Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2047093
 
 

Footnotes (79)



 


 



Messerschmidt and Convergence in Action: A Reply to Comments on Trawling for Herring


Jennifer E. Laurin


University of Texas School of Law

April 27, 2012

Columbia Law Review, Vol. 100, No. 2, 2012
U of Texas Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 218

Abstract:     
This short essay examines the Supreme Court's recent decision Fourth Amendment qualified immunity decision in Messerschmidt v. Millender through the framework of doctrinal borrowing and convergence set forth in my prior piece Trawling for Herring, and responds to incisive responses to that prior essay from Professors John Greabe, Colin Starger, Nelson Tebbe, and Robert Tsai. In short, Messerschmidt strongly exemplifies a continuing trend of convergence between exclusionary rule and constitutional tort doctrine, and does so in a manner that exhibits some of the most negative pathologies of doctrinal borrowing and convergence that Trawling identified.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 16

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: April 29, 2012  

Suggested Citation

Laurin, Jennifer E., Messerschmidt and Convergence in Action: A Reply to Comments on Trawling for Herring (April 27, 2012). Columbia Law Review, Vol. 100, No. 2, 2012; U of Texas Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 218. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2047093

Contact Information

Jennifer E. Laurin (Contact Author)
University of Texas School of Law ( email )
727 East Dean Keeton Street
Austin, TX 78705
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 252
Downloads: 41
Footnotes:  79

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.250 seconds