Archives for July 2011

Yevgeny Shrago 

California’s Riverside County Supervisor Jeff Stone made some waves this week, pushing for the Republican parts of Southern and Central California to secede from the evil liberal metropolises of Los Angeles and the Bay Area. Undoubtedly, once those high income areas with their substantial property values and dynamic job markets are no longer around to encumber the creatively named state of South California, it will turn into a low-tax paradise on a par with Florida or Alabama. More realistically, the bedraggled California Republicans probably just want to know what it’s like to sit in the Speaker’s chair.

The legal implications of trying to secede are straightforward: Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution says that both the state legislature of the seceding state and Congress must approve the splitting up of the state. West Virginia did it back in the 19th Century, but as long as LA and San Fran don’t decide that they really need to be their own country, that example isn’t applicable. On the one hand, California Dems may see this as a way to ensure utter Democratic domination in the state. Overwhelming Democratic majorities would probably overcome all the procedural hurdles that currently make California so sclerotic. On the other, anyone with a national view (say the Democrats who currently control the Senate and would need to approve this secession plan) should recognize this as a way for Republicans to radically swing the electoral college calculus by decreasing the number of Cali’s Democratic electors. [Read more…] about Seceding our way to a fairer electoral college

Mark Wilson 

The Fourth Amendment is not merely on life support. According to Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, it’s dead. Writing in a new iPad-oriented publication, The Daily, Chief Judge Kozinski and his law clerk, Stephanie Grace, gave the venerable amendment a eulogy and blamed all of us for its downfall.

They have a point. Our reasonable expectations of privacy have taken a downward turn in light of all the information that we give, voluntarily, to everyone from Kroger to Amazon. Did James Madison ever consider surrendering his privacy so that he could save 99 cents on a bag of potato chips? Curiously, The Federalist doesn’t say. [Read more…] about The Fourth Amendment’s Death Is Greatly Exaggerated . . . We Hope

Billy Corriher

A recent decision from the Sixth Circuit provides a new chapter in the long legal battle over affirmative action at Michigan’s public universities.

Jennifer Gratz, the lead plaintiff in the Supreme Court’s 2003 case that threw out the University of Michigan’s affirmative action program, campaigned for a state constitutional amendment to prohibit affirmative action.  “Proposal 2” passed with a wide majority, and it amended the Michigan Constitution “to prohibit all sex- and race-based preferences in public education, public employment, and public contracting.”

The Sixth Circuit case, unlike Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003), was not a traditional Equal Protection challenge to an affirmative action program.  Rather, Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action v. Regents of the Univ. of Mich. was a challenge to Proposal 2 itself.  A divided three-judge panel held the proposal unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause, explaining that the proposal altered the political process governing admissions standards in a manner that disadvantaged minorities. [Read more…] about The Never-Ending Battle Over Affirmative Action at the University of Michigan

HLPR Online editorial staff

Apply to contribute to the Harvard Law & Policy Review blog and bring your law and policy analysis to approximately 4,000 visitors a month.  The HLPR Blog: Notice and Comment is now accepting entries to its annual writing competition, through which we select contributors for the forthcoming academic year.

Contributors will be expected to contribute one post each week, from September 12, 2011 until September 15, 2012. These posts will generally be short (50 to 250 words), such as summaries of emerging legal issues, commentary with links, or brief analyses of current events. Occasionally, bloggers will write longer posts or series. Contributors should be sharp writers who can provide interesting content and analysis to a progressive audience. Some of our most popular posts are here and here. Contributors frequently are, but are not required to be, law students or lawyers. In return for their contributions, bloggers will gain experience in an increasingly important media format and exposure to national audience. They will also receive preference when submitting longer articles for publication in the journal.

The Harvard Law & Policy Review is the official journal of the American Constitution Society. Our last issue was distributed to over 6,000 attorneys, scholars, judges, students, and policymakers, as well as selected congressional offices and law libraries. Past contributors to the journal include Senator Tom Udall and Professor Suzette M. Malveaux.

Please submit your application by August 19, 2011. If you have questions, email blog+apply@hlpronline.com.

Matt Scarola
Executive Online Editor

Anush Emelianova
President

Dan Berkovits
Editor-in-Chief

Marshall Thompson 

Last Tuesday, Rep. Michelle Bachmann, who is known for her controversial statements, made a very uncontroversial remark about slavery. She said, “Slavery was a terrible part of our nation’s history. It is good that we no longer have slavery.”

I have to agree with Bachmann in part. Slavery was, in fact, a terrible part of our nation’s history. I have to disagree with her, however, that we no longer have slavery. Slave labor is still a part of the U.S. economy despite the 13th Amendment.

[Read more…] about Slavery still part of the U.S. economy

[Read more…] about Google+ Privacy = ??