Federal Law & Legal System – Page 69 – Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

The Roots of Progressivism Lie in . . . the Republican Party?

Post author:Edward A. Fallone
Post published:January 24, 2012
Post category:Legacies of Lincoln Political Processes & Rhetoric President & Executive Branch Public

Tonight, when President Barack Obama delivers his third State of the Union address, he is widely expected to channel the progressive rhetoric of Theodore Roosevelt. It was Roosevelt’s “New Nationalism” speech in 1910 (quoted in my previous post here) that called for the federal government to play an active role in regulating the economy. When he speaks to the nation tonight, President Obama is likely to push back against the demand to shrink the federal government – a common refrain among the current crop of Republican presidential candidates — by pointing to Theodore Roosevelt’s call for an active federal government.

It is certainly true that, in his “New Nationalism” speech, Theodore Roosevelt developed the theme that elite special interests had come to dominate government at all levels, thereby turning government into a tool for their own narrow purposes. President Obama is hoping that a return to this theme will resonate with voters today. However, while the connection between President Obama and Theodore Roosevelt has been widely reported, few commentators have recognized that these same ideas actually can be traced back to an earlier Republican president . . . Abraham Lincoln.

How Should the Supreme Court Handle Warrantless GPS Tracking?

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:January 20, 2012
Post category:Criminal Law & Process Legal Scholarship Public U.S. Supreme Court

One of the most anticipated decisions of the current U.S. Supreme Court term is United States v. Jones, which was argued last fall (transcript here). The case concerns Fourth Amendment protections from GPS tracking of automobiles. The lower court, the D.C. Circuit, held that the government was prohibited from placing a GPS tracking device on the defendant’s car without a warrant and tracking his movements 24 hours a day for four weeks. For the D.C. Circuit, it was crucial that the tracking was so extensive, which creates the possibility of a very fact-bound affirmance. Alternatively, the Court might try to draw some type of bright-line rule that would be of greater assistance to lower courts in deciding future cases, either favorably to GPS tracking or otherwise.

As the Court continues to sort out these issues, the Justices might benefit from reading a new note in the Marquette Law Review by Justin Webb. Justin’s paper, entitled “Car-ving Out Notions of Privacy: The Impact of GPS Tracking and Why Maynard is a Move in the Right Direction,” argues in favor of the D.C. Circuit’s approach. The abstract appears after the jump.

Cory Maples May Avoid Procedural Default, But Will Anyone Else Ride His Coattails?

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:January 20, 2012
Post category:Federal Criminal Law & Process Public U.S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court ruled earlier this week that habeas petitioner Cory Maples may not have to bear the consequences of a truly egregious dereliction of duty by his pro bono lawyers. The lower federal courts had refused to consider Maples’ petition on the merits because he had missed a filing deadline in state court. Normally, criminal defendants are stuck with the mistakes of their lawyers, but in this case — “a veritable perfect storm of misfortune,” as Justice Alito called it — the defendant will have another opportunity to litigate his claims. (The full opinion in Maples v. Thomas is here.)

Here’s what happened. Maples was convicted of murder and sentenced to death by an Alabama state court. His direct appeals were unsuccessful. He then launched a collateral attack in state trial court. The Supreme Court recounted what happened next: