Author: Brooke Logsdon, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review The Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments on the political speech case, Heffernan v. City of Paterson.[1] The case involved Officer Heffernan, who was demoted from his position as a detective because his department believed that he was supporting the adverse mayoral candidate.[2] More specifically,... Continue Reading →
Ohio Clarifies: Law Enforcement Cannot Conduct Unjustified Search of Vehicle Subsequent to a Recent Occupant’s Arrest
Author: Maxel Moreland, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review Under the Fourth Amendment, absent an impartial and neutral judge or magistrate, warrantless searches are unconstitutional, subject to only a few exceptions.[1] Leak examined two such exceptions—a search incident to a lawful arrest and inventory searches done pursuant to law enforcement’s community-caretaking function.[2] The Ohio... Continue Reading →
Limits on Judicial Elections: A Thing of the Past?
Author: Andrea Flaute, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review From basic speech restrictions to an outright prohibition on personally solicited campaign funds, judicial candidates, prior to the decisions in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White and Williams-Yulee v. Florida Bar, lacked the basic leeway given to every other candidate to control their campaign.[1] In... Continue Reading →
“Admitting Privileges” Requirements for Abortion Providers Possibly Up for Review by the Supreme Court
Author: Rebecca Dussich, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review Since the Supreme Court’s decision granting women the constitutionally protected right to seek and obtain abortions in Roe v. Wade,[1] various individuals, organizations, and government bodies have pushed back against the ruling through legislation and additional lawsuits. Although many of these attempts have been successful,... Continue Reading →
Arizona’s Battle to Retain Its Independent Redistricting Commission: When “Legislature” Doesn’t Really Mean “Legislature”
Author: Rebecca Dussich, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review Although racial gerrymandering has been ruled unconstitutional,[1] political gerrymandering has not yet been explicitly rejected by the courts and is even supported by some as an acceptable mechanism for drawing congressional district maps.[2] However, in a political landscape where race, gender, religion, education level, and... Continue Reading →
Three Strikes and (Maybe) You’re Out: Coleman v. Tollefson
Author: Chris Gant, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review The adage borrowed from baseball, “three strikes and you’re out,” is used in law in different contexts. Many states have enacted “three-strikes” laws to punish repeat offenders: under these laws, a criminal receives a much longer sentence on his third conviction.[1] Another example is found... Continue Reading →
The Legality of Preventing Future Crime: Johnson v. United States
Author: Chris Gant, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review “Minority Report” is a futuristic science fiction film in which crime is thwarted before it takes place.[1] In the film, a specialized police department, “Precrime,” apprehends would-be murderers before the murder is committed. Clairvoyant “Precogs” indicate that someone will commit a murder and Precrime apprehends... Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit No Longer to Review Patent Claim Construction Entirely De Novo
Author: Jon Siderits, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., and did away with the Federal Circuit’s longstanding application of a purely de novo standard when reviewing a district court’s construction of a patent claim.[1] Specifically, the... Continue Reading →
True Threats and the First Amendment: Objective vs. Subjective Standards of Intent to Be Revisited in Elonis v. United States
Author: Rebecca Dussich, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review Last month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in an appeal of the Third Circuit’s decision in United States v. Elonis.[1] Anthony D. Elonis was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c), a federal statute that prohibits making “any threat to injure the person of another”... Continue Reading →
City of Indianapolis v. Annex Books: Has Renton’s “Reasonable Belief” Standard Become Unreasonable?
Author: Rebecca Dussich, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review Among the petitions reviewed during the Supreme Court’s September conference was a request[1] to reverse a Seventh Circuit decision, City of Indianapolis v. Annex Books, in which the court invalidated an Indianapolis ordinance that restricted the permissible hours of operation for “adult entertainment businesses.”[2] The... Continue Reading →