Safeguarding Constitutional Rights: The Uses and Limits of Prophylactic Rules

Tennessee Law Review, Vol. 66, P. 925, Summer 1999

Posted: 24 Apr 2000

See all articles by Brian K. Landsberg

Brian K. Landsberg

University of the Pacific - McGeorge School of Law

Abstract

The Supreme Court has adopted prophylactic rules to safeguard rights such as the freedom of speech under the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment right to be free from compulsion to testify against oneself, and the right to be free from racial discrimination. In at least one instance, currently pending before the Supreme Court, the Congress has legislatively attempted to repeal a judicially fashioned prophylactic rule. This article explores the extent to which the Supreme Court may legitimately protect against the violation of constitutional rights by adopting measures designed to minimize the risk of such violations, even when those measures are not specifically authorized by the Constitution. It also addresses whether the adoption of such prophylactic rules threatens to subvert the Constitution by unduly enlarging the powers of the Court. Finally, it analyzes the extent to which Congress may legitimately alter prophylactic rules that the Court has adopted.

JEL Classification: K10, K14, K41, K42

Suggested Citation

Landsberg, Brian K., Safeguarding Constitutional Rights: The Uses and Limits of Prophylactic Rules. Tennessee Law Review, Vol. 66, P. 925, Summer 1999, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=219245

Brian K. Landsberg (Contact Author)

University of the Pacific - McGeorge School of Law ( email )

3200 Fifth Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95817
United States
916-739-7103 (Phone)
916-739-7272 (Fax)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
734
PlumX Metrics