Law Commons^™

Public Employees As A Reflection Of A Religiously Diverse Culture, Steven T. Collis

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

For decades, scholars and jurists have debated over whether government violates

the Establishment Clause when it endorses religion or if coercion is required. In

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, the Supreme Court put this argument to

rest, at least as to public employees. It grounded its decision in some form of

originalism. While that will be sufficient to satisfy some readers, others will want to be

assured of the wisdom of the rule originalism demands. This Essay argues that a

coercion test for the private religious exercise of public employees is appropriate for a

pluralistic society.

It offers four …

Thoughts On The Architecture Of Freedom Of Religion And Freedom Of Speech, Perry Dane

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

This symposium was convened to explore the rights of businesses

and employees to invoke freedom of religion or freedom of expression

to resist certain forms of state regulation. The most immediate

occasions for that discussion, at least for my purposes, are cases such

as 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, in which the Supreme Court upheld the

right of a website designer to refuse to design a wedding website for a

same-sex couple. These sorts of cases, which pit the religious or

expressive rights of conscientious believers against the equality rights

of others, have proliferated in recent years.

I have …

First Amendment Imbalance: Kennedy V. Bremerton School District, Steven K. Green

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

This Essay seeks to unpack the competing legal claims presented by a public-school employee engaging in religious expression in conjunction with their work duties and in the presence of students. The competing First Amendment issues are several: nonestablishment, free exercise, free speech (including the government-employee speech doctrine), and parental expressive rights. These various issues came to a head in 2022 in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District where a Court majority affirmed the right of a high school football coach to engage in demonstrative prayers on the football field at the conclusion of a game. In so holding, the majority prioritized …

Ordinary Conscience And Pretend Offenses: Protecting Those Left Out Of Title Vii After Groff, Robin Fretwell Wilson, Michael J. Petersen

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Part I reviews America’s foundational commitment to fairness and transparency by government, as well as the deep respect the Founders believed should be accorded to conscience specifically.

Part II applauds the unanimous decision in Groff to walk back the Supreme Court’s grievous error in Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison. We canvas illustrative cases pre-Groff in which employees, notwithstanding Hardison’s “de minimis” burden standard, proceeded to trial, and instances in which employees did not. We also illustrate how, post-Groff, employees are, rightfully, having an easier time getting to trial.

Even as Groff makes actual Title …

Cleaning The Mess Of 303 Creative V. Elenis, Netta Barak-Corren

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

No piece of academic writing can clean, by itself, the mess left by 303 Creative v. Elenis. Only the Court can. This symposium piece can only offer analytical clarity on 303 Creative, which can help to understand and organize the mess. I will proceed to do so in three steps. First, I point out the glaring omissions of the Court’s opinion and criticize the dangerous consequences of the Court’s inexplicable approach. Second, I discuss the inconsistency of the dissent and the truth it reveals about the unviability of its sweeping position. Finally, I argue that the only way …

Guns, Analogies, And Constitutional Interpretation Across Centuries, Frederick Schauer, Barbara A. Spellman

Notre Dame Law Review

In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court acknowledged the difficulties in applying its constitutional originalism to the question of firearms regulation. After all, the fully automatic assault rifles whose sale, possession, and use lie at the center of many contemporary debates about gun control and the Second Amendment simply did not exist in 1791, when the Second Amendment was ratified. Nor did they exist in 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment, the vehicle for applying the Second Amendment to the states, was added to the Constitution. The firearms that existed in 1791 were largely …

The General-Law Right To Bear Arms, William Baude, Robert Leider

Notre Dame Law Review

In this Article, we argue that Bruen's intended methodological shift has been widely misunderstood by the bench and bar. This has led to confusion and misapplication in the lower courts, as well as much scholarly criticism of the test that is, we think, misdirected. As we will explain, Bruen calls for a form of legal originalism, applying a classical view of fundamental rights as a form of unwritten customary law. This is consistent with the text and history of the Constitution and leads to results that are less mechanical and more sensible than many lower courts have thought. Understanding …

Bruen’S Enforcement Puzzle: Unearthing And Adjudicating The Historical Enforcement Record In Second Amendment Cases, Andrew Willinger

Notre Dame Law Review

The Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen brings historical complexity to the fore by instituting a history-focused test for the Second Amendment that demands analogues from the Founding or Reconstruction eras to support modern gun regulations. The majority opinion in Bruen considers, in multiple places, how certain historical gun regulations may have been enforced. In each instance, the Court suggests that evidence of racially disparate enforcement of a historical law is relevant to whether that law is part of the American historical tradition and an appropriate analogue. Historical enforcement data appear to …

Technology, Tradition, And “The Terror Of The People”, Darrell A.H. Miller, Alexandra Filindra, Noah Kaplan

Notre Dame Law Review

In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court mandated a text, history, tradition, and analogy–only approach to Second Amendment cases.

No longer can policymakers rely on empirical data alone to carry their litigation burden. Now such data must conform to a still-emerging “historical tradition of firearm regulation” to meet constitutional muster. Some despair that reams of data, careful experiments, and rigorous statistical analyses no longer have any relevance to the gun debate.

But those that claim that Bruen signals the end of empirically grounded policy solutions badly misread the opinion. Empirical studies can still …

Strengthening State Constitutions, Jared C. Huber

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note argues that state constitutions should have more difficult amendment procedures than most states currently do. Part I highlights the ease of amending most state constitutions by evaluating state constitutional amendment procedures. Next, Part II argues that because constitutions are fundamental, organizing laws, their amendment procedures should reflect such status. Finally, Part III of this Note examines state constitutional amendments that resulted from national political turmoil and argues amendment procedures should be stringent enough to temper such reactionism. If a constitution is to be a constitution, it must be resilient enough to function as one. State constitutions largely fail …

Historical Fact, Ryan C. Williams

Notre Dame Law Review

The growing emphasis on history as a criterion of constitutional decision-making in Supreme Court jurisprudence has raised the importance of a distinctive type of judicial fact-finding—namely, the investigation and resolution of contested questions of historical fact. Although history has always played an important role in constitutional adjudication, its primary role has traditionally been as an input to constitutional interpretation. But in cases like New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Court has increasingly demanded that factual determinations regarding the content, meaning, purposes, and effects of decisions taken in the distant past should also guide the lower …

Diverse Originalism, History & Tradition, Christina Mulligan

Notre Dame Law Review

The Supreme Court’s New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen decision appears to be an originalist opinion, ostensibly looking for the meaning of the Constitution’s text by looking to the public’s understanding of the language used. But Bruen's test actually fails to follow a public meaning originalist methodology. The Court focuses present-day constitutional interpreters on evidence of constitutional meaning that only reflects a portion of the public—the politically empowered men who were in a position to pass legislation. Two unfortunate outcomes follow. First, by limiting potential evidence of public meaning so severely, the Court raises the risk …

The History Of Bans On Types Of Arms Before 1900, David B. Kopel, Joseph G.S. Greenlee

Journal of Legislation

This Article describes the history of bans on particular types of arms in America, through 1899. It also describes arms bans in England until the time of American independence. Arms encompassed in this article include firearms, knives, swords, blunt weapons, and many others. While arms advanced considerably from medieval England through the nineteenth-century United States, bans on particular types of arms were rare.

Pretrial Commitment And The Fourth Amendment, Laurent Sacharoff

Notre Dame Law Review

Today, the Fourth Amendment Warrant Clause governs arrest warrants and search warrants only. But in the founding era, the Warrant Clause governed a third type of warrant: the “warrant of commitment.” Judges issued these warrants to jail defendants pending trial. This Article argues that the Fourth Amendment Warrant Clause, with its oath and probable cause standard, should be understood today to apply to this third type of warrant. That means the Warrant Clause would govern any initial appearance where a judge first commits a defendant—a process that currently falls far short of fulfilling its constitutional and historical function. History supports …

Proportionalities, Youngjae Lee

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

“Proportionality” is ubiquitous. The idea that punishment should be proportional to crime is familiar in criminal law and has a lengthy history. But that is not the only place where one encounters the concept of proportionality in law and ethics. The idea of proportionality is important also in the self-defense context, where the right to defend oneself with force is limited by the principle of proportionality. Proportionality plays a role in the context of war, especially in the idea that the military advantage one side may draw from an attack must not be excessive in relation to the loss of …

An Originalist Approach To Puerto Rico: Arguments Against The Status Quo, Micah Allred

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Few originalists have grappled with a fundamental question about Puerto Rico: whether the Constitution permits the United States to hold the island indefinitely as nonstate territory. There are reasons to doubt that it does. The main purpose of the Constitution’s territorial provisions was to allow Congress to transition the then West-ern Territory into states. And, as a structural matter, Congress’s direct authority over Puerto Ricans conflicts with important constitutional principles such as federalism. But for originalists, arguments from purpose and structure are helpful only insofar as they elucidate the original meaning of the Constitution’s text. This Article lays out two …

Who Is A Minister? Originalist Deference Expands The Ministerial Exception, Jared C. Huber

Notre Dame Law Review

The ministerial exception is a doctrine born out of the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment that shields many religious institutions’ employment decisions from review. While the ministerial exception does not extend to all employment decisions by, or employees of, religious institutions, it does confer broad—and absolute—protection. While less controversy surrounds whether the Constitution shields religious institutions’ employment decisions to at least some extent, much more debate surrounds the exception’s scope, and perhaps most critically, which employees fall under it. In other words, who is a "minister" for purposes of the ministerial exception?

On Traditionalism In Free Speech Law, R. George Wright

Journal of Legislation

No abstract provided.

State Sovereign Immunity And The New Purposivism, Anthony J. Bellia, Bradford R. Clark

Journal Articles

Since the Constitution was first proposed, courts and commentators have debated the extent to which it alienated the States’ preexisting sovereign immunity from suit by individuals. During the ratification period, these debates focused on the language of the citizen-state diversity provisions of Article III. After the Supreme Court read these provisions to abrogate state sovereign immunity in Chisholm v. Georgia, Congress and the States adopted the Eleventh Amendment to prohibit this construction. The Court subsequently ruled that States enjoy sovereign immunity independent of the Eleventh Amendment, which neither conferred nor diminished it. In the late twentieth-century, Congress began enacting statutes …

Does The Discourse On 303 Creative Portend A Standing Realignment?, Richard M. Re

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Perhaps the most surprising feature of the last Supreme Court Term was the extraordinary public discourse on 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis. According to many commentators, the Court decided what was really a “fake” or “made-up” case brought by someone who asserted standing merely because “she worries.” As a doctrinal matter, these criticisms are unfounded. But what makes this episode interesting is that the criticisms came from the legal Left, which has long been associated with expansive principles of standing. Doubts about standing in 303 Creative may therefore portend a broader standing realignment, in which liberal Justices become jurisdictionally hawkish. …

Congressional Power To Institute A Wealth Tax, Will Clark

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Over the last few years, several high-profile politicians have pushed to impose a federal “wealth tax.” For example, a recent bill introduced in the Senate would create a two percent tax on the value of assets between fifty million and one billion dollars, plus a higher percentage on wealth valued over one billion dollars. The proponents of the tax argue that it would reduce the growing wealth inequality in the United States, while opponents say that it would disincentivize investment in the American economy.

Policy arguments, however, are only relevant if the federal government has the authority to institute such …

An Originalist Approach To Prospective Overruling, John O. Mcginnis, Michael Rappaport

Notre Dame Law Review

Originalism has become a dominant jurisprudential theory on the Supreme Court. But a large number of precedents are inconsistent with the Constitution’s original meaning and overturning them risks creating enormous disruption to the legal order. This article defends a prospective overruling approach that would harmonize precedent with originalism’s rise and reduce the disruption from overrulings. Under prospective overruling, the Court declares that an existing statute violates the original meaning but will continue to be enforced because declaring it unconstitutional would produce enormous costs; however, future statutes of this type will be voided as unconstitutional. Under our approach, the Court would …

Converse-Osborn: State Sovereign Immunity, Standing, And The Dog-Wagging Effect Of Article Iii, Carlos M. Vázquez

Notre Dame Law Review

“[T]he legislative, executive, and judicial powers, of every well constructed government, are co-extensive with each other . . . . [T]he judicial department may receive from the Legislature the power of construing every . . . law [which the Legislature may constitutionally make].” Chief Justice Marshall relied on this axiom in Osborn v. Bank of the United States to stress the breadth of the federal judicial power: the federal courts must have the potential power to adjudicate any claim based on any law Congress has the power to enact. In recent years, however, the axiom has sometimes operated in the …

The Myth Of The Federal Private Nondelegation Doctrine, Alexander Volokh

Notre Dame Law Review

Judges and scholars have often claimed that delegations of governmental power to private parties are constitutionally prohibited. However, such a “private nondelegation doctrine” is elusive, if not nonexistent. To understand why, first we need to realize that there are actually several distinct nondelegation doctrines. I develop a taxonomy that makes sense of these various doc-trines by focusing on the different reasons why a delegation might be problematic. A nondelegation doctrine might be “giver-based” (can Congress delegate this power?), “recipient-based” (can the recipient exercise this power?), or “application-based” (will the application of this power be unjust?). Once we distinguish these doctrines, …

The "Nonministerial" Exception, Athanasius G. Sirilla

Notre Dame Law Review

In 2014, Charlotte Catholic High School declined to continue Lonnie Billard’s employment as a substitute drama teacher after he publicly announced, via Facebook, that he and his same-sex partner were getting civilly married. Billard sued the school in the Western District of North Carolina for unlawful employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act due to his sexual orientation. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Billard. The court first held that the high school’s actions could constitute unlawful sex discrimination in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County. The district court …

Reversing Incorporation, Ilan Wurman

Notre Dame Law Review

It is originalist gospel that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause was intended, at a minimum, to incorporate the Bill of Rights against the states. This Article revisits forty years of scholarship and concludes that this modern consensus is likely mistaken. Reconstructing antebellum discourse on fundamental rights reveals that the historical players assumed that every state must, as all free governments had to, guarantee and secure natural rights to their citizens. But that did not mean the states regulated these rights in the same way, nor did that dictate what the federal government’s role would be in guaranteeing and …

Severability And Standing Puzzles In The Law Of Removal Power, Jack Ferguson

Notre Dame Law Review

One of the “oldest and most venerable debates in U.S. constitutional law” concerns the President’s ability to fire executive branch officers. That debate shows little sign of subsiding. In recent years, the Supreme Court has decided a number of removal power cases that reflect an increasingly formalist turn. These cases have endorsed a version of the unitary executive theory and blessed the President’s ability to remove nominally independent officials. When it comes to questions of severability and remedy, however, the formalist majorities have fractured. Collins v. Yellen, decided in 2021, provides the most illuminating example. Justices Thomas and Gorsuch concurred …

Catholic Liberalism And The Liberal Tradition, Kathleen A. Brady

Notre Dame Law Review

Criticisms of liberalism are nothing new. All political traditions have their detractors, and as in the past, today’s critics of liberalism include those on the left and right as well as religious believers and those without religious affiliations. However, in very recent years, far-reaching and deepening critiques have been emerging from an unlikely source. Throughout American history, the nation’s religious communities have been among the strongest defenders of religious freedom as well as other fundamental liberal values such as limited government, democratic institutions, civic equality, and other civil freedoms. Conservative Christians have been no exception. With other Americans, they have …

Christians And/As Liberals?, Steven D. Smith

Notre Dame Law Review

Christianity and liberalism were made to fit each other, like hand and glove. According to some interpretations, anyway. Liberal constitutionalism, with its commitments to freedom and equal human dignity, is the political system that reflects and embodies Christian commitments; and the constitutional legal order that accompanies liberalism, centrally including legally enforced rights of religious freedom, is the mode of government that best permits Christians to live in accordance with their faith in a fallen and deviant world. Thus, a couple of decades ago, Robert Kraynak reported that “[a]lmost all churches and theologians now believe that the form of government most …

"The Arc Of The Moral Universe": Christian Eschatology And U.S. Constitutionalism, Nathan S. Chapman

Notre Dame Law Review

This Essay first attempts to understand how a contested Christian doctrine found its way into constitutional law. It does so through a reverse genealogy of ideas—an archaeology, perhaps. The Essay begins by sketching how U.S. constitutionalism, in both theory and doctrine, reflects the belief that the “arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” It then suggests that underlying this constitutional theme is a merger of two features of American civil religion: the tradition of treating the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as the central texts of a sacred canon and the belief that America …