No More Tiers? Proportionality as an Alternative to Multiple Levels of Scrutiny in Individual Rights Cases

Beschle, Donald L.

Journal: Pace Law Review

Volume: 38

First Page: 384

Year: 2018

Bluebook Citation: 38 PACE L. REV. 384 (2018)

Author: Donald L. Beschle: all 22 publications


Citation analytics

How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

Cited
1
Citing decision
1
Courts citing
Most recently cited by1
  • 2021Virginia Duncan v. Rob Bonta 9th Cir.

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Abstract

This article will explore how the explicit adoption of proportionality analysis as a single analytical tool might lead, not only to a more coherent approach to individual rights cases, but will also bring together aspects of the current multiple analytical tiers in a way that allows full consideration of both the individual rights and the social values present in these cases. Part I of this article will give a brief overview of the history of the creation and application of the various tiers of analysis used by the United States Supreme Court and explore how the once-sharp difference in those applications have blurred in recent years. Part II will describe the proportionality analysis used by other nations’ courts in a wide range of individual rights cases. Part III will focus on how an explicit adoption of proportionality might lead to significant improvement in the analysis of cases presenting issues under the free exercise clause, currently a particularly confusing and contentious source of debate.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.