The Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy regularly publishes an online edition — the “Sidebar” — with timely comments on topical trends and current subjects of constitutional law and public policy. The Sidebar provides a forum for students, professors, practitioners, judges, and policy-makers to discuss trends in the law via brief essays, notes, and commentaries that can be quickly published.
On the Record… articles were issued as a component of the “Sidebar” from 2006 to 2009.
Submissions from 2009
Montejo v. Louisiana: Affirmative Requests and the Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel, Jacob E. Warren
Submissions from 2008
KSR v. Teleflex: How “Obviousness” Has Changed, Daniel Becker
Fitzgerald v. Barnstable School Committee: Enforcement of Constitutional Rights, Sarah Branstetter
Explaining Change and Rethinking Dirty Words: FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., Tobias Coleman
Davis v. FEC: The First Amendment Rights of a Wealthy Candidate, Jeremy Earl
Pleasant Grove City v. Summum: Identifying Government Speech & Classifying Speech Forums, Aaron Harmon
Panetti v. Quarterman: Raising the Bar Against Executing the Incompetent, D. G. Maxted
Why the Incompatibility Clause Applies to the Office of the President, Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash
Arizona v. Johnson: Determining When a Terry Stop Becomes Consensual, Ryan Thompson
Why Our Next President May Keep His or Her Senate Seat: A Conjecture on the Constitution’s Incompatibility Clause, Seth Barrett Tillman
Pacific Bell v. linkLine: Price Squeezing and the Limits of Judicial Administrability, Sandeep Vaheesan
Submissions from 2007
Philip Morris USA v. Williams: A Confusing Distinction, Sachin Bansal
Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White, Christian J. Brann
Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo: The Unlikely Tort Of “Securities Fraud”: Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo, Oleg Cross
Carey v. Musladin: A Commentary on What is not Prejudicial, Christopher Donadio
Whorton v. Bockting and the Watershed Exception of Teague v. Lane, Tadhg Dooley
Scott v. Harris, Uchenna Evans
United Haulers Ass’n v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Mgmt. Auth., Joshua J. Faber
Burton v. Stewart: Reconsidering What Makes a Supreme Court Decision ‘New’, Michael Goodman
Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. v. Gonzales, Blake Mason
Eminent Domain after Kelo v. City of New London: Compensating for the Supreme Court’s Refusal to Enforce the Fifth Amendment, Scott D. Mikkelsen
Cunningham v. California, Christopher P. Raab
Lawrence v. Florida: Applications for Post-Conviction Relief Are, Elizabeth Richardson-Royer
When is Enough Too Much? The Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005 and the Eighth Amendment’s Prohibition on Excessive Fines, Amy Kristin Sanders Esq.
Jones V. Bock: New Clarity Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Squire Servance
Safeco Ins. Co. of America v. Burr: Defining Notification Requirements and Willfulness under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, Travis S. Souza
Submissions from 2006
Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services Inc., Blayre Britton
Smith v. City of Jackson: Age Discrimination Act Authorizes Disparate Impact Claims – But Scope is Narrow, William B. Holladay
Mayle v. Felix, Aleksandra Kopec
Merck KGAA v. Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd.: Greater Research Protection for Drug Manufacturers, Samuel Rubin
Eliding in New York, Monte Neil Stewart