Martin A Schwartz

January 11, 2002 | New York Law Journal

S ection 1983 civil rights claimants frequently assert that law enforcement officers used excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Claims that the officer used deadly force involve special legal concerns. This column analyzes the Fourth Amendment issues in �1983 deadly force cases.

By Martin A. Schwartz

18 minute read

April 08, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Martin A. Schwartz, a law professor at Touro College-Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, writes that the governing standard of judicial role plays a powerful role in constitutional litigation between the individual and the government. Highly deferential review typically spells victory for the government while heightened review normally means that the individual will prevail. This is equally true when prisoners assert a violation of a federal constitutional right.

By Martin A. Schwartz

9 minute read

April 14, 2003 | New York Law Journal

By Martin A. Schwartz

8 minute read

June 15, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Martin A. Schwartz, a law professor at Touro College's Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, writes that the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that key provisions of the 1996 federal Telecommunications Act are not enforceable.

By Martin A. Schwartz

12 minute read

April 02, 2007 | New York Law Journal

Martin A. Schwartz, a law professor at Touro College - Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, untangles the procedural web woven in the recent US Supreme Court decision in Wallace v. Kato, a case that again shows the sticky statute of limitation issues that can arise in federal court claims asserted under 42 USC �1983.

By Martin A. Schwartz

15 minute read

April 07, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Martin A. Schwartz, a law professor at Touro College-Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, writes that the governing standard of judicial role plays a powerful role in constitutional litigation between the individual and the government. Highly deferential review typically spells victory for the government while heightened review normally means that the individual will prevail. This is equally true when prisoners assert a violation of a federal constitutional right.

By Martin A. Schwartz

9 minute read

October 16, 2007 | New York Law Journal

Martin A. Schwartz, a law professor at Touro College - Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, writes that with its opinion in Morse v. Frederick from the end of last term, the Supreme Court has now decided four cases dealing with student free speech rights, each of which dealing with a different facet of student speech - political speech, lewd speech, curriculum speech, and most recently, speech advocating illegal activity.

By Martin A. Schwartz

13 minute read