The watchdogs of liberty must diversify their business. Private products and private services have come to dominate our lives, to induce our dependence and to encircle our worlds. If we sleep or look elsewhere, the circle may become a noose.
Reviving the trespassory model of the Fourth Amendment, the Court in U.S. v. Jones has raised more questions about data privacy than it answered. If the mere existence and transmission of data can signal a lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy, the only way to demonstrate a subjective interest in privacy will be to go off the grid. There has to be a better way.
Noah and Matt give their brief reactions to United States v. Alvarez, Miller v. Alabama, Arizona v. United States, and NFIB v. Sebelius. Noah and Matt take a look at Mitt Romney’s recently leaked closed-door comments. The discussion turns to the recent protests and violence in the Middle East over the YouTube video negatively depicting Islam.
In Miller v. Alabama, the Supreme Court voted 5-4 that the Eighth Amendment prohibits a sentencing scheme that mandates life in prison without parole for juvenile homicide offenders. Despite Justice Kagan’s protestations, the Court was not eliminating an outlying vestige of once common, brutal punishment, but instead a practice that was common. The holding suggests the Court may be willing to take a more activist role in monitoring state criminal justice systems.
This episode is the first in CR-CL’s summer interview podcast series. This week, Noah interviews Professor Ben Sachs about the disparity between the political speech rights of labor unions and corporations. Noah interviews Emily Bazelon about President Obama’s recent announcement expressing his personal support for marriage equality, and what that announcement will mean legally and symbolically moving forward.
Noah interviews Professor Ari Ezra Waldman about students’ right to speak affirmingly about sexual orientation, same-sex marriage, and gay identity in schools. Noah and Matt discuss the retroactivity of the Fair Sentencing Act, passed to address the disparity between federal sentences for crack and powder cocaine possession, how that disparity came about, and whether even the lessened disparity is justified.
Noah and Matt are joined in the studio this week by HarvardCRCL.org Technology and Privacy blogger Andrew Mamo. Matt fills us in on the recent Supreme Court decision in Florence v. Board of Freeholders and the potential impact of a blanket rule allowing strip searches for jail intake even for minor offenses. Andrew discusses the recent concern over Google’s unified privacy policy, the Consumer Online Privacy Bill of Rights, and efforts in Europe to establish a right to be forgotten.
Noah and Matt jump on the media bandwagon and provide their take on the week’s arguments on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, particularly the individual mandate to purchase health insurance. Next, they take a look at the issues discussed in CR-CL’s latest colloquium, Roper, Graham, and J.D.B.: Re-Defining Juvenile’s Constitutional Rights.
Article drafts and video of CR-CL’s recent colloquium. On Monday, March 26, 2012, the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, in conjunction with the Juvenile Law Center and the Milbank Foundation, presented a colloquium: Roper, Graham, and J.D.B.: Redefining Juveniles’ Constitutional Rights. Guests at the event included Martin Guggenheim of NYU Law School, Marsha Levick and Robert Schwartz of the Juvenile Law Center, Michael Dale, of the Nova Southeastern Law Center, and the Hon. Jay Blitzman, chief judge of the Middlesex County Juvenile Court.
Each year, over 50,000 skiers and snowboarders visit the ski slopes at Big Mountain in northwest Montana, just 66 miles from the Canadian border. This year, the mountain has set the stage for a battle between atheists and religious groups over the fate of a six-foot statue of Jesus that [...]
Copyright © 2013 Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review. All Rights Reserved.
