Volume X (2014), Issue 1

Articles

Post-Tinker

R.George Wright

In 1969, near the height of the Vietnam War protest movement, the Supreme Court issued its landmark opinion in the public school student speech case of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. Tinker upheld wearing protest armbands in public school by students of various ages. Read more about Post-Tinker

  • January 2014
  • 10 Stan.J.C.R.& C.L. 1
  • Article

One-State/Two Votes: Do Supermajority Senate Voting Rules Violate the Article V Guaranty of Equal State Suffrage?

Burt Neuborne
Senate Rule XXII, as currently administered, imposes a de facto supermajority voting rule on the Senate, requiring sixty votes to enact legislation, or to provide constitutional advice and consent to a presidential nomination. To be sure, final senate votes on bills and nominations are formally governed by majority rule, but in order to be eligible for a final vote, virtually every proposed nominee or bill must clear a de facto sixty-vote threshold.
  • January 2014
  • 10 Stan.J.C.R.& C.L. 27
  • Article

Missing the Forest for the Trees: Federal Habeas Corpus and the Piecemeal Problem in Actual Innocence Cases

Stephanie Roberts Hartung
The DNA exoneration data stemming from the Innocence Movement exposes a harsh reality in our criminal justice system: existing post-conviction review procedures fail to accurately identify and remedy wrongful convictions of the innocent. While the layers of review available to prisoners are seemingly exhaustive, in fact, the actually innocent prisoner is confronted with little more than a façade of protection.
  • January 2014
  • 10 Stan.J.C.R.& C.L. 55
  • Article

Notes

A Child’s Rights to Counsel in Removal Proceedings

Benjamin Good
The last eighty years have seen the right to court-appointed counsel grow from a statutory creation into a constitutional guarantee--one that now applies in a variety of contexts, criminal and civil. This growth was catalyzed by two factors: the threat of particularly severe forms of deprivation, and the vulnerability of defendants who are especially incapable of representing themselves.
  • January 2014
  • 10 Stan.J.C.R.& C.L. 109
  • Note