Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1201881
 
 

Citations (1)



 
 

Footnotes (141)



 


 



The Timing of Facial Challenges


Timothy Sandefur


Pacific Legal Foundation

February 5, 2010

Program for Judicial Awareness Working Paper No. 08-016
Akron Law Review, Vol. 43, p. 51, 2010

Abstract:     
There appears to be considerable confusion among the bar and on the bench as to when a plaintiff may or may not file a lawsuit challenging the facial constitutionality of a law. Many practitioners and judges have come to the erroneous conclusion that facial challenges to the validity of laws must be filed within a certain time frame after the challenged law is enacted, or risk being barred by the statute of limitations. This error - which springs largely from a confusion with regulatory takings law - has not only led courts to dismiss valid facial arguments as timely, but has also led them to take the mistaken position that statutes of limitations do not apply at all to First Amendment cases, or to misconstrue past cases in which laws were found facially invalid as being as-applied challenges. Worst of all, many practitioners are under the misimpression that a facial challenge is time barred one or two years after the challenged statute is enacted. This is not correct.

This article attempts to separate out the different conceptual categories whose overlap has led to such mistakes. In brief, the facial/as-applied distinction has nothing to do with the accrual or the ripeness of a cause of action. Because the accrual date of facial and as-applied challenges are identical (with some specific exceptions), mere enactment is rarely if ever the moment when a facial challenge accrues. The distinction between facial and as-applied challenges is a way of characterizing the merits of a constitutional challenge, but it has no relation to jurisdictional questions such as accrual, ripeness, or statutes of limitations. A plaintiff may challenge a law's validity at any time with the limitations period after that law has injured her, whether she chooses to argue that the law is facially unconstitutional or only unconstitutional as applied in her case.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 28

Keywords: facial challenge, as-applied challenge, statute of limitations, ripeness, time barred

JEL Classification: K10, K19

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: August 7, 2008 ; Last revised: February 8, 2010

Suggested Citation

Sandefur, Timothy, The Timing of Facial Challenges (February 5, 2010). Program for Judicial Awareness Working Paper No. 08-016. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1201881 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1201881

Contact Information

Timothy Sandefur (Contact Author)
Pacific Legal Foundation ( email )
930 G Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 976
Downloads: 153
Download Rank: 112,951
Citations:  1
Footnotes:  141

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.422 seconds