Digital Commons Network^™

United States V. Vaello-Madero: The Impact Of Varying Rights To Citizens Of The United States, Ana Siracusa

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Since 1917, residents of Puerto Rico have been citizens of the United States. However, because of Puerto Rico’s status as a United States territory, residents of Puerto Rico are not automatically guaranteed the same constitutional rights as other citizens of the United States. When faced with the question of what constitutional rights residents of Puerto Rico are entitled to, the Supreme Court has continued to perpetuate the otherness of United States territories. This disposition results from the United States’ colonial mindset in the acquisition and government of its territories. The discrimination against United States territories, namely Puerto Rico, has bled …

Independent And Overlapping: Institutional Religious Freedom And Religious Providers Of Social Services, Kathleen A. Brady

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Roughly two decades ago, scholarly interest in the limits of government involvement in religious institutions exploded. Scholars explored distinctions between the spiritual and temporal dimensions of human activity and identified numerous individual, social, spiritual and civic goods associated with independent religious groups. From these foundations, they defined and refined areas of protection and immunity from government intervention. A shared premise of much of this work was that religious matters belong to religious believers and their institutions, and that the internal governance and operations of these institutions must be kept from state interference. In 2012, this scholarship bore fruit when the …

Making Protection Unexceptional: A Reconceptualization Of The U.S. Asylum System, Denise Gilman

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

The United States treats asylum as exceptional, meaning that asylum is presumptively unavailable and is offered only in rare cases. This exceptionality conceit, combined with an exclusionary apparatus, creates a problematic cycle. The claims of asylum seekers arriving as part of wide-scale refugee flows are discounted, and restrictive policies are adopted to block these claims. When asylum claims nonetheless continue to mount, the United States asserts “crisis” and deploys new exclusionary measures. The problems created by the asylum system are not addressed but are instead deepened. This Article encourages a turn away from policies that have led down the same …

Rodriguez At Fifty: Lessons Learned On The Road To A Right To A High-Quality Education For All Students, Kimberly Jenkins Robinson

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Haaland V. Brackeen: The Decision That Threatened The Indian Child Welfare Act’S Protections Of Native Families In Illinois, Kennedy Ray Fite

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

The Indian Child Welfare Act has become a controversial piece of legislation since the Supreme Court heard oral argument on the case of Haaland v. Brackeen in November 2022 and released its decision in June 2023. The statute was originally enacted in 1978 to remedy the United States’ tragic history of family separation in tribal communities, including removal of native children who were subsequently placed into federal boarding schools or non-native homes by a child-welfare system grounded in white-American assumptions. Congress recognized the vital nature of Native American culture for native children and the importance of native children to tribal …

And On The Third Wave: Using Intersectionality To Resurrect Heightened Scrutiny In Public Education Litigation, Chris Chambers Goodman

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

This Symposium marks the fiftieth anniversary of San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, and seeks to address how society could have been different if the Supreme Court had recognized education as a fundamental right. It also considers how the lack of a fundamental right to education may have led to the under-education of our population and may be linked to other issues like economic inequality and the shifting landscape of fundamental rights.

This Article focuses on the ties between race and socioeconomic status in public school K–12 education. It analyzes the impact of the Rodriguez holding that education …

A Law & Macroeconomics Critique Of San Antonio Independent School District V. Rodriguez, Steven A. Ramirez

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Fifty years ago, the Supreme Court decided, in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, to permit states to provide dramatically disparate funding for childhood education from district to district, thereby concretizing and propagating racial and economic inequality indefinitely. This Article shows that this decision entails staggering macroeconomic costs, undermines human development in the United States, and has hindered the government from promoting general welfare, domestic tranquility, and common defense. The opinion pursued the political objectives of the Southern Strategy and does not rest upon a legitimate exercise of judicial power. Rodriguez furthers the replication of our nation’s racial …

“So” What? Why The Supreme Court’S Narrow Interpretation Of The Computer Fraud And Abuse Act In Van Buren V. United States Has Drastic Effects, Landon Wilneff

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

In Van Buren v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that one does not “exceed authorized access” under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) when one accesses information they were otherwise entitled to access. Part I will outline the legislative history of the CFAA, and will explain the circuit split between the Second, Fourth, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits and the First, Third, Fifth, and Seventh Circuits. Part II will detail the facts and procedural history of Van Buren, and will walk through the reasoning of the majority and dissent. Part III will analyze the majority’s …

Table Of Contents, Luc Law Journal

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Ignored, Harassed, And Endangered: States Must Provide Gender-Affirming Healthcare To Transgender Youth In Juvenile Detention, Jake Gnolfo

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

In 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Edmo v. Corizon, Inc. held a prison’s denial of gender-affirming care to a transgender adult prisoner constituted cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. However, the reality for incarcerated transgender juveniles is much different. It is incredibly hard, if not impossible, for transgender juveniles to obtain access to gender-affirming care while detained. Furthermore, states have begun banning gender-affirming healthcare for all transgender youth. Preliminary injunctions of these laws have been swift and successful; however, transgender juveniles remain left out of the conversation. While being restrained of their …

The New Thoreaus, Mark L. Movsesian

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Fifty years ago, in Wisconsin v. Yoder, the Supreme Court famously indicated that “religion” denotes a communal rather than a purely individual phenomenon. An organized group like the Amish would qualify as religious, the Court wrote, but a solitary seeker like the nineteenth century transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau would not. At the time, the question was mostly peripheral; hardly any Americans claimed to have their own, personal religions that would make it difficult for them to comply with civil law. In the intervening decades, though, American religion has changed. One-fifth of us—roughly sixty-six million people—now claim, like Thoreau, to …

Families, Schools, And Religious Freedom, Helen M. Alvaré

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Old and New Testament scriptures persistently point to human beings’ romantic and familial relationships according to Christian norms as means of glimpsing foundational religious beliefs about God’s identity, how God loves human beings, and how human beings are to love Him and one another. Christian families, therefore, are alarmed to witness public schools educating minors using normative materials directly opposing Christian norms, and doing so outside of courses subject to parental opt-ins or opt- outs. The Supreme Court has not weighed in on the precise question of parental rights respecting particular educational content of this type, but lower federal courts …

Curriculum Censorship Of Lgbtq+ Identity: Modern Adaptation Of Vintage "Save Our Children" Rhetoric Is Still Just Discrimination, Cathryn M. Oakley

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Underpinning Florida’s 2022 “Don’t Say Gay or Trans” law is the same vintage, discriminatory rhetoric that has been invoked to harm LGBTQ+ people for decades: that LGBTQ+ people are deviant and fundamentally sexual, therefore even the most chaste acknowledgement of the existence of LGBTQ+ people is inherently inappropriate for children. LGBTQ+ students, students with LGBTQ+ family members, and LGBTQ+ school employees are protected by the constitution, including the First and Fourteenth amendments as well as federal civil rights law. Whether censorship of LGBTQ+ identities is effectuated directly, as in Florida, or indirectly through opt-outs, the dignitary harm is done. Curriculum …

Introduction, Kathleen Michel Kivarkis

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

San Antonio Independent School District V. Rodriguez At Fifty: Contingencies, Consequences, And Calls To Action, Martha Minow

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

When the Supreme Court of the United States decided San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, the Court’s five-to-four decision not only closed the door to federal courts to predominantly Mexican American low-income students seeking constitutional protection against unequal public education; it also rejected claims of federal constitutional right to equal educational opportunity, rebuffed calls for heightened judicial scrutiny of classifications drawn on the basis of wealth or poverty, and let stand unaltered school finance arrangements producing different per pupil expenditures depending solely on where students live. Setbacks though can inspire. Faced with the decision in Rodriguez, advocates …

Constructing The Establishment Clause, Vincent Phillip Muñoz, Kate Hardiman Rhodes

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

In this Article, we attempt to document how the history of the Supreme Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence is a history of constructionism, much of it—though not all—originalist in flavor. We use “construction” in a technical sense and in contradistinction to “interpretation.” Construction is the act of importing meaning into the constitutional text. To document and explain how leading Supreme Court justices have engaged in originalist constructionism, we employ the interpretation-construction distinction as well as two additional analytical concepts recently discussed by leading legal scholars: Sam Bray’s recovery of “the mischief rule” and Jack Balkin’s textual typology of principles, standards, and …

The Democratic Deficit Of Dobbs, Miranda Mcgowan

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Overturning the fifty-year-old constitutional right to abortion, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization wrapped itself in the mantle of the rule of law. The Dobbs Court claimed that Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey had lawlessly departed from the Court’s established history and tradition test for determining whether an unenumerated right is fundamental and protected by the Constitution. The actual history and tradition test, the Court said, only protects a claimed right as fundamental if positive law had affirmatively protected it when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified. Seeing only abortion restrictions in that narrow time …

Justice Alito, Originalism, And The Aztecs, Andrew Koppelman

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Is Church Autonomy Jurisdictional?, Lael Weinberger

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

The First Amendment’s religion clauses create what courts have called “church autonomy doctrine,” protecting the internal self-governance of religious institutions. But courts are divided as to whether this doctrine is simply an affirmative defense for religious institutions or a jurisdictional limitation on courts’ ability to adjudicate internal religious matters. Scholars, meanwhile, have long debated whether church autonomy is jurisdictional at a higher level of abstraction, speaking of jurisdiction as a concept of authority rather than a technical term for civil procedure. This Article engages this multilevel debate with an argument for unbundling. First, it urges unbundling conceptual jurisdiction from judicial …

Religious Nondelegation, B. Jessie Hill

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

The problem of religious exemptions has given rise to a rich body of scholarly literature, as well as a flood of litigation. One recent set of cases involved challenges to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) health care mandates—Section 1557 and the contraceptive mandate—and their religious exemptions. Some scholars have argued that religious exemptions violate the Establishment Clause when they confer a benefit on religious individuals, the costs of which are largely borne by those who do not share the religious individuals’ beliefs—a notion that is sometimes expressed in terms of “third-party harms.” The third-party harms approach to Establishment Clause violations …

The Major Questions Doctrine: Judicial Activism That Undermines The Democratic Process, Warren Grimes

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Professor Warren Grimes of Southwestern Law School discusses the advent of the ‘major questions’ doctrine in recent Supreme Court jurisprudence, and argues that this school of thought is a form of judicial activism that improperly hinders executive agencies, Congress, and democratic governance as a whole.

Mandatory Judging, Douglas R. Richmond

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

As a matter of judicial ethics, judges must disqualify themselves in matters in which their impartiality may reasonably be questioned. This key principle implicates two additional aspects of judicial ethics: the duty to sit and the rule of necessity. The duty to sit basically describes a judge’s duty to preside over a case unless disqualified as a matter of judicial ethics. Or, phrased another way, a judge must hear a case if her impartiality cannot reasonably be questioned. Recognition of the duty to sit means that judges may not disqualify themselves based on their unease with cases, personal or professional …

Arbitration Under Union-Negotiated Collective-Bargaining Agreements: The Need For Perspicuity When Employees Waive The Right To Pursue Discrimination Claims In Federal Court, Travis Thickstun

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

How clear and unmistakable should arbitration clauses be when employees waive their right to pursue discrimination claims in federal court under union-negotiated collective-bargaining agreements? The United States courts of appeals have been split on this question since the Supreme Court handed down its decisions in Wright v. Universal Maritime Service Corp. and 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett.¹ In Wright, the Court held that waiver in union-negotiated collective-bargaining agreements must be “clear and unmistakable.”² Eleven years later, in Pyett, the Court affirmed its clear-and-unmistakable standard for waiver of a union member’s right to pursue …

On Second Thought: An Empirical Analysis Of When The Supreme Court Decides Not To Decide, Adam Feldman, Taylor R. Dalton

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Supreme Court Justices have a set of tools that allow them to avoid reaching the merits of a legal dispute even if the Court decides to hear the case by granting a petition for a writ of certiorari. Certain Supreme Court decisions relying on such tools are clear on their face—that is, case dimensions, delimiting the justiciability of a matter, are being evaluated because the Court wants to clarify the viability of the case. This Article looks at other rationales for the Court’s decisions not to rule on the merits after granting a case to the merits docket. In particular, …

A Call For Better Abortion Data: Common Ground Amid Dobbs And The Abortion Debate, J. Jackson Hill

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

There is room for compromise in the U.S. abortion debate. Specifically, improving abortion data is an untapped issue with significant bipartisan appeal. Better data will lead to more-informed abortion policy and promote shared public health priorities, like the reduction of unintended pregnancies. Unfortunately, the current abortion reporting system falls short of providing these benefits. There is no national law governing the collection and reporting of abortion data. Americans must therefore rely on information voluntarily provided to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Guttmacher Institute. The result is data that is inaccurate, non-uniform, and untimely. To remedy the …

States’ Duty Under The Federal Elections Clause And A Federal Right To Education, Evan H. Caminker

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Fifty years ago, in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, the Supreme Court failed to address one of the preeminent civil rights issues of our generation—substandard and inequitable public education—by holding that the federal Constitution does not protect a general right to education. The Court didn’t completely close the door on a narrower argument that the Constitution guarantees “an opportunity to acquire the basic minimal skills necessary for the enjoyment of the rights of speech and of full participation in the political process.” Both litigants and scholars have been trying ever since to push that door open, pressing …

The Inequity Of Third-Party Bail Practices, Judge Patrick Carroll

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

For many criminal defendants, a common source of bail funds is their own family or friends. Such individuals typically assist in the expectation that if the defendant complies with court orders and satisfies all court appearances, their money will be returned to them. In revenue-motivated court systems, however, bail funds--even when owned by a third party--are often applied to the defendant's fines and court costs, resulting in the effective forfeiture of the friend or relative's money. This Article reviews the processes of third-party bonds, the risk that a third-party bond will be incorrectly identified as the defendant's asset, and the …

Introduction To Issue 3

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Illinois Cannabis Social-Equity Program: Toward A Socially Just Peace In The War On Drugs?, Andre Douglas Pond Cummings, Steven A. Ramirez

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Laudably, when Illinois legalized the recreational use of cannabis, it also sought to repair the damage wrought by the War on Drugs (WOD) through its social-equity initiatives. That harm included excessive and disproportionate incarceration in communities of color, over-policing within those communities, and all of the social and economic harms implicit in those realities. This harm necessarily creates intergenerational harm, as parents and children lose necessary pillars of support. Moreover, compelling evidence suggests that the progenitors of the WOD intended this harm. Measured against this historic social injustice, the social equity efforts in Illinois fail to secure a material unwinding …

Introduction To Issue Two

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.