6. See, e.g., art. 5, Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union, O.J. C 115/13, at 18 (2008). For a recent, general discussion of subsidiarity in European Union law, see Theodore Konstadinides, Division of Powers in European Union Law (2009).
7. Case 90/86, Criminal Proceedings Against Zoni, 1988 E.C.R. 4285.
8. U.S. Const. art. I, § 8.
9. United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 551 (1995).
10. For cases treating such issues, see, for example, Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942); and Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005).
11. Lopez, 514 U.S. at 551; U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3; see Lopez, 514 U.S. at 558–59; see id. at 560–61 (citing Wickard, 317 U.S. at 128); see id. at 606–7 (Souter, J., dissenting).
12. Lopez, 514 U.S. at 551 (majority opinion); id. at 564–65.
13. That is the position I took in my dissent. Id. at 619–22 (Breyer, J., dissenting).
14. 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)(2)(A).
15. U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3.
16. See C & A Carbone, Inc. v. Clarkstown, 511 U.S. 383, 401–2 (1994) (O’Connor, J., concurring); see, e.g., Camps Newfound/Owatonna, Inc. v. Town of Harrison, 520 U.S. 564, 595 (1997) (striking down a Maine statute that excluded, from its property tax exemption for charitable organizations, organizations operated principally for the benefit of nonresidents); see also Wyoming v. Oklahoma, 502 U.S. 437, 461 (1992) (striking down an Oklahoma law that discriminated against out-of-state coal producers).
17. See, e.g., Wyoming, 502 U.S. at 454–55 (“[W]hen the state statute amounts to simple economic protectionism, a ‘virtually per se rule of invalidity’ has applied” [citing Philadelphia v. New Jersey, 437 U.S. 617, 624 (1978)]).
18. Cf. Wyeth v. Levine, 129 S. Ct. 1187, 1191 (2009); cf. also Altria Group, Inc. v. Good, 129 S. Ct. 538, 541 (2008).
19. New State Ice Co., 285 U.S. at 271; id. at 273–77; Brief of the Appellee at 17, New State Ice Co., 285 U.S. 262 (No. 463); New State Ice Co., 285 U.S. at 281 (Brandeis, J., dissenting); id. at 310–11.
20. Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, 551 U.S. 701, 709–11 (2007).
21. Id. at 715–16.
22. Id. at 711–12; id. at 812–13 (Breyer, J., dissenting).
23. Id. at 709–11 (majority opinion); id. at 782 (Kennedy, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment); id. at 832–35 (Breyer, J., dissenting); id. at 823–29, 855–58; id. at 836; id. at 803.
24. Id. at 866; id. at 849 (citing Brown v. Board of Education [Brown II], 349 U.S. 294, 299 [1955]).
25. Id. at 862.
Chapter Eleven / Other Federal Courts
1. See Robert C. LaFountain et al., National Center for State Courts, Examining the Work of State Courts (2007); and Statistics Division, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, 2008 Annual Report of the Director: Judicial Business of the United States Courts (2009).
2. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a)(6).
3. See, e.g., Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. v. Linde Air Products Co., 336 U.S. 271, 275 (1949) (“A court of law, such as this Court is, rather than a court for correction of errors in fact finding, cannot undertake to review concurrent findings of fact by two courts below in the absence of a very obvious and exceptional showing of error”); see also Sup. Ct. R. 10; United States v. Reliable Transfer Co., Inc., 421 U.S. 397, 401 n. 2 (1975).
4. Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 540 (1953) (Jackson, J., concurring).
5. Horne v. Flores, 129 S. Ct. 2579, 2588 (2009); id. at 2610 (Breyer, J., dissenting).
6. Id. at 2610–12.
7. Id. at 2590–92 (majority opinion); id. at 2612 (Breyer, J., dissenting) (noting that the district court hearing produced an evidentiary record of 1,684 pages); id. at 2608.
8. Id. at 2594–98 (majority opinion); id. at 2607; id. at 2608 (Breyer, J., dissenting).
9. Flores v. Arizona, 480 F. Supp. 2d 1157, 1160 (D. Ariz. 2007) (“There is no doubt that [the school district] is doing substantially better than it was in 2000”), rev’d sub nom., Horne v. Flores, 129 S. Ct. 2579 (2009).
10. See generally Stephen J. Carroll et al., RAND Institute for Civil Justice, Asbestos Litigation xxiv (2005), www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG162.pdf; id. at 45–48.
11. See id. at 45–48.
12. See generally Fed. R. Civ. P. 23; Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3); Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(b).
13. Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591, 602–4 (1997).
14. Georgine v. Amchem Products, Inc., 157 F.R.D. 246, 315–16 (E.D. Pa. 1994), vacated, 83 F. 3d 610 (3d Cir. 1996), aff’d sub nom., Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997); 157 F.R.D. at 334–35.
15. Amchem, 521 U.S. at 597 (holding that the class certification failed to meet the requirements of the federal rules); id. at 622–27; id. at 625.
16. Georgine, 157 F.R.D.
17. Amchem, 521 U.S. at 633 (Breyer, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (citation omitted); id. at 598 (majority opinion) (quoting Report of the Judicial Conference Ad Hoc Committee on Asbestos Litigation 2–3 [1991]); Ahearn v. Fibreboard Corp., 162 F.R.D. 505, 509 (E.D. Tex. 1995) (citing RAND studies); id. at 530; Ortiz v. Fibreboard Corp., 527 U.S. 815, 866 (1999) (Breyer, J., dissenting) (citing Cimino v. Ray-mark Industries Inc., 751 F. Supp. 649, 651 [E.D. Tex. 1990]).
Chapter Twelve / Past Court Decisions
1. Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954); Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537, 540 (1896); id. at 552.
2. Brown, 347 U.S. at 495.
3. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1.; see Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629, 635–36 (1950) (holding that state provision of racially segregated law schools violated equal protection); see also McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950) (holding that segregated treatment based on the race of a student pursuing a doctorate in education violated equal protection); see also EO 9981, 13 Fed. Reg. 4313 (July 26, 1948) (ordering equality of treatment and opportunity in the armed services).
4. Brown, 347 U.S. at 492–96; see Brown v. Board of Education (Brown II), 349 U.S. 294, 298 (1955) (“All provisions of federal, state, or local law requiring or permitting [racial] discrimination [in public education] must yield to this principle [that such discrimination is unconstitutional]”).
5. See generally Henry M. Hart Jr. & Albert Sacks, The Legal Process 568–69 (William N. Eskridge Jr. & Philip P. Frickey eds., 1994).
6. See, e.g., Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., 551 U.S. 877, 923–26 (2007) (Breyer, J., dissenting).
7. Id. at 925.
8. Id. at 924.
9. Id.
10. Id.
11. Id. at 926; Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 444 (1966); Dickerson v. United States, 530 U.S. 428, 443–44 (2000).
12. See Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, No. 08-208 (Jan. 21, 2010), overruling Austin v. Chamber of Commerce, 494 U.S. 652 (1990) and McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, 540 U.S. 93, 205–09 (2003).
13. See U.S. Const. art. V.
14. See Northern Securities Co. v. United States, 193 U.S. 197, 400 (1904) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Jeffrey Rosen, The Supreme Court: The Personalities and Rivalries That Defined America 115 (2006).
15. New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454, 462–63 (1981); cf. Arizona v. Gant, 129 S. Ct. 1710, 1723–24 (2009) (holding that Belton’s acceptance of warrantless vehicle searches incident to arrest is confined to cases in which the arrestee is in reaching distance of the passenger compartment or it is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence related to the offense of arrest).
16. Consider, from the 2006–7 term, the following cases: Leegin, 551 U.S.; Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, 551 U.S. 701 (2007); Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc., 551 U.S. 449 (2007); National Association of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife, 551 U.S. 644 (2007); Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc., 551 U.S. 587 (2007); Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007
); Uttecht v. Brown, 551 U.S. 1 (2007); Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., 550 U.S. 618 (2007), superseded by statute, Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111–2, 123 Stat. 5 (2009); and Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (2007).
Chapter Thirteen / Individual Liberty
1. See Hugo L. Black, The Bill of Rights, 35 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 865, 874 (1960).
2. Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47, 52 (1919).
3. 541 U.S. 267, 272, 355(2004).
4. Davis v. Bandemer, 478 U.S. 109 (1986).
5. See Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001).
6. Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306, 353–54 (2003) (Thomas, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part); Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244, 301 (2003) (Ginsburg, J., dissenting).
7. See generally Alec Stone Sweet & Jud Matthews, Proportionality Balancing and Global Constitutionalism, 47 Colum. J. Transnat’l L. 72, 97–159 (2008) (tracing history of proportionality analysis and its use by courts around the world); cf. Ysursa v. Pocatello Education Association, 129 S. Ct. 1093, 1103–4 (2009) (Breyer, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (arguing for and applying a proportionality analysis in the First Amendment context).
8. District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 (2008).
9. Id. at 2797–99.
10. Id. at 2826–27, 2831–36 (Stevens, J., dissenting); id. at 2847 (Breyer, J., dissenting); U.S. Const. art. 1, § 8.
11. Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2801–2.
12. Id. at 2870 (Breyer, J., dissenting).
13. Id. at 2846 (Stevens, J., dissenting) (“Until today, it has been understood that legislatures may regulate the civilian use and misuse of firearms so long as they do not interfere with the preservation of a well-regulated militia”).
14. Id. at 2817–18.
15. Cf. id. at 2865 (Breyer, J., dissenting). Compare also the approach of Eugene Volokh, Implementing the Right to Keep and Bear Arms for Self-Defense: An Analytical Framework and a Research Agenda, 56 UCLA L. Rev. 1443 (2009), who attempts to translate the right to keep and bear arms into “workable constitutional doctrine.”
16. Heller, 128 S. Ct. at 2865–66 (Breyer, J., dissenting).
17. Id. at 2854–59 (discussing the empirical studies provided in amicus briefs).
18. Id. at 2859 (“[T]he question here is whether [the empirical arguments] are strong enough to destroy judicial confidence in the reasonableness of a legislature that rejects them”).
19. Id. at 2861–64.
20. Id. at 2864.
21. Id. at 2865.
22. Id. at 2865–67.
Chapter Fourteen / The President, National Security, and Accountability
1. Ex parte Merryman, 17 F. Cas. 144 (1861).
2. Abraham Lincoln, Message to Congress in Special Session (July 4, 1861), in Abraham Lincoln: Speeches and Writings, 1859–1865 253 (Don E. Fehrenbacher ed., 1989).
3. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952); id. at 635–40 (Jackson, J., concurring).
4. Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944); see, e.g., Mark Tushnet, Defending Korematsu?: Reflections on Civil Liberties in Wartime, 2003 Wis. L. Rev. 273, 296 (“Korematsu seems now to be regarded almost universally as wrongly decided”).
5. EO 9066, 7 Fed. Reg. 1407 (Feb. 19, 1942).
6. Peter Irons, Justice at War 6–7 (1983); Jacobus tenBroek, Edward N. Barnhart & Floyd W. Matson, Prejudice, War, and the Constitution 70 (1954).
7. Irons, supra note 6, at 7; id. at 60; id. at 40–43; tenBroek et al., supra note 6, at 83–84.
8. See Irons, supra note 6, at 27, 41–42, 58–59; Edward Sanpei, “A Viper Is a Viper Whenever the Egg Is Hatched,” 12–13 (1972) (unpublished manuscript on file with author).
9. Dorothy Swaine Thomas & Richard S. Nishimoto, The Spoilage: Japanese-American Evacuation and Resettlement During World War II 5 (1969).
10. Irons, supra note 6, at 51–52, 56–57; id. at 53–55 (discussing constitutional concerns among Justice Department officials); see also tenBroek et al., supra note 6, at 357–58 n. 65.
11. TenBroek et al., supra note 6, at 111–12; Irons, supra note 6, at 60–62.
12. EO 9066; Act of March 21, 1942, 56 Stat. 173, 18 U.S.C. § 97a; Irons, supra note 6, at 65–66.
13. Irons, supra note 6, at 70; id. at 73.
14. Id. at 73–74; id. at 320.
15. Id. at 268–77; tenBroek, supra note 6, at 170–84.
16. Civil Liberties Act of 1988, 50 U.S.C. app. § 1989b (2006); Irons, supra note 6, at 367.
17. Irons, supra note 6, at 87–93.
18. Id. at 154–59 (describing the trial and sentencing of Hirabayashi).
19. Id. at 175, 182, 184–85.
20. Id. at 186–92.
21. Id. at 198–202.
22. Id. at 206–12.
23. Id. at 202–4, 208.
24. Id. at 197–98, 211–12, 225–26.
25. Hirabayashi v. United States, 320 U.S. 81 (1943).
26. Id. at 100–105.
27. Id. at 93; id. at 101–2.
28. Id. at 96, 103.
29. Id. at 100, 96, 98, 99.
30. Id. at 102.
31. Id. at 106 (Douglas, J., concurring); id. at 110–12 (Murphy, J., concurring); id. at 114 (Rutledge, J., concurring).
32. Irons, supra note 6, at 93–94.
33. Id. at 98–99.
34. Id. at 153, 227, 268.
35. Id. at 278–79.
36. Id. at 280–84.
37. Id. at 280–81.
38. Id. at 286.
39. Id. at 290–91.
40. Id. at 268–73.
41. Id. at 99–103.
42. Id. at 298–99.
43. Id. at 307–8.
44. Id. at 315; id. at 305–6.
45. Korematsu, 323 U.S.; Ex parte Endo, 323 U.S. 283 (1944); Korematsu, 323 U.S. at 222; id. at 218.
46. Korematsu, 323 U.S. at 218; id. at 219; id. at 223–24.
47. Id. at 225 (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
48. Id. at 230–31 (Roberts, J., dissenting).
49. Id. at 236–37 (Murphy, J., dissenting); id. at 237 n. 7; id. at 240; id. at 237–39 nn. 4–12; id. at 239–40.
50. Id. at 238–39; id. at 238 n. 10; id. at 241, 242 n. 16.
51. Id. at 241.
52. Id. at 244–46 (Jackson, J., dissenting) (emphasis added).
53. Id. at 246–48.
54. U.S. Const. amend. XIV.
55. Ex parte Endo, 323 U.S. at 297 (“[W]e do not come to the underlying constitutional issues which have been argued”).
56. Korematsu, 323 U.S. at 216.
57. Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1, 37 (1949) (Jackson, J., dissenting).
58. Irons, supra note 6, at 345.
59. Korematsu v. United States, 584 F. Supp. 1406 (N.D. Cal. 1984); Civil Liberties Act of 1988, 50 U.S.C. app. § 1989b (2006).
60. Korematsu, 323 U.S. at 246 (Jackson, J., dissenting).
Chapter Fifteen / Presidential Power
1. Authorization for Use of Military Force, § 2(a), 115 Stat. 224 (2001).
2. A. T. Church III (Vice Admiral, U.S. Navy) to the Secretary of Defense, memorandum, Re: Report on DoD Detention Operations and Detainee Interrogation Techniques, Mar. 7, 2005, at 100 (hereinafter Church Report); Laurel E. Fletcher et al., Human Rights Center, University of California, Berkeley, Guantánamo and Its Aftermath 29 (Nov. 2008); Benjamin Wittes et al., Governance Studies, Brookings Institution, The Current Detainee Population of Guantánamo: An Empirical Study 2 (Dec. 16, 2008).
3. Church Report, supra note 2, at 100; Wittes et al., supra note 2, at 2.
4. Church Report, supra note 2, at 101–3; Fletcher et al., supra note 2, at 29, 31 fig. 2.
5. Church Report, supra note 2, at 99; see also Jack Goldsmith, The Terror Presidency 108 (2007).
6. Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466 (2004).
7. See id. at 473–74; U.S. Const. art. I, § 9, cl. 2.
8. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(a).
9. Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484 (1973); see Rasul, 542 U.S. at 475–76.
10. Rasul, 542 U.S. at 483; id. at 487 (Kennedy, J., concurring).
11. See id. at 480–81.
12. Id. at 474 (quoting Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel. Mezei, 345 U.S. 206, 218–19 [1953] [Jackson, J., dissenting]).
13. Id. at 497–99 (Scalia, J., dissenting).
14. Id. at 487 (Kennedy, J., concurring).
15. Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 510 (2004).
16. Id. at 511–13.
17. Id. at 513–14.
18. Id. at 525.
19. Id. at 516–21.
20. Id. at 545–52 (Souter, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part); id. at 573 (Scalia, J., dissenting).
21. Id. at 531 (plurality opinion); id. at 529 (citations omitted); id. at 532.
22. Id. at 531, 535–36.
23. Id. at 535.
24. Id. at 529 (citing Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 [1976]); id. at 535; id. at 533 (emphasis added).
25. Id. at 533–34 and n. 2 (emphasis added).
26. Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, 119 Stat. 2739; Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Secretary of Defense) to the Secretary of the Navy, memorandum, Re: Order Establishing Combatant Status Review Tribunals, July 7, 2004, www.defenselink.mil/news/Jul2004/d20040707review.pdf.
27. Military Order of November 13, 2001: Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism, 66 Fed. Reg. 57,833; Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557, 568 (2006).
28. Hamdan, 548 U.S. at 569–70.
29. Id. at 635; id. at 588 (quoting Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1, 19 [1942]).
30. Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), art. 21, 10 U.S.C. § 821 (emphasis added).
31. Hamdan, 548 U.S. at 595–97; id. at 612.
32. UCMJ, art. 36, 10 U.S.C. § 836; Hamdan, 548 U.S. at 623; id. at 633–35, 639–41 (Breyer, J., concurring).
33. Hamdan, 548 U.S. at 636.
34. Military Commissions Act, 28 U.S.C. §2241(e) (Supp. 2007).
Making Our Democracy Work Page 29