Notes
Introduction
1 E.g., Barron
v.
Baltimore, 32 US. (7 Pet.) 243 (1833); Livingston v. Moore,
32 US. (7 Pet.) 469 (1833).
2 E.g., compare United States v. Cruikshank, 92 US. (2 Otto) 542 (1876) and
O'Neil v. Vermont, 144 US. 323 (1892) with Chicago, Burlington, and
Quincy R.R. Co. v. Chicago, 166 US. 226 (1897).
3 United States v. Cruikshank, 92 US. (2 Otto) 542 (1876).
4 Maxwell v. Dow, 176 US. 581 (1900).
5 Twining v. New Jersey, 211 US. 78 (1908).
6 In re Kemmler, 136 US. 436 (1890).
7 See, e.g., cases cited in notes 4, 5, and 6 supra.
8 E.g.,
J.
Ely, Democracy and Distrust 37, 196 (1980).
9 E.g., Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 US. 145 (1968); Benton v. Maryland, 395
US. 784 (1969)'
10 Friendly, "The Bill of Rights as a Code of Criminal Procedure;' 53 Calif.
L. Rev. 929, 934-35 (1965)'
11 Perry, "Interpretivism, Freedom of Expression, and Equal Protection;'
42 Ohio St. L.
J.
261, 286 (1981) (hereinafter cited as Perry, "Inter-
pretivism").
12 A. Bickel, The Least Dangerous Branch 102 (1962).
13 Adamson v. California, 332 US. 46, 68-123 (1947).
14 Grey, "Do We Have an Unwritten Constitution?" 27 Stan. L. Rev. 703,
711 - 12 (1975)'
15 Alfange, "On Judicial Policymaking and Constitutional Change: Another
Look at the 'Original Intent' Theory of Constitutional Interpretation;' 5
Hastings Const. L. Q. 603,607 (1978).
16 Berger, "Incorporation of the Bill of Rights in the Fourteenth Amend-
ment: A Nine-Lived Cat;' 42 Ohio St. L.
J.
435 (1981) (hereinafter cited
as Berger, "Incorporation"). For a rebuttal, see Curtis, "Further Adven-
tures of the Nine-Lived Cat: A Response to Mr. Berger on Incorporation
Previous Page Next Page