Professors Kahan and Meares used a bold, even inflammatory title for their 1998 Foreword to the Georgetown Law Journal’s Annual Review of Criminal Procedure. In The Coming Crisis of Criminal Procedure, they argued that judicial decisions articulating the constitutional rights of persons accused of crime have unduly compromised the ability of high-crime, inner-city neighborhoods to combat rampant lawlessness in their midst. Kahan and Meares observed that much of the architecture of constitutional criminal procedure, and especially its skepticism about police discretion, was constructed before the civil rights revolution, and accordingly no longer corresponds to social and political reality. They therefore called for a new jurisprudence of constitutional criminal procedure more respectful of the ability of high-crime, inner-city neighborhoods to strike a balance between liberty and order. The following year, in his Foreword, Professor Cole denied the existence of a “crisis” in criminal procedure. He argued that judicial decisions have actually left too much discretion in the hands of the police, and that granting police even greater freedom from legal restraint is all too likely to result in discrimination against racial and ethnic minorities. Among legal scholars, Professor Cole’s position has far more support. For example, in recent years, legal scholars have produced a virtual avalanche of work attacking the law of search and seizure as granting police overly broad discretion that is all too often used to disadvantage racial minorities and the poor. In contrast, support for the view that constitutional law has made a wrong turn by unduly circumscribing the ability of the police to intervene in high-crime communities has been scant, equivocal, and grudging.
A panel discussion about current topics in policing from the Fourth National People of Color Legal Scholarship Conference.
"It's important to note that scholars have long observed that political discourse and political events can contribute to the frequency of bias incidents. In fact, this phenomenon has a name today. It's called the Trump Effect."
Scholars discuss the most significant immigration-related cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, their ramifications, and what to expect in 2020.
Experts discuss legal developments and related ramifications one year after President Trump declared a national emergency at the U.S. Southern Border with Mexico in order to build a wall.