{"id":1139,"date":"2021-10-25T16:51:26","date_gmt":"2021-10-25T20:51:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/aclr-online\/volume-54\/glass-ceilings-how-warren-provides-insight-into-state-courts-ability-to-protest-against-limited-constructions-of-the-constitution\/"},"modified":"2025-05-12T11:09:27","modified_gmt":"2025-05-12T15:09:27","slug":"glass-ceilings-how-warren-provides-insight-into-state-courts-ability-to-protest-against-limited-constructions-of-the-constitution","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/aclr-online\/volume-54\/glass-ceilings-how-warren-provides-insight-into-state-courts-ability-to-protest-against-limited-constructions-of-the-constitution\/","title":{"rendered":"Glass Ceilings? How Warren Provides Insight into State Courts\u2019 Ability to Protest Against Limited Constructions of the Constitution"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span class=\"Apple-converted-space\">\u00a0<\/span>In 2016, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that, in analyzing a suspected felon\u2019s flight from and the reasonableness of a subsequent stop by authorities, courts may consider the suspect\u2019s race. Citing a Boston Police Department report documenting a longstanding pattern of racial profiling, the Court explained that \u201cwhenever a black male is the subject of an investigatory stop [for a crime in progress] . . . flight is not necessarily probative of the suspect\u2019s state of mind or consciousness of guilt.\u201d\u00a0<i>Warren <\/i>and its progeny may indicate a larger strategy for state courts to reach different conclusions than their federal counterparts when opining on federal questions over which they share concurrent jurisdiction. Simultaneously, the opinion may demonstrate how states might further expand their citizens\u2019 positive rights and liberties under their own constitutions.<span class=\"Apple-converted-space\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p>This post will briefly review <i>Warren<\/i>, specifically evaluating the unique interplay between the federal and state judiciaries in defining the limits of criminal defendants\u2019 constitutional rights. The post will then explore the extent to which <i>Warren <\/i>attempts to expand the contours of its subjects\u2019 positive liberties. The post then debates whether the Supreme Judicial Court\u2019s efforts are sufficiently rooted in and analyzed under the Commonwealth\u2019s Constitution and jurisprudence, which would shield the court\u2019s decisions from federal review. To the extent that such efforts may not be, the post discusses ways in which Massachusetts courts could further safeguard citizens\u2019 constitutionally guaranteed liberties.<span class=\"Apple-converted-space\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/15\/2021\/10\/54-0_Scudieri-GLASS_CEILINGS.pdf\">Read More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>\u00a0In 2016, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that, in analyzing a suspected felon\u2019s flight from and the reasonableness of a subsequent stop by authorities, courts may consider the suspect\u2019s [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4766,"featured_media":0,"parent":1023,"menu_order":10,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"abstract.php","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_price":"","_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_header":"","_tribe_default_ticket_provider":"","_tribe_ticket_capacity":"0","_ticket_start_date":"","_ticket_end_date":"","_tribe_ticket_show_description":"","_tribe_ticket_show_not_going":false,"_tribe_ticket_use_global_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_global_stock_level":"","_global_stock_mode":"","_global_stock_cap":"","_tribe_rsvp_for_event":"","_tribe_ticket_going_count":"","_tribe_ticket_not_going_count":"","_tribe_tickets_list":"[]","_tribe_ticket_has_attendee_info_fields":false,"footnotes":"","_tec_slr_enabled":"","_tec_slr_layout":""},"class_list":["post-1139","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"ticketed":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1139","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4766"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1139"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1139\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1141,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1139\/revisions\/1141"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1023"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/american-criminal-law-review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1139"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}