How the Coronavirus Crisis Reveals Weaknesses Not Just in America’s Public Health Systems But in Our Constitutional Doctrines

VIKRAM DAVID AMAR

Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar explains how the current crisis caused by the novel coronavirus reveals flaws in both America’s public health system and also in the country’s constitutional doctrines. Responding in part to Professor Michael C. Dorf’s column of March 15 urging uniform federal restrictions, Amar expresses doubt as to whether Congress’s powers under Article I of the Constitution permit imposition of such a lockdown in the first place.

Read More

United States v. Phea

Docket: 17-50671

Opinion Date: March 31, 2020

Judge: Per Curiam

Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Fifth Circuit reversed the district court's denial of defendant's 28 U.S.C. 2255 petition, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The court held that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to an obvious constructive amendment to the superseding indictment. In this case, the trial court not only eliminated the scienter requirement of actual knowledge, the element defendant was indicted under, but lowered the factual basis required to prove this essential element from what defendant knew to what he had the reasonable opportunity to observe. Furthermore, counsel's failure to object prejudiced defendant. Accordingly, the court remanded for further proceedings.

Estate of Frank D. Streightoff v. Commissioner

Docket: 19-60244

Opinion Date: March 31, 2020

Judge: Carl E. Stewart

Areas of Law: Tax Law, Trusts & Estates

The Commission issued the Estate a notice of deficiency, determining that the Estate had a $491,750.00 tax liability which differed from the Estate's tax return valuation. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the tax court's decision sustaining the Commission's determinations. The court held that the Estate holds a substituted limited partnership interest in SILP. The court also held that the Notice of Deficiency (including its attachments) fulfills the statutory requirement under 28 U.S.C. 6212. However, even assuming arguendo that the notice description was inadequate, the court could not invalidate it on that basis because Internal Revenue Code 7522(a) explicitly prohibits it from setting aside a notice for lacking the descriptive element. Finally, the court rejected the Estate's argument under the Administrative Procedure Act as without merit.