University of the Pacific Law Review Symposium
Friday, October 11, 2019 at 9:00 am to 4:00 pm
Pacific McGeorge School of Law
3200 Fifth Ave., Sacramento, CA
The University of the Pacific Law Review Symposium
The Warren Court's Criminal Procedure Revolution: a 50 year retrospective
Organized by Joshua Dressler, Ohio State Law School Distinguished University Professor and Frank R. Strong Chair in Law, and Michael Vitiello, McGeorge School of Law Distinguished Professor
The Warren Court created a new subject matter: Constitutional Criminal Procedure, effectively starting with Mapp v. Ohio in 1961 and ending with the Warren Court in 1969. Along the way, the Court dramatically expanded the rights of criminal defendants in numerous ways, including finding that many of the rights in the Bill of Rights applied to the states and giving expansive interpretations to those rights. At the same time, while many could applaud those developments (who could disagree that every defendant was entitled to an attorney in a criminal case?), the Court also inflicted wounds on itself.
Miranda v. Arizona may have been the Court’s most controversial decision. Most commentators agree that Miranda changed the course of the 1968 Presidential election. Candidates George Wallace and Richard Nixon made law and order the center piece of their campaigns. The issue tilted the electorate to the right. In rapid succession, President Nixon got to make 4 appointments to the Court. The message was clear: the newly appointed justices took the Court to the right. While one prominent scholar could conclude that no counter revolution took place, the Burger Court began a process of cabining Warren Court decisions, almost always cutting back on the Warren Court cases.
That leads to the topic of the symposium: Was the Warren Court right in making procedural reform the centerpiece of its agenda? What if the 1968 Presidential election came out differently, with President Hubert Humphrey replacing retiring justices? Would the Court have sustained the Warren Court’s revolution and, if so, what would it have looked like?
An Overview: The Revolution And Beyond 9:00 a.m. - 9:15 a.m.
- Michael Vitiello, Distinguished Professor of Law, McGeorge School of Law
Panel I: The Warren Court: Critical Commentary 9:15 a.m. - 10:45 a.m.
- George C. Thomas, III, Rutgers Law School, Board of Governors Professor of Law & Judge Waugh Distinguished Scholar, “The Warren Court, Idealism, and the 1960s”
- Susan Mandiberg, Lewis and Clark Distinguished Professor of Law, “Twists in the Use of Warren Court Fourth Amendment Rhetoric: ‘Searches,’ ‘Reasonableness,’ and ‘Good Faith’”
- William T. Pizzi, University of Colorado Law School, Emeritus Professor of Law, “The Failure of the Criminal Procedure Revolution?”
Panel II: The Warren Court: Directions Not Taken? 11:00 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.
- Raquel Aldana, U.C. Davis Law School, Vice Chancellor for Academic Diversity and Professor of Law, “Looking Back at the Warren Court Due Process Revolution through the Lens of Crimmigration”
- Kari Hong, Boston College Law School, Assistant Professor, “The Legacy of Gideon v. Wainwright and the Right to Counsel in Immigration Proceedings”
- Emily Garcia Uhrig, formerly Professor of Law, McGeorge School of Law and now Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court, “Gideon’s Legacy of Equity: The Right to Assistance of Counsel in Post-conviction Proceedings and Housing Court in California”
Lunch: 12:30 p.m. - 1:45 p.m. Luncheon Presentation:
- Joshua Dressler, Ohio State Law School Distinguished University Professor and Frank R. Strong Chair in Law Emeritus, “Reflections on the Warren Court’s Criminal Justice Legacy, Fifty Years Later: What the Wings of a Butterfly and a Yiddish Proverb Teach Me”
Panel III: A Closer Look At Warren Court Case Law: Part One 2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m.
- Deborah Denno, Visiting Professor, Fordham University School of Law, Arthur A. McGivney Professor of Law and Founding Director of Neuroscience and Law Center, “Race and the Indelible Dollree Mapp”
- Robert Weisberg, Stanford Law School, Edwin E. Huddleson, Jr. Professor of Law, Co-Director, Stanford Criminal Justice Center, “The Enduring Mysteries of Terry v. Ohio”
A Closer Look At Warren Court Case Law: Part Two 3:15 p.m. - 4:45 p.m.
- Gabriel J. Chin, U.C. Davis, Professor of Law, “A Case Study of the Careful, Incremental Warren Court in the Context of the Right to Free Transcripts on Appeal”
- Don Doernberg, McGeorge School of Law, Professor of Law, “‘Or’: The False Dichotomy of the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence”
- Michael Vitiello, McGeorge School of Law, Distinguished Professor of Law, “United States v. Wade and Gilbert v. California: A Step in the Right Direction?”