Land Use Policies in Selected States

PDF pages: 2

A Senior Faculty Member’s Favorite Sabbatical: My Teaching Sabbatical

Professor John Mitchell had taken several typical sabbaticals—travel and research culminating in several articles and a book—and up until the last minute, his spring 2009 sabbatical promised nothing very different. And then with a single phone call, his sabbatical book project collapsed. There was nothing else about which he was passionate at that time, and it seemed stupid to arbitrarily choose a topic and then spend the next four years writing a book he didn\u27t care about. In the midst of scrambling desperation, the idea of a sabbatical focused not on a scholarly project, but on his primary teaching focus (Evidence) emerged. The end product would be to totally rethink/reconceptualize the Evidence course he had taught for almost two decades. The article details the new direction proposed for Professor Mitchell’s sabbatical

A Clinical Textbook?

A clinical perspective (i.e., centered on practicing attorneys and clients) should be embedded throughout the law school curriculum. Do you need a clinical textbook to impart this clinical perspective? No. There are a number of other alternatives. Many professors are creating their own problems and exercises. Also, standard texts have increasingly begun to include problems and exercises which you can use. And there are companion or supplementary materials--casefiles, exercises, and even novels which professors can assign to add a lawyering perspective to a doctrinal course

In (Slightly Uncomfortable) Defense of ‘Triage’ by Public Defenders

This article argues that triaging is necessary for public defenders and is a response to the work of Professor Freedman. Because states lack money in areas of greater community concern, the defense of indigent criminals is neglected and substantial resources are not likely to be forthcoming. The author previously set out a solution of triaging, which can be conducted either haphazardly or according to some set of rational principles based on ethical theory. The author concurs with Professor Freedman to the extent that the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington effectively ensures that Sixth Amendment Constitutional guarantees will play no role in either enforcing basic levels of attorney competence or in even recognizing the reality of institutional defense players. However, the author ultimately objects with Professor Freedman because the author does not think that public defenders should face the problem head on. Instead, the author is optimistic and provides an involved and effective system of “pattern representation” to ensure competent representation

What Went Wrong with the Warren Court\u27s Conception of the Fourth Amendment?

This article discusses the current status of police in the United States--police can undertake any and all actions unrestrained by any law but their own. The post-Warren Supreme Courts have held that none of these police activities are searches and/or seizures, and in these courts\u27 Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, that means that these activities are not circumscribed by the Fourth Amendment at all. Thus, in terms of the Constitution, the police are without any judicial supervision and subject to no standards but their own whim. The article explores the reasons for this, and faults the Warren Court for its mishandling of two cases that form much of current Fourth Amendment jurisprudence-United States v. Katz and Terry v. Ohio

My Father, John Locke, and Assisted Suicide: The Real Constitutional Right

This article discusses the right to assisted suicide, a right not derived from anything explicit or implied in any textual provision of the Constitution. It is a right derived from the two underlying political philosophies, which form the basis of the entire U.S. Constitutional enterprise: John Locke\u27s Social Contract and Civic Republicanism. In Part I, this article discusses Glucksberg\u27s fundamental rights analysis. So much has been written about this case that this article will limit comments to briefly adding thoughts as to why, given the combination of the Court\u27s motivation, both institutional and pragmatic, in approaching this case, and its methodology for analyzing fundamental rights, a nine to zero decision was fairly predictable, even in this difficult, emotionally compelling case. Part II gives more consideration to the equal protection claim. Those entering the debate in Vacco v. Quill regarding whether there is an equivalence between terminating life support (which the law permits) and assisted suicide (which the law forbids), have done so in a rather conclusory fashion, whether contending for or against equivalence. Many entering the debate also have failed to explicitly question whether, even if what we condone in end-of-life care cannot be morally distinguished from assisted suicide, there may be meaningful distinctions in policy of which the law may properly take into account. A detailed equal protection analysis of legally accepted medical practices in end-of-life care-pulling the plug, refusing treatment, the principle of double effect, and terminal sedation is, therefore, appropriate. In Part III, this article discusses the Social Contract theory and Civil Republicanism. I explain why the combination of these political philosophies underlying the Constitution provide people like my father, both past the age of Social Security retirement and incapable of ever again participating in the political process, with a right to end their lives