Gerald L. Neuman

J. Sinclair Armstrong Professor of International, Foreign, and Comparative Law

Biography

Gerald L. Neuman is the J. Sinclair Armstrong Professor of International, Foreign, and Comparative Law, and the Co-Director of the Human Rights Program at HLS. He teaches human rights, constitutional law, and immigration and nationality law. His current research focuses on international human rights bodies, transnational dimensions of constitutionalism, and rights of foreign nationals. He is the author of Strangers to the Constitution: Immigrants, Borders and Fundamental Law (Princeton 1996), and co-author of the casebook Human Rights (with Louis Henkin et al., Foundation Press). Prior to joining HLS in 2006, he served on the faculties of the University of Pennsylvania Law School (1984-1992) and Columbia Law School (1992-2006). From 2011 to 2014, he was a member of the Human Rights Committee, the treaty body that monitors compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Areas of Interest

Gerald L. Neuman, Bi-Level Remedies for Human Rights Violations, 55 Harv. Int'l L.J. 323 (2014).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Human Rights Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Subsidiarity, in, The Oxford Handbook of International Human Rights Law (Dinah Shelton ed., 2013).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Human Rights Law
Type: Book
Abstract
This article examines the role of the principle of subsidiarity in international human rights law. It explains the concept and the procedural doctrines of subsidiarity and considers subsidiarity of international institutions as a structural fact and the substantive subsidiarity within the state. It contends that international protection of human rights is subsidiary to national protection and that subsidiarity plays important roles in international human rights law. This article also predicts the future expansion and evolution of the role of subsidiarity in international human rights law.
Gerald L. Neuman, The Extraterritorial Constitution after Boumediene v. Bush, 82 S. Cal. L. Rev. 259 (2009).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
First Amendment
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Human Rights Law
Type: Article
Abstract
The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Boumediene v. Bush elaborates a 'functional approach" to the selective application of constitutional limitations to U.S. government action outside U.S. sovereign territory. This functional approach provides the best fit, both descriptively and normatively, to the Court's modern case law. The decision repudiates the stance of the plurality in United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, which sought to deny all constitutional rights to foreign nationals involuntarily subjected to U.S. action abroad. Important ambiguities remain in the articulation of the functional approach. One major question is whether and when foreign nationals who are not in U.S. custody (unlike the Boumediene petitioners) are also potentially eligible for constitutional protection. Another concerns how coarsely or finely the categories of foreign locations are drawn when the functional analysis is applied. The confirmation of the functional approach has significant consequences for U.S. citizens who travel abroad and for foreign nationals who travel here, as well as for foreign nationals who remain abroad. Although the Supreme Court did not rely on international law in its Boumediene decision, international human rights law may prove helpful in the future in determining whether limitations such as the First Amendment or the Takings Clause can practicably be given effect in foreign countries.
Gerald L. Neuman, Arbitrary Detention and the Human Rights Committee's General Comment 35, in Mélanges in tribute to Judge Christine Chanet, (Emmanuel Decaux, Iulia Motoc & Patrice Gillibert eds., forthcoming 2017).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Human Rights Law
Type: Book
Abstract
The UN Human Rights Committee’s General Comment No. 35 summarizes the treaty body’s interpretation of the right to liberty of person, including protection against arbitrary detention, under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, one of the principal human rights treaties at the global level. This essay provides an overview of General Comment No. 35, and then focuses on three aspects that provoked controversy either within the Committee or outside it: the time limit for “prompt” presentation of pre-trial detainees to a judge; the standards governing security detention in non-international armed conflict; and the disagreement between the Human Rights Committee and the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities regarding whether involuntary hospitalization is ever permitted. These examples illustrate significant issues about the interaction between the Covenant and other international regimes.
Gerald L. Neuman, Constrained Derogation in Positive Human Rights Regimes, in Human Rights in Emergencies (E.J. Criddle ed., ASIL Studies in Int’l Legal Theory 2016).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Human Rights Law
Type: Book
Gerald L. Neuman, Citizenship, in The Oxford Handbook of the United States Constitution 587 (Mark Graber, Sanford Levinson, & Mark Tushnet eds., 2015).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Constitutional Law
Sub-Categories:
Constitutional History
,
Immigration Law
Type: Book
Abstract
This chapter examines the U.S. constitutional law of citizenship, particularly as a status recognized by the Constitution entailing rights and duties. It first traces the evolution of the institution of citizenship in the Constitution and how federalism has contributed to the maintenance of multiple citizenship statuses rather than a uniform common citizenship. It discusses the constitutionally salient rights of citizenship, and citizenship itself as a right, before turning to civic duties implied by the Constitution. Against that background, it focuses on women’s citizenship, and the slow dismantling of gender differentiation in civic rights and duties. It also explores the extraterritoriality of citizens’ constitutional rights and concludes by examining the weak constraints that constitutional rights place on naturalization and immigration policies.
Reconsidering the Insular Cases: The Past and Future of the American Empire (Gerald L. Neuman & Tomiko Brown-Nagin eds., Harvard Univ. Press 2015).
Categories:
Disciplinary Perspectives & Law
,
Government & Politics
,
Constitutional Law
,
Legal Profession
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Constitutional History
,
Law & Political Theory
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Human Rights Law
,
Legal History
Type: Book
Abstract
"Over a century has passed since the United States Supreme Court decided a series of cases, known as the “Insular Cases,” that limited the applicability of constitutional rights in Puerto Rico and other overseas territories and allowed the United States to hold them indefinitely as subordinated possessions without the promise of representation or statehood. Essays in this volume, which originated in a Harvard Law School conference, reconsider the Insular Cases. Leading legal authorities examine the history and legacy of the cases, which are tinged with outdated notions of race and empire, and explore possible solutions for the dilemmas they created. Reconsidering the Insular Cases is particularly timely in light of the latest referendum in Puerto Rico expressing widespread dissatisfaction with its current form of governance, and litigation by American Samoans challenging their unequal citizenship status. This book gives voice to a neglected aspect of U.S. history and constitutional law and provides a rich context for rethinking notions of sovereignty, citizenship, race, and place, as well as the roles of law and politics in shaping them." -- Back cover.
Gerald L. Neuman, Extraterritoriality and the Interest of the United States in Regulating Its Own, 99 Cornell L. Rev. 1441 (2014).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Fourth Amendment
,
International Law
Type: Article
Abstract
This Essay explores a few of the many legal dimensions of the federal government’s regulation of harmful conduct of its own officials and its own nationals outside the borders of the United States. First, Part I discusses statutory regulation of the action of federal officials, as an essential aspect of defining their roles abroad. Second, Part II addresses the currently disputed power of Congress, under the Foreign Commerce Clause, to protect foreign citizens against harm—including sexual abuse—inflicted by U.S. nationals in foreign territory. Finally, Part III examines recent developments concerning constitutional restrictions on extraterritorial federal action, including the denial that the Warrant Clause applies to U.S. citizens, and the surprisingly limited effect of the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in Boumediene v. Bush10 on other constitutional rights of foreign nationals. The common theme that will emerge from these related inquiries is that legal interpretation must remain open to appropriate recognition of extraterritorial harm.
Gerald L. Neuman, Discourses in Dignity, in Understanding Human Dignity 637 (Christopher McCrudden ed., 2013).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Human Rights Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
Type: Book
Abstract
The advantages of dialogue across disciplines concerning human dignity should not distract us from the reality that different intellectual disciplines have different discourses and methods. In particular, positive legal systems (which are plural, not singular) produce their own functional understandings of human dignity, and these understandings are influenced by consensual and institutional factors as well as moral (or ‘suprapositive’) factors. Philosophical and religious traditions can contribute insights to debates within the legal discourses, but those insights need to be rephrased into terms that are accessible to outsiders to those traditions. Such rephrasing is especially necessary at the level of the global human rights system, where all philosophical schools and all religions have minority status.
Gerald L. Neuman, Human Rights and Constitutions in a Complex World, 50 Irish Jurist 1 (2013).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Constitutional Law
Sub-Categories:
Religion
,
Human Rights Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
,
European Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, The Brakes that Failed: Constitutional Restriction of International Agreements in France, 45 Cornell Int'l. L. J. 257 (2012).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Foreign Law
,
International Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
Type: Article
Abstract
Can constitutions successfully constrain the exercise of the treaty power? This article examines the French Constitution of 1958 as a case study. The founders of the Fifth Republic drafted provisions intended to protect national sovereignty, as the Gaullists understood that concept, against inroads resulting from international agreements. Looking back fifty years later, it is clear that those protective efforts did not succeed. The sequence of events by which the constraints were loosened or evaded may represent one nation's particular history, but they illustrate the limited capacity of constitutional restrictions to control international commitments in the long term.
Gerald L. Neuman, The External Reception of Inter-American Human Rights Law, 2011 Que. J. Int'l L. 99.
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Comparative Law
,
Human Rights Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
,
European Law
Type: Article
Abstract
This article examines the ways in which Inter-American human rights law has been received and employed outside its own sphere. The Inter-American Court and Commission engage self-consciously in dialogue and borrowing from the global human rights system and the other regional human rights tribunals. Tracing the reciprocal influence of Inter-American developments is a complicated undertaking, because official texts may either understate or overstate the degree to which their authors have relied upon external sources. Examination of the jurisprudence of other human rights tribunals produces mixed results that require interpretation. The African and European regional tribunals have openly engaged with Inter-American precedents on procedure and substance from both the Court and the Commission, although less extensively than the Inter-American Court’s methodology leads it to draw from Europe. The International Court of Justice and the UN Human Rights Committee have generally avoided open reference to regional precedent in their institutional opinions, while arguably some tacit influences can be traced. Some express discussion of Inter-American precedent does occasionally appear in concurring or dissenting opinions. The Inter-American Court has had less success, however, in exporting its views on jus cogens.
Gerald L. Neuman, Book Review, 105 Am. J. Int'l L. 643 (2011) (reviewing Thomas Buergenthal & Daniel Thürer, Menschenrechte: Ideale, Instrumente, Institutionen (2010)).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Human Rights Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, The Habeas Corpus Suspension Clause after Boumediene v. Bush, 110 Colum. L. Rev. 537 (2010).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Criminal Law & Procedure
Sub-Categories:
Terrorism
,
Criminal Prosecution
Type: Article
Abstract
In the course of vindicating the right to habeas corpus for military prisoners at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, the Supreme Court had occasion to resolve a series of previously open questions about the meaning of the Constitution's Habeas Corpus Suspension Clause. In this Essay, Professor Neuman examines the implications of the Court's interpretation for habeas corpus law more generally, in civil and criminal contexts within the United States. The Suspension Clause guarantees a permanent minimum content for the judicial remedy against unlawful detention of either citizens or aliens. The constitutionally necessary scope of review is determined partly by historical inquiry, and partly by an instrumental balancing test. Stricter standards apply to review of executive detention, but the Clause may also require some check on judicially ordered detention. The Court's analysis further suggests that the Suspension Clause is best understood today as affirmatively mandating a federal remedy, and not merely as protecting state remedies from federal interference. This Essay explores the consequences of this account for recent controversies over judicial power to provide effective review of decisions removing aliens from the United States, and thereby illustrates the uncertain operation of the Court's new balancing approach.
Gerald L. Neuman, A Migrants' Bill of Rights -- Between Restatement and Manifesto, 24 Geo. Immigr. L.J. 685 (2010).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Human Rights Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
Type: Article
Abstract
These comments first provide a general perspective on the nature of the proposed International Migrants Bill of Rights (IMBR) and then offer some specific observations on the current draft, in particular its provisions on the subject of equality or nondiscrimination, including but not limited to Article 2.
Gerald L. Neuman, Anti-Ashwander: Constitutional Litigation as a First Resort in France, 43 N.Y.U. J. Int'l L. & Pol. 15 (2010).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Human Rights Law
,
European Law
,
International Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
Type: Article
Abstract
France joins the mainstream of Western constitutionalism by permitting individuals to challenge statutes in force that violate their constitutional rights. The Republic has abandoned its prior model of limited review and seeks to reinvigorate a constitutional culture to which citizens have had insufficient access. The pendulum has swung surprisingly far: the new procedures require the Conseil Constitutionnel to decide upon the constitutionality of a statute even if the case could easily have been resolved on treaty grounds, such as European human rights law. The unnecessary adjudication of constitutional questions was found necessary to restore the importance of the national constitution in a system generously infused with transnational human rights. The widely held perception that treaty law has crowded out constitutional law makes the recent developments in France a useful example for exploring the relationship between constitutional rights and human rights regimes. This essay explains the new reform, which creates a system for for their advice on issues addressed in this essay.
Gerald L. Neuman, Amnesty should be a matter for regret, not a bonus for those who persevere, Bos. Rev. May/June 2009, at 16 (Forum Response to Joseph H. Carens’s The Case for Amnesty).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Foreword, Dangerous Intersection, 44 U.S.F. L. Rev. 241 (2009)(Symposium: The Evolving Definition of the Immigrant Worker: The Intersection Between Employment, Labor, and Human Rights Law).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Labor & Employment
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Human Rights Law
,
Labor Law
Type: Article
Louis Henkin, Sarah Cleveland, Laurence Helfer, Gerald L. Neuman & Diane F. Orntilicher, Human Rights (Found. Press 2d ed. 2009).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
International Law
,
Human Rights Law
Type: Book
Abstract
"This casebook provides a comprehensive, accessible, and up-to-date analysis of international human rights law. It emphasizes the relationship between the international, regional, and national legal systems (with a particular focus on the United States), features an intellectual and historical development of the idea of human rights, and analyzes recent developments in areas including corporate responsibility, terrorism and human rights, the rights of refugees, international criminal law, and the role of NGOs.The first edition has been comprehensively revised and updated to address important and “hot button” issues and topics in international human rights law. These include:an introductory case study on human rights, extraordinary renditions and extraterritoriality."
Gerald L. Neuman, Understanding Global Due Process, 23 Geo. Immigr. L.J. 365 (2009).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Government & Politics
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
,
Human Rights Law
,
European Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Import, Export, and Regional Consent in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 19 Eur. J. Int'l. L. 101 (2008).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
International Law
,
Human Rights Law
Type: Article
Abstract
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has elaborated a significant body of human rights jurisprudence through interpretation of regional human rights conventions and the adaptation of European and global precedents and global soft law. The Inter-American Court has also aspired to influence outside its region by offering innovative interpretations of human rights and by identifying norms as jus cogens. The Court’s methodology in recent years has appeared to give insufficient consideration to the consent of the regional community of states as a factor in the evolutive interpretation of a human rights treaty. The article illustrates and criticizes that trend, and contends that greater attention to indicia of regional consent could improve the acceptance and effectiveness of the Inter-American human rights system.
Gerald L. Neuman, American Convention on Human Rights (1969), in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Rüdiger Wolfrum ed., 2008).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Human Rights Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
,
International Law
Type: Book
Gerald L. Neuman, Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), in Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Rüdiger Wolfrum ed., 2008).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Human Rights Law
,
International Law
Type: Book
Gerald L. Neuman & Nicholas Hatzis, Was Bush v. Gore a Human Rights Case?, 25 Const. Comment. 215 (2008).
Categories:
Government & Politics
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Elections & Voting
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Human Rights Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
,
European Law
Type: Article
Abstract
The article discusses a court case on the Greek parliamentary election of 2004 wherein the Supreme Court of Greece decided on the contested election by ruling for a recalculation based on different rules. The ruling was challenged by under the free elections provision of the European human rights system, with the European Court of Human Rights rendering judgment in April 2008 that Greece has violated this provision. It differentiates the remedy in this with that of the intervention of the U.S. Supreme Court in the 2000 in the 2000 elections.
Gerald L. Neuman, The Resiliance of Nationality, 101 Proc. Ann. Meeting Am. Soc’y Int’l L. 97 (2007).
Categories:
Family Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Children's Law & Welfare
,
Treaties & International Agreements
,
Human Rights Law
,
European Law
,
International Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, International Law as a Resource in Constitutional Interpretation, 30 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 177 (2006).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
International Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Discretionary Deportation, 20 Geo. Immigr. L.J. 611 (2006).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
National Security Law
,
Congress & Legislation
,
Administrative Law & Agencies
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, On the Adequacy of Direct Review after the REAL ID Act of 2005, 51 N.Y.L. Sch. L. Rev. 133 (2006).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Wong Wing v. United States: The Bill of Rights Protects Illegal Aliens, in Immigration Stories 31 (David A. Martin & Peter H. Schuck eds., 2005).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
Type: Book
Gerald L. Neuman, Talking to Ourselves, 16 Eur. J. Int'l L. 139 (2005).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
International Law
,
Human Rights Law
Type: Article
Abstract
The discourse of international law is a remarkable achievement, but it poses the danger that international lawyers will be absorbed in their own conversation and fail to persuade outsiders. International human rights bodies may be especially vulnerable to that risk, despite their need for cooperation from local actors.
Gerald L. Neuman, Extraterritorial Rights and Constitutional Methodology after Rasul v. Bush, 153 U. Pa. L. Rev. 2073 (2005).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Civil Practice & Procedure
,
Criminal Law & Procedure
Sub-Categories:
Constitutional History
,
First Amendment
,
Terrorism
,
Conflict of Laws
,
Immigration Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman & Charles F. Hobson, John Marshall and the Enemy Alien: A Case Missing from the Canon, 9 Green Bag 2d 39 (2005).
Categories:
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Executive Office
,
Military, War, & Peace
,
National Security Law
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, The Uses of International Law in Constitutional Interpretation, 98 Am. J. Int'l L. 82 (2004).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Statutory Interpretation
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
International Law
,
Human Rights Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
Type: Article
Abstract
Is international law “irrelevant” to constitutional interpretation in the United States? How could that be? The arguments for categorical ignorance of international law in constitutional adjudication play on exaggerated fears: fear of foreign domination, fear of judicial activism, fear of the unknown. The claim of irrelevance depends on a false dichotomy between excluding international law from judicial consideration and allowing foreign institutions to control constitutional meaning. The more sensible inquiry would ask how international law has informed constitutional interpretation in the past, and how it should be used in the future.
Gerald L. Neuman, Closing the Guantanamo Loophole, 50 Loy. L. Rev. 1 (2004).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Government & Politics
,
Criminal Law & Procedure
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Constitutional History
,
Terrorism
,
Prison Law & Prisoners' Rights
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
National Security Law
,
Refugee & Asylum Law
Type: Article
Abstract
The constitutional status of the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base on the island of Cuba has suddenly gone from an issue of esoteric interest to refugee lawyers to a problem attracting intense global attention. The Administration's claims concerning a total absence of legal constraints on its actions at Guantanamo have become a national disgrace. The Supreme Court granted certiorari in November 2003 to review one aspect of the Administration's claims - whether federal courts are utterly powerless to hear any challenges brought by foreign nationals imprisoned at Guantanamo in connection with the "war on terrorism." Whether and how the Court will resolve that question remains uncertain at this writing. Many legal perspectives could be brought to bear on the current situation at Guantanamo, including global and regional human rights law, international humanitarian law, international criminal law, U.S. constitutional law, U.S. administrative law, U.S. military law, U.S. criminal law, and the law of federal jurisdiction. This article will focus primarily on issues of U.S. constitutional law and federal jurisdiction. In particular, it will discuss the constitutional status of Guantanamo as a nonsovereign territory subject to complete U.S. territorial jurisdiction, the extraterritorial application of fundamental due process rights, and the availability of federal habeas corpus to foreign nationals detained at Guantanamo. These three issues figured prominently in the D.C. Circuit panel decision that the Supreme Court agreed to review, and they are likely to inform both the Supreme Court's judgment and the course of future proceedings.
Gerald L. Neuman, Comment, Counter-terrorist Operations and the Rule of Law, 15 Eur. J. Int'l. L. 1019 (2004).
Categories:
Criminal Law & Procedure
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Terrorism
,
Human Rights Law
,
International Law
Type: Article
Abstract
Measures to prevent and punish terrorism must be conducted with respect for human rights. Nonetheless, when counter-terrorism methods shift from law enforcement to transnational armed conflict, the applicability and effect of particular positive human rights norms may change. If European states find it necessary to pursue the military model of counter-terrorism, then European human rights jurisprudence may need to modify its rigid opposition to military trials. The right to take proceedings before a court for determination of the lawfulness of detention provides an important procedural safeguard against torture and disappearance, but in some narrow circumstances derogation from that right may be strictly required by the exigencies of combating terrorism.
Gerald L. Neuman, The Abiding Significance of Law in Foreign Relations, 2004 Sup. Ct. Rev. 111.
Categories:
Government & Politics
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
,
International Law
,
Foreign Relations
,
Human Rights Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Human Rights and Constitutional Rights: Harmony and Dissonance, 55 Stan. L. Rev. 1863 (2003).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Statutory Interpretation
,
Human Rights Law
,
International Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
,
European Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Humanitarian Law and Counterterrorist Force, 14 Eur. J. Int'l. L. 283 (2003).
Categories:
Criminal Law & Procedure
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Terrorism
,
International Humanitarian Law
Type: Article
Abstract
The current context of a ‘war against terrorism’ raises the question whether international humanitarian law should govern a state’s actions in an armed conflict against a foreign terrorist organization. Depending on the configuration of the conflict, including the response of the foreign state from whose territory the terrorists operate, existing treaties may already apply to the military operations. The limited protections they impose, though not originally designed with such a conflict in mind, do not unduly hinder defence against international terrorism. Restricting counterterrorist operations is justified, in part by bedrock human rights of the terrorists themselves, but more strongly by the rights of innocent civilians exposed to counterterrorist violence.
Gerald L. Neuman, On Fascist Honour and Human Dignity: A Sceptical Response, in Darker Legacies of Law in Europe 267 (Christian Joerges & Navraj Ghaleigh eds., Hart Pub. 2003).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Disciplinary Perspectives & Law
,
Legal Profession
Sub-Categories:
Legal Theory & Philosophy
,
Foreign Law
,
European Law
,
Legal History
,
Legal & Political Theory
Type: Book
Abstract
The legal scholarship of the National Socialist and Fascist period of the 20th century and its subsequent reverberation throughout European law and legal tradition has recently become the focus of intense scholarly discussion. This volume presents theoretical, historical and legal inquiries into the legacy of National Socialism and Fascism written by a group of the leading scholars in this field. Their essays are wide-ranging, covering: the reception of National Socialist and Fascist ideologies into legal scholarship; contemporary perceptions of Nazi Law in the Anglo-American world; parallels and differences among authoritarian regimes in the Third Reich, Austria, Italy, Spain, and Vichy-France; how formerly authoritarian countries have dealt with their legal antecedents; continuities and discontinuities in legal thought in private law, public law, labor law, international and European law; and the legal profession's endogenous obedience and the pains of Vergangenheitsbewältigung. The majority of the contributions were first presented at a conference at the EUI in the fall of 2000, the others in subsequent series of seminars.
Gerald L. Neuman, Qualitative Migration Controls in the Antebellum United States, in Migration Control in the North Atlantic World: The Evolution of State Practices in Europe and the United States from the French Revolution to the Inter-war Period 106 (Andreas Fahrmeir, Olivier Faron & Patrick Weil eds., 2003).
Categories:
Government & Politics
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Legal Profession
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Race & Ethnicity
,
Federalism
,
Legal History
Type: Book
Gerald L. Neuman, Review: Citizenship Today: Global Perspectives and Practices (T. Alexander Aleinikoff & Douglas Klusmeyer eds., 2001), 96 Am. J. Int'l L. 514 (2002).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Comparative Law
,
European Law
,
International Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, The Habeas Corpus Suspension Clause after INS v. St. Cyr, 33 Colum. Hum. Rts. L. Rev. 555 (2002).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Government & Politics
,
Constitutional Law
Sub-Categories:
Constitutional History
,
Fourteenth Amendment
,
Immigration Law
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Human Rights Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Constitutionalism and Individual Rights in the Territories, in Foreign in a Domestic Sense: Puerto Rico, American Expansion, and the Constitution 182 (Christina Duffy Burnett & Burke Marshall eds., 2001).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Constitutional History
,
Fourteenth Amendment
Type: Book
Gerald L. Neuman, Human Dignity in United States Constitutional Law, in Zur Autonomie des Individuums: Liber Amicorum for Spiros Simitis 249 (Dieter Simon & Manfred Weiss eds., 2000).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
Sub-Categories:
Fourteenth Amendment
,
Eighth Amendment
,
Fourth Amendment
,
Fifth Amendment
Type: Book
Gerald L. Neuman, Jurisdiction and the Rule of Law after the 1996 Immigration Act, 113 Harv. L. Rev. 1963 (2000).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Constitutional Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Constitutional History
,
Immigration Law
,
Statutory Interpretation
,
Congress & Legislation
,
Courts
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Federal Courts Issues in Immigration Law, 78 Tex. L. Rev. 1661 (2000).
Categories:
Government & Politics
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Courts
,
Federalism
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Terrorism, Selective Deportation, and the First Amendment after Reno v. AADC, 14 Geo. Immigr. L.J. 313 (2000).
Categories:
Criminal Law & Procedure
,
Constitutional Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
First Amendment
,
Terrorism
,
Immigration Law
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
National Security Law
Type: Article
Abstract
In 1995, the Ninth Circuit issued a landmark decision holding that the First Amendment prohibited the federal government from singling aliens out for deportation on the basis of political activities for which the First Amendment would preclude the criminal punishment of citizens. In 1999, in Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee ("AADC"), the Supreme Court ordered dismissal of the litigation underlying the Ninth Circuit's decision on jurisdictional grounds. In Part III of the majority opinion, Justice Scalia stated that the First Amendment does not guarantee a defense of selective prosecution in deportation proceedings, or at least, that it does not guarantee such a defense in circumstances like those of the case at bar. Whether the Supreme Court's decision is also a landmark depends on a number of factors, including whether Part III of the opinion is merely dictum, and if not, what the scope and rationale of its holding might be. Despite all the layers of technicality and the broader implications, AADC was a highly political case about terrorism and counter-terrorism. From a perspective sympathetic to the plaintiffs, it involved the question of government overreaction trampling on the First Amendment rights of U.S. residents who have engaged in innocent association with a political movement that is based in a foreign country and that happens also to engage in political violence against innocent civilians in pursuit of some of its goals. From the government's perspective, it involved the effort to deny a terrorist organization, ...
Gerald L. Neuman, The Nationalization of Civil Liberties, Revisited, 99 Colum. L. Rev. 1630 (1999).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Government & Politics
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
Sub-Categories:
Fourteenth Amendment
,
Civil Rights
,
Discrimination
,
Congress & Legislation
,
Federalism
,
Government Accountability
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Treaties & International Agreements
Type: Article
Abstract
In 1967 Professor Herbert Wechsler delivered a lecture examining the then-increasing role of the Supreme Court and Congress in defining the rights of the citizens of the states. More than thirty years later, Professor Gerald Neuman revisited this subject in an inaugural lecture as Columbia's first Herbert Wechsler Professor of Federal Jurisprudence. Neuman finds that the Supreme Court has slowed the expansion of constitutional rights and that three recent decisions have circumscribed Congressional power to create statutory rights under the Commerce Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment. He argues that these decisions do not necessarily impede the legitimate use of other governmental powers to confer statutory rights, and that the power of Congress to implement treaties may become a more important basis for the enactment of legislation that protects individual rights beyond those recognized in U.S. constitutional doctrine.
Gerald L. Neuman, The U.S. Constitutional Conception of the Rule of Law and the Rechtsstaatsprinzip of the Grundgesetz, in Das Grundgesetz im Prozess europäischer und globaler Verfassungsentwicklung : internationales Symposium zum 50-jährigen Bestehen des Grundgesetzes am 14. und 15. Mai 1999 gemeinsam veranstaltet mit der Fritz Thyssen Stiftung 253 (Ulrich Battis et al. eds., Nomos, 2000).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Comparative Law
Type: Book
Abstract
This paper compares the conception of the rule of law in U.S. constitutional law with the corresponding conception of the Rechtsstaat in modern German constitutional law. The type of Rechtsstaat established by the German constitution is clearly substantive. A commitment to human rights is understood as inherent in the concept of the Rechtsstaat, and so is the requirement of proportionality as a standard for evaluating restrictions on personal and economic liberties. In U.S. constitutional law, by contrast, the concept of the rule of law does not operate as an enforceable constitutional doctrine, but rather as an ideal lying behind and informing both constitutional and nonconstitutional doctrines. Characterizing the vision of the rule of law expressed in U.S. constitutional law is, therefore, more difficult, but I argue that it is primarily procedural (or formal), with some substantive elements. The concept of proportionality does not lack parallels in U.S. constitutional law; basically, it is a form of balancing of interests. But balancing is not regarded in U.S. constitutional doctrine as an element of the rule of law, and it is not applied to interferences with all constitutional rights. This is especially true with regard to economic rights that are more highly protected in German constitutional law. The German constitution has been very influential as a model of constitutionalism, and one of its most exportable features may be its image of the Rechtsstaat. It remains to be seen to what degree the more substantive conception of the Rechtsstaat will carry protection of economic rights under the proportionality principle more widely into national constitutions and transnational arrangements, and to what degree those institutions will content themselves with the thinner Anglo-American conception of the rule of law.
Louis Henkin, Gerald L. Neuman, Diane F. Orentlicher & David W. Leebron , Human Rights (Found. Press 1999).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
International Law
,
Human Rights Law
Type: Book
Gerald L. Neuman, Comment, Family Reunification in United States Immigration Law and Policy: The Limits of Congressional Power, in Einwanderungskontrolle und Menschenrechte -- Immigration Control and Human Rights 111 (Kay Hailbronner & Eckart Klein eds., 1999).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Constitutional Law
,
Family Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Comparative Law
,
European Law
Type: Book
Gerald L. Neuman, Equal Protection, 'General Equality,' and Economic Discrimination from a U.S. Perspective, 5 Colum. J. Eur. L. 281 (1999).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Fourteenth Amendment
,
Fifth Amendment
,
Comparative Law
,
European Law
Type: Article
Abstract
The evolution of a country’s constitutional law reflects both the particular historical experiences of the country and general trends of intellectual history shared among countries. The United States inherited its human rights tradition from Europe. Although much of its development has been self-referential, implicit reliance on broader intellectual trends and even explicit invocation of European thinkers and European legal developments have also contributed. Meanwhile, U.S. constitutionalism has been influential in other countries, and received special attention-which does not mean unquestioning imitation-in Germany. In the field of constitutional equality, the U.S. practice of regarding equality before the law as a norm that prohibits arbitrary legislation, and not just as a guarantee of the equal application of laws by judges and administrators, influenced debates on the interpretation of the Weimar Constitution, and has become important constitutional doctrine under the post-war German constitution, or Grundgesetz (GG) of 1949.1 U.S. case law was closely studied in the 1920’s by Professor Gerhard Leibholz, later a Justice of the Federal Constitutional Court, who approved its focus on “objective arbitrariness”–the objective absence of any reasonable justification for unequal treatment. U.S. equality law has evolved considerably since the 1920’s, partly by rejecting some of the cases that influenced German constitutional thinking. That evolution has not yet produced a consistent and stable doctrine, however, and methodological disagreements persist. German equality law (which has not ignored later developments in the United States) has also evolved, and has supplemented the inquiry into objective arbitrariness with other concepts. One might therefore ask whether U.S. and German equality law might reconverge; whether the modem German constitutional experience offers solutions to the dilemmas of U.S. equality law; and whether U.S. experience offers insights into German practice. Or are conditions in the United States and Germany insufficiently comparable for convergence to be likely or desirable? Or, even if conditions are comparable, has the path of constitutional development in each country led their conceptions of equality away from a common basis, so that convergence is not feasible? It is with these questions in mind that I will discuss “general equality” law from the United States perspective, with specific attention to economic discrimination.
Gerald L. Neuman, Habeas Corpus, Executive Detention, and Alien Removal, 98 Colum. L. Rev. 961 (1998).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Constitutional Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Constitutional History
,
Immigration Law
,
Congress & Legislation
,
Courts
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Nationality Law in the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany: Structure and Current Problems, in Paths to Inclusion: The Integration of Migrants in the United States and Germany 247 (Peter Schuck & Rainer Münz eds., 1998).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Constitutional Law
Sub-Categories:
Fourteenth Amendment
,
Immigration Law
,
Race & Ethnicity
,
Native American & Tribal Law
,
Comparative Law
,
European Law
,
Refugee & Asylum Law
,
International Law
Type: Book
Gerald L. Neuman, Admissions and Denials: A Dialogic Introduction to the Immigration Law Symposium, 29 Conn. L. Rev. 1395 (1997).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
Type: Article
Abstract
United States immigration law is currently in a state of upheaval. Three major statutes enacted in 1996 have produced changes in substance and procedure that affect every aspect of immigration practice. The effects of particular changes, and the interactive consequences of the multiple changes, cannot be fully foreseen, and they will occupy analysts, administrators and courts for years to come. The present Symposium offers a series of assessments of crucial aspects of immigration policy, as it exists and as it is evolving. The three transformative statutes are the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act ("AEDPA"), the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act ("PRA"), and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act ("IIRAIRA"). The first two of these statutes were not primarily about immigration. AEDPA was a conjunction of two distinct legislative projects, with some additional immigration provisions tacked on. Its original purpose dealt with terrorism, both in the criminal context and in the immigration context, but it became the vehicle for the enactment of restrictive new rules on federal post-conviction relief for state prisoners. For immigration law, its significance lay in the creation of new procedures for the removal of alleged alien terrorists through secret proceedings, and in a group of unrelated immigration provisions, including restrictions on discretionary relief for deportable aliens, mandatory detention policy, and unprecedented limits on judicial review.
Gerald L. Neuman, Sense and Nonsense about Customary International Law: A Response to Professors Bradley and Goldsmith, 77 Fordham L. Rev. 371 (1997).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
State & Local Government
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
,
Courts
,
Human Rights Law
,
International Law
,
Foreign Relations
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, The Global Dimension of RFRA, 14 Const. Comment. 33 (1997).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Government & Politics
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Religion
,
Fourteenth Amendment
,
First Amendment
,
Congress & Legislation
,
Treaties & International Agreements
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Strangers to the Constitution: Immigrants, Borders, and Fundamental Law (Princeton Univ. Press 1996).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Constitutional History
,
Civil Rights
,
Immigration Law
,
Refugee & Asylum Law
Type: Book
Abstract
"Gerald Neuman discusses in historical and contemporary terms the repeated efforts of U.S. insiders to claim the Constitution as their exclusive property and to deny constitutional rights to aliens and immigrants--and even citizens if they are outside the nation's borders. Tracing such efforts from the debates over the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798 to present-day controversies about illegal aliens and their children, the author argues that no human being subject to the governance of the United States should be a "stranger to the Constitution." Thus, whenever the government asserts its power to impose obligations on individuals, it brings them within the constitutional system and should afford them constitutional rights. In Neuman's view, this mutuality of obligation is the most persuasive approach to extending constitutional rights extraterritorially to all U.S. citizens and to those aliens on whom the United States seeks to impose legal responsibilities. Examining both mutuality and more flexible theories, Neuman defends some constitutional constraints on immigration and deportation policies and argues that the political rights of aliens need not exclude suffrage. Finally, in regard to whether children born in the United States to illegally present alien parents should be U.S. citizens, he concludes that the Constitution's traditional shield against the emergence of a hereditary caste of "illegals" should be vigilantly preserved."
Gerald L. Neuman, Anomalous Zones, 48 Stan. L. Rev. 1197 (1996).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
State & Local Government
,
Refugee & Asylum Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Subsidiarity, Harmonization, and their Values: Convergence and Divergence in Europe and the United States, 2 Colum. J. Eur. L. 573 (1996).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Federalism
,
European Law
,
Comparative Law
Type: Article
Abstract
In surveying insights gained from these two symposia, I will not presume to replicate George Bermann’s fine recapitulation of the first symposium. Rather I will try to make a series of comparative observations on what I have learned, from an American point of view, under the general heading “Subsidiarity, Harmonization, and their Values. Speakers have repeatedly invoked the Supreme Court’s opinion in New York v. United States. Early in that opinion, Justice O’Connor made the following disclaimer: The benefits of this federal structure have been extensively catalogued elsewhere, but they need not concern us here. Our task would be the same even if one couldprove that federalism secured no advantages to anyone. It consists not of devising our preferred system of government, but of understanding and applying the framework set forth in the Constitution. Then, in a manner too predictable to be called ironic, O’Connor followed this disclaimer by imposing a brand-new doctrine of federalism – the anti- commandeering principle – which may or may not be normatively attractive, but which lacks persuasive grounding in either text or history. On a prior occasion, Richard Briffault has argued that a disclaimer like O’Connor’s defines the proper judicial role in U.S. federalism. The values served by subsidiarity are diverse and difficult to quantify. In any given case, whether subsidiarity actually promotes those values, and to what degree, and how those benefits compare with the conflicting values served by federal legislation, are matters ill-suited to judicial determination. George Bermann has similarly argued that the European Court of Justice should limit itself to a procedural review of subsidiarity – Rudolf Steinberg disagrees. But we are not judges. Scholars and policymakers both may properly ask what values are served by subsidiarity in the European Union and the United States, in general, and in the particular cases where subsidiarity claims are respected or overridden. As Ingolf Pernice reminds us, federalism is not intended to benefit the states or public officials as an end in itself, but to benefit their people. I would like to take that statement here in the opposite of the sense in which Justice O’Connor meant it. O’Connor meant that state sovereignty should be protected in formal terms, and that we should treat state sovereignty as a mechanism whose protection would ultimately produce benefits for the people. As scholars, we are entitled to look behind the state in each case, and ask who benefits. For the United States, Justice O’Connor has summarized the values served by federalism as follows: It assures a decentralized government that will be more sensitive to the diverse needs of a heterogenous society; it increases opportunity for citizen involvement in democratic processes; it allows for more innovation and experimentation in government; and it makes government more responsive by putting the States in competition for a mobile citizenry. Perhaps the principal benefit of the federalist system is a check on abuses of government power. The virtues ascribed to subsidiarity in the European context are similar, though not identical. For example, George Bermann has summarized the values underlying subsidiarity as “self-determination and accountability, political liberty, flexibility, preservation of identities, diversity, and respect for internaldivisions of component states,” plus the possible value – if it counts as a value per se – of deregulation.”
Gerald L. Neuman, Recent Trends in United States Migration Control, 38 Ger. Y.B. Int'l L. 284 (1996).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Refugee & Asylum Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Casey in the Mirror: Abortion, Abuse and the Right to Protection in the United States and Germany, 43 Am. J. Comp. L. 273 (1995).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Constitutional Law
,
Family Law
Sub-Categories:
Reproduction
,
Children's Law & Welfare
,
Comparative Law
,
European Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Aliens as Outlaws: Government Services, Proposition 187, and the Structure of Equal Protection Doctrine, 42 UCLA L. Rev. 1425 (1995).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Constitutional Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Fourteenth Amendment
,
Immigration Law
,
State & Local Government
,
Supreme Court of the United States
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Asylum Reform in Germany: An Interim Report, 17 In Defense of the Alien 155 (1995).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Refugee & Asylum Law
,
European Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
Type: Book
Abstract
Proceedings of the 1994 Annual National Legal Conference on Immigration and Refugee Policy
Gerald L. Neuman, Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht als Mittel der Integration, 28 Kritische Justiz 439 (1995).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Family Law
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Children's Law & Welfare
,
International Law
,
Comparative Law
,
European Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Extraterritorial Violation of Human Rights by the United States, 9 Am. U. Int'l L. Rev. 213 (1994).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Human Rights Law
,
Refugee & Asylum Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Justifying U.S. Naturalization Policies, 35 Va. J. Int'l L. 237 (1994).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Constitutional Law
,
Disciplinary Perspectives & Law
Sub-Categories:
Fourteenth Amendment
,
First Amendment
,
Immigration Law
,
Law & Political Theory
Type: Article
Abstract
Commissioner Meissner has emphasized for us the importance of naturalization and the need to "put the N back into INS." The present Article aims toward an analogous goal: putting the "n" back into immigration law scholarship. It will not treat the requirements for naturalization as straight-forward, which in an academic context could mean undeserving of serious attention. Instead, it will inquire into their justifiability. By justifiability, I mean political justifiability, measured against the political principles applied in other legal contexts in the United States. Occasional discussions of the constitutionality of naturalization criteria dwell on the question whether congressional power over naturalization is "plenary" in the sense of being subject to no constitutional constraints, subject only to a rationality requirement, or immunized from judicial review. This Article will not address that issue of positive constitutional law, and will advert to constitutional doctrine only as one source of political principles applied in the United States. Although the inquiry begins somewhat abstractly, the focus will be entirely on the U.S. context, and (accordingly) the naturalization of aliens who have already been admitted as permanent residents. In some cases, parallel arguments might be made about the naturalization policies of other nations, but I have not attempted to keep track of the degree of generality of the arguments. For the United States, I will identify four simple normative models of naturalization of resident aliens. Each of these models comes with its own set of constraints on the justifiability of naturalization ...
Gerald L. Neuman, The Lost Century of American Immigration Law (1776-1875), 93 Colum. L. Rev. 1833 (1993).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Buffer Zones Against Refugees: Dublin, Schengen, and the German Asylum Amendment, 33 Va. J. Int'l L. 503 (1993).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Refugee & Asylum Law
,
Treaties & International Agreements
,
European Law
,
Comparative Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Conflict of Constitutions? No Thanks, 91 Mich. L. Rev. 939 (1993).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Family Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Fourteenth Amendment
,
Reproduction
,
State & Local Government
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Federalism
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Braving the New World in the Nineties, 7 St. John's J. Legal Comment. 561 (1992).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Constitutional History
,
Immigration Law
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, "We are the People": Alien Suffrage in German and American Perspective, 13 Mich. J. Int'l L. 259 (1992).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Constitutional Law
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Comparative Law
,
European Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Rhetorical Slavery, Rhetorical Citizenship, 90 Mich. L. Rev. 1276 (1992)(reviewing Judith N. Shklar, American Citizenship: The Quest for Inclusion (1991)).
Categories:
Disciplinary Perspectives & Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Constitutional Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
,
Law & Political Theory
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Volkssouveränität als Entmündigung des Volkes? -- Anmerkungen zum Ausländerwahlrecht aus Amerikanischer Sicht, in Der Orientierungslose Leviathan: Verfassungsdebatte, Funktion und Leistungsfähigkeit von Recht und Verfassung 88 (Thomas Kreuder ed., 1992).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
Sub-Categories:
Immigration Law
Type: Book
Gerald L. Neuman, Whose Constitution?, 100 Yale L.J. 909 (1991).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Constitutional History
,
Immigration Law
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
,
Supreme Court of the United States
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Immigration and Judicial Review in the Federal Republic of Germany, 23 N.Y.U. J. Int'l L. & Pol. 35 (1990).
Categories:
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Government & Politics
,
Constitutional Law
Sub-Categories:
Fourteenth Amendment
,
Immigration Law
,
Courts
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Federalism
,
Foreign Law
,
Comparative Law
,
European Law
,
Refugee & Asylum Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Variations for Mixed Voices, 137 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1851 (1989) (reviewing Louis Fisher, Constitutional Dialogues: Interpretation as Political Process (1988)).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Judges & Jurisprudence
,
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Congress & Legislation
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Law Review Articles That Backfire, 21 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 697 (1988).
Categories:
Government & Politics
,
Legal Profession
Sub-Categories:
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
,
Legal Scholarship
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, The Constitutional Requirement of 'Some Evidence', 25 San Diego L. Rev. 631 (1988).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Government & Politics
Sub-Categories:
Supreme Court of the United States
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Back to Dred Scott?, 24 San Diego L. Rev. 485 (1987)(reviewing Peter H. Schuck & Rogers M. Smith, Citizenship Without Consent: Illegal Aliens in the American Polity (1985)).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
Sub-Categories:
Fourteenth Amendment
,
Immigration Law
Type: Article
Gerald L. Neuman, Territorial Discrimination, Equal Protection, and Self-Determination, 135 U. Pa. L. Rev. 261 (1987).
Categories:
Constitutional Law
,
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Government & Politics
,
Civil Practice & Procedure
Sub-Categories:
Fourteenth Amendment
,
Conflict of Laws
,
State & Local Government
,
Supreme Court of the United States
Type: Article

Current Courses

Course Catalog View