Abstract
AbstractWith a view to elaborating a developmental theory of constitutionalism in the United States, this essay explores the relationship among constitutional, criminal, and civil law. It supports, with relevant case materials, a single proposition: civil litigants are afforded contested constitutional protections in federal court to the extent that the judges attribute an aspect of criminality to the underlying facts or issues in question. The essay tests this proposition in the areas of punitive damages, double jeopardy, and constitutional torts; discusses the mirroring of the stipulated pattern in legal maneuvering on constitutional issues; and briefly spells out its implications for the larger theory.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Political Science and International Relations,Sociology and Political Science
Reference27 articles.
1. The Distinction between Crime and Tort in the Early Common Law;Seipp;Boston University Law Review,1996
2. The Background of the Seventh Amendment
3. Privatizing Bans on Abortion: Eviscerating Constitutional Rights through Torts Remedies;Manian;Temple Law Review,2007
4. Clearing the Smoke from Philip Morris V. Williams: The Past, Present, and Future of Punitive Damages
5. Reconciling Punitive Damages with Tort Law's Normative Framework;Nezar;Yale Law Review,2011