Courts & Judicial Interpretation

Amicus, Courts & Judicial Interpretation, Criminal Justice

Will History Save the Insanity Defense?

By /

On October 7th, the Supreme Court began its term with the oral argument for Kahler v. Kansas, a case which asks whether a state violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments if it essentially abolishes the insanity defense. The test for due process is traditionally historical, so both Kahler and Kansas focused their briefs on the question of whether the insanity defense is so deeply rooted in history that its elimination would constitute a violation of due process. At oral argument, a few of the Justices probed the difficulties associated with evaluating historical claims.

Amicus, Courts & Judicial Interpretation, Criminal Justice, Freedom of Expression

The Right to Eat Halal Often Stops at the Prison Gate

By /

Religious dietary constraints should not be viewed as an additional or optional financial inconvenience for state correctional departments, but must be understood as a necessary consequence of our country’s zealous insistence on mass incarceration. Departments of Correction should resist the urge to implement policies that they know will actively discourage adherents of minority faiths from free exercise. To do so is to fly in the face of our Founders’ recognition that religion is an intrinsic part of the human experience and essential to equality in a democratic society.

Amicus, Congress, Courts & Judicial Interpretation, Executive Branch, Immigration, Racial Justice, Reproductive Rights, Voting and Elections Rights

Census 2020: Race, Self-Determination, & Voter Suppression

By /

In late April 2019, the Supreme Court heard oral argument for the Department of Commerce v. New York, 139 S.Ct. 1316 (2019), a case which asks whether the Secretary of Commerce’s decision to add a question to the Decennial Census about responders’ citizenship status violated the Enumeration Clause of the U.S. Constitution, art.I, §2, cl.3? [1] The last time the census inquired about citizenship was in 1950. The question asks “Is this person a citizen of the United States?” If you answer “yes,” the question then asks for more details about where you were born and whether your parents were born in the United States.

Amicus, Courts & Judicial Interpretation, Criminal Justice, Policing and Law Enforcement, Racial Justice

Where the Confrontation Clause Gets it Wrong: Police Brutality Cases

By /

As police officers continue to shoot and kill unarmed civilians, we must examine the disparity between police brutality and police accountability. Too many officers kill unarmed Black people with little to no consequences. One barrier to accountability is gathering witnesses, as witnesses are required to present themselves for trial to testify against accused officers.

Scroll to Top