory Applied: Lawrence as an Example of Bottom Up Federalism 1. The Majority Opinion: The State Counting Methodology in Action 2. The Dissent's Attempt To Turn Back the Clock to Palko/Twining 3. The Real Reason for the Lawrence Decision C. From Bowers to Lawrence: Social Change and De Facto Amendments Through State Government Practice 1. The BMW v. Gore Line of Cases Lacks a Tradition-based Predicate and Oversteps the Proper Limits of Substantive Due Process 2. Foreign Law Should Play a Very Limited Role in Substantive Due Process Adjudication CONCLUSION INTRODUCTION In its Lawrence decision, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a Texas statute that prohibited same-sex intimacy by consenting adults in the privacy of the home. (1) In doing so, it reversed its earlier decision in Bowers v. Hardwick (2) because [i]ts continuance as precedent demeans the lives of homosexual persons. (3) The Lawrence majority opinion made an extended argument for the relevance of more recent social attitudes--and legal treatment--of sexual minorities as opposed to more long-standing, or even ancient, traditions. …" @default.
• W2104749613 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2104749613 creator A5019046353 @default.
• W2104749613 creator A5026400993 @default.
• W2104749613 date "2006-12-01" @default.
• W2104749613 modified "2023-09-22" @default.
• W2104749613 title "Dumbo's Feather: An Examination and Critique of the Supreme Court's Use, Misuse, and Abuse of Tradition in Protecting Fundamental Rights" @default.
• W2104749613 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W2104749613 type Work @default.
• W2104749613 sameAs 2104749613 @default.
• W2104749613 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2104749613 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2104749613 hasAuthorship W2104749613A5019046353 @default.
• W2104749613 hasAuthorship W2104749613A5026400993 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConcept C126806153 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConcept C71043370 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConceptScore W2104749613C126806153 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConceptScore W2104749613C144024400 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConceptScore W2104749613C17744445 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConceptScore W2104749613C199539241 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConceptScore W2104749613C2778272461 @default.
• W2104749613 hasConceptScore W2104749613C71043370 @default.
• W2104749613 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2104749613 hasLocation W21047496131 @default.
• W2104749613 hasOpenAccess W2104749613 @default.
• W2104749613 hasPrimaryLocation W21047496131 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W1199400375 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W1497469915 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W1517496363 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W1525451965 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W2246528782 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W2257475059 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W2261578555 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W2271283764 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W227210910 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W2508777656 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W251971378 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W2619886236 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W2622534175 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W2721161247 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W3124073825 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W31731050 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W652374775 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W750834673 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W82914394 @default.
• W2104749613 hasRelatedWork W96719755 @default.
• W2104749613 hasVolume "48" @default.
• W2104749613 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2104749613 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2104749613 magId "2104749613" @default.
• W2104749613 workType "article" @default.