Upcoming Speeches:
Today at noon I will be speaking about "Constitutional Cliches: Does Trite Make Right?" at the Vanderbilt School of Law in Nashville.

On Saturday morning, I will be speaking at a conference on unenumerated rights at Drake Law School in Des Moines. In formation about what looks like a very interesting conference is here.

Law symposium to explore forgotten Constitutional Amendments
Drake Law School's Constitutional Law Center will hold its 2008 symposium, Saturday, April 5, in room 213 in Cartwright Hall. The topic will be "The Forgotten Constitutional Amendments."

Scholars will discuss how and why the Ninth and 14th Amendments are considered to be largely forgotten amendments.

They will also explore how the Supreme Court has rarely addressed these amendments when deciding cases.

"The Supreme Court has issued rulings declaring that there is a right to privacy that includes a right for women to have abortions, and that includes a right for homosexuals to engage in sexual activity," said Mark Kende, director of the Constitutional Law Center. "Yet these rulings are based on a part of the Constitution that has to do with due process.

"The Ninth Amendment and 14th Amendment Privileges or Immunities Clause seem, by their language, to be possible provisions that make sense for the court to use in discussing individual rights. Mysteriously, however, the court has rarely discussed those clauses.

"This conference will explore the reasons why the court has hesitated to rely on those provisions, and whether anything is likely to change in the future. The conference will therefore shed light on some of the most important and controversial political issues of our time such as abortion and homosexuality," he added.
Other speakers include: Daniel Farber, Kurt Lash, Michael Kent Curtis, Rebecca Zietlow, and David Bogen.


On Monday afternoon at 4pm, I will again be speaking on "Constitutional Cliches" at the University of Virginia College of Law in Charlottesville.
Gaius Obvious (mail):
The 9th may be forgotten, but the 14th is definately not forgotten centering as it is on the whole of civil rights legislation and federal assumption of power over the states. You want a forgotten amendment, talk about the 3rd or to a lesser extent, the 18th.
4.3.2008 9:34am
Alex R:
The 14th amendment due process and equal protection clauses are certainly not forgotten; I think that they are claiming that the Privileges or Immunities clause of the 14th amendment has been forgotten...
4.3.2008 10:28am
U.Va. 3L:
I look forward to stopping by!
4.3.2008 11:53am
Asher Steinberg (mail):
Scholars will discuss how and why the Ninth and 14th Amendments are considered to be largely forgotten amendments.

Yeah, at first I thought this was some sort of parody.
4.3.2008 12:18pm
Elliot Reed (mail):
The 14th Amendment has been forgotten? You'd better tell my 1L ConLaw prof, who spent most of the semester on it. Better tell those U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants too. The Second (until a months from now, probably), Third, and Tenth are all much better candidates. The Ninth too but you already mentioned that.
4.3.2008 12:44pm
M (mail):
All this talk of Constitutional Cliches is starting to get a little, well, you know what I mean.
4.3.2008 1:11pm
Grange95 (mail):
As a Drake law alum, welcome in advance to Des Moines! Regrettably, I will be out of town this weekend, but it is an honor to have you speaking at the law school. Sounds like a fairly interesting symposium.

P.S. Snowing right now, but Saturday is supposed to be more spring-like for weather.
4.3.2008 5:22pm
Syd (mail):
I'd pick the third, tenth, eleventh and twenty-third amendments as forgotten, but the fourteenth? Come on, now!
4.3.2008 6:22pm
louisvillelawyer (mail):
That's Vanderbilt University Law School, if you please. :)
4.3.2008 7:12pm
ChrisIowa (mail):
Unfortunately I have a prior commitment in Ames. Welcome to Iowa. Ignore the weather and don't leave until you've been well fed.
4.4.2008 12:32am
Dave Hardy (mail) (www):
I suspect the mention of the 14th relates to impact beyond narrow due process clause incorporation of expressly enumerated rights in the 1st-8th Amendments.

As far as either the 9th, or broader reading of the 14th goes, I suspect the reason for treating them like the psychotic relative kept locked in the basement lest the friends and neighbors find out is that action under their terms... seems obvious. Most of us (excepting Judge Bork) are comfortable with the idea that the bill of rights and the 14th protects some things other than those expressly set out, on the most narrow reading, of Amendments 1-8. But courts have been reluctant to make that too apparent. And thus to create any coherent theory of what is protected and what is not. (1) This is protected. (2) What about that, which is essentially identical? "Certiorari denied."
4.4.2008 1:32am
Vain Clerk:
I hate to be persnickety, but as an alumnus of my beloved Charlottesville institution, the correct name is: "The University of Virginia School of Law." Ain't no "college," Barnett!

That said, I'm sad that I cannot take some time off work to see you speak in C'ville. Enjoy, and debate John Harrison while you're there.
4.4.2008 11:41am