Making Our Democracy Work (41 page)

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).

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.

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).

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).