Law Commons^™

Discharging Equity: Harrington V. Purdue Pharma L.P. And The Validity Of Nonconsensual Third-Party Releases, Andrew Klauber

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

In September 2019, Purdue Pharma L.P. petitioned for bankruptcy in the Southern District of New York. Purdue, which the Sackler family had owned and operated for decades, developed and aggressively marketed addictive opioid products, contributing to the modern opioid epidemic. The tsunami of litigation arising from the opioid epidemic gave rise to claims against Purdue and the Sackler family estimated to total more than $40 trillion, causing Purdue to petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

In Purdue’s plan of reorganization, it employed a nonconsensual third-party release to discharge claims against the Sackler family. Nonconsensual third-party releases controversially enjoin parties to a …

Disentangling Race And Politics: Racial Gerrymandering In South Carolina's First Congressional District, Matthew Poliakoff

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

After the 2020 Census, South Carolina's Republican-controlled legislature redrew the boundaries for Congressional District 1, historically anchored in Charleston County. After thirty-thousand African American voters were moved out of District 1 and into District 6, the South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP challenged the new map as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. A three-judge district court panel agreed, finding that race predominated above other factors in the map redraw. On appeal, the question remains not only whether the state legislature used race above other factors in its map design, but also how plaintiffs are expected to prove these claims in …

Full Faith And Credit In The Post-Roe Era, Celia P. Janes

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

In 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, once again leaving the question of whether abortion should be legal to individual state legislatures. This decision allowed the Texas law known as S.B. 8, alternatively known as the Texas Heartbeat Act, to go into effect. The law allows private individuals to sue anyone who has performed or has aided and abetted the performance or inducement of an abortion in Texas. California responded to this law with Assembly Bill 2091, which prevents California state courts from issuing subpoenas arising under S.B. 8 and similar laws in other states. This Note addresses …

Communication With Public Officials In The Modern Age Of Social Media: Does It Violate The First Amendment When Public Officials Block Private Individuals From Their Social Media Pages?, Emily Cohen

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

In the modern world, social media dominates. It is considered an almost essential function of public officials, ranging from the President of the United States to local politicians, to maintain at least one social media page to keep the public updated on their policies and current events. As public officials shift toward social media to communicate with the public, these social media sites become the new spaces for public discourse, with members of the public often commenting on or responding to public officials' posts. As more public discourse occurs on these sites, and individuals begin to criticize their public officials …

Upholding The Domestic Violence Firearm Prohibitors Under Bruen’S Second Amendment, Samantha L. Fawcett

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Federal law prohibits individuals subject to a domestic violence protective order (§ 922(g)(8)) or convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors (§ 922(g)(9)) from possessing firearms. Before New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, these commonsense gun laws had generally been considered uncontroversial, both in terms of their broad popular support and their constitutionality under the Second Amendment. In Bruen, however, the Supreme Court held that when a regulation burdens a Second Amendment right, the regulation must be consistent with American historical tradition, meaning that the regulation must be analogous to a pattern of historical firearm regulation.

After …

Historic Preservation: Launched From Grand Central Terminal, But Derailing, Kraz Greinetz

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

In Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York, the Supreme Court authorized the practice of historic preservation. Ruling that when a city designates a building as "historic" and therefore restricting its development, it is not a "taking" of private property that requires just compensation under the Fifth Amendment. Since that time, historic preservation has proliferated in America's cities. But it's time for another look. Since Penn Central was decided, the facts and law of property regulation in the United States have changed. And the decision, which was wrong from an originalist perspective when it was decided, has …

Redlining Reimagined: "Race-Neutral Alternatives" In The Likely Wake Of Affirmative Action, Margaret Kruzner

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

For a decade, Justice Clarence Thomas has sharply criticized the Court's treatment of affirmative action, the race-conscious university admissions processed used to pursue the educational benefits associated with diverse classrooms. Calling affirmative action a "faddish theory" that the "Constitution abhors," Justice Thomas signaled his readiness to overrule Grutter v. Bollinger, which endorsed the practice in 2003.

Justice Thomas and the Court's originalist Justices have a new opportunity to strike down affirmative action in the Students for Fair Admissions litigation. Students for Fair Admissions, a non-profit organization founded by Edward Blum, is suing Harvard College and the University of North …

Moore V. Harper: The Independent State Legislature Theory And The Court At The Brink, Braden Fain

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Moore v. Harper tasks the Supreme Court with considering a fringe legal idea known as the Independent State Legislature Theory (ISLT). Donald Trump gave ISLT new life by invoking the theory during his attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Instead of presidential elections, the litigation in Moore concerns congressional elections and partisan gerrymandering. Were the Court to accept ISLT, the theory would render states effectively impotent to curb gerrymandering and would aggrandize the Court's authority in federal elections. Scholars have recognized the theory's threat to American democracy and have accordingly produced a detailed record debunking the ISLT. …

The Spirit Of Gun Laws, Noah Levine

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The firearms debate in the United States often pits public health against freedom. This false dichotomy implies that gun laws, even wise ones, inherently erode individual liberty. Indeed, this appeal to liberty finds fertile ground in the United States, where many Americans intuitively reject any incursion on their freedom. Yet this one-sided conception of liberty is, at best, incomplete: while the government can certainly encroach on our freedom, so too can our fellow citizens.

A historically grounded conception of liberty in the United States includes the sense of security that fosters self-expression without fear of arbitrary constraint. That is, when …

Allen V. Milligan: Anticlassification And The Voting Rights Act, Graham Stinnett

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The "crown jewel" of the Civil Rights Movement, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 has been called "one of the most effective statutes ever enacted." However, in 2013 the Supreme Court famously gutted the Voting Rights Act in Shelby County v. Holder. Nearly a decade later, in Allen v. Milligan, the Court is now signaling that Section 2, the last remaining core provision of the Voting Rights Act, could be on the chopping block. With Milligan, the Court may be preparing to inject race-neutrality into Section 2, which could destroy the vestiges of the onetime "super-statute."

This …

Protecting Natural Stewardship: Public Trusts, Wildlife Trusts, And The Effect Of Trophic Cascades, Nicholas Massey

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The reintroduction of the Gray Wolf to the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem conferred extensive ecological benefits to the region. The wolves' return resulted in a phenomenon known as a "trophic cascade," in which the presence of apex predators atop a food pyramid effectuates a "waterfall" of ecosystem-wide benefits. For example, the Gray Wolf has curtailed bloated elk populations, which has in turn reduced the damage of elk herds overgrazing on willow, aspen, and cottonwood plants—critical sources of food for the region's beavers. Importantly, the wolves' benefits are not confined to flora and fauna. Scientists have even discovered geological and riparian benefits …

Match Up: Increasing Disclosure Of Facial Recognition Technology With Criminal Discovery Rules, Paget Barranco

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Facial recognition technology (FRT) is an automated computer tool that compares the image of one face in a target image to one or more images of other faces. Law enforcement at both the federal and state levels increasingly use FRT to identify unknown perpetrators of crimes. FRT has great potential to generate investigative leads and assist in solving crimes, but there are issues with the technology and a lack of transparency about how it is used. Further, law enforcement and prosecutors may not disclose information about the FRT search results that they relied on to identify a suspect, affecting defense …

Too Much Salt: Rejecting The Pass-Through Entity Tax As A Salt Deduction Cap Workaround, Timothy Gray Ingram

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Historically, U.S. taxpayers have been able to deduct their state and local taxes from their federal taxable income. This changed with the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which introduced a $10,000 cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction. States have reacted by turning to various methods to mitigate the negative tax consequences of the cap for their residents, including workarounds that use the charitable contribution deduction or a payroll tax as a means to allow full deductibility of state and local taxes.

With the IRS striking down the charitable contribution workaround, and the …

Cannabis Drug Development And The Controlled Substances Act, Gabrielle Feliciani

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Cannabis is a federally illegal drug in the United States, yet thirty-seven states and four territories have now enacted laws allowing the production, distribution, and consumption of cannabis for medical use. An estimated 5.5 million individuals in medical-use states are qualified to purchase cannabis to treat and mitigate symptoms for conditions ranging from cancer to post-traumatic stress disorder to chronic pain. But, only three cannabis drugs have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

The current state of federal illegality creates a problem of supply and demand—consumer demand for cannabis is high, but the number of approved drug …

It Ain't Real Funky Unless It's Got That Pop: Artistic Fair Use After Goldsmith, Benjamin A. Spencer

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The Pop Art style pioneered by artists such as Paolozzi, Lichtenstein, and Rauschenberg challenged notions of what art could be by recasting common objects and images into new contexts, transforming them into pieces that served as both cultural commentary and novel expression. Though examination of an artwork's meaning or message may seem more natural for a critic or curator, the Supreme Court will have a chance to weigh in with Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts v. Goldsmith. Here, the court will decide whether a Warhol painting based on a photograph of Prince is protected by fair use. …

A Way Forward After Dobbs: Human Rights Advocacy And Self-Managed Abortion In The United States, Kelly Keglovits

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Even in the era before Dobbs, wherein the Supreme Court repeatedly classified abortion as a "fundamental right," the ability to have an abortion was inaccessible in many parts of the United States. The irony that a "fundamental right" was so difficult to exercise results from how Constitutional rights are understood, which left many open-ended avenues for states to bring restrictions. International Human Rights law, however, offers a more optimistic and accountable approach to steps forward in increasing abortion access—illustrating a need to bring a human rights-based approach home. Dobbs has eviscerated any concept of federal protections for abortion, severely worsening …

Done The Time, Still Being Punished For The Crime: The Irrationality Of Collateral Consequences In Occupational Licensing And Fourteenth Amendment Challenges, Mccarley Maddock

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Traditionally, retributive models of criminal justice rely on incarceration as punishment for a crime. Under this theory, punishment should end when the offender is released from prison. Yet, a decentralized web of statutes across the United States undermines this commonsense notion and continues to punish formerly incarcerated persons by denying them access to basic services for re-entry into society such as housing, government benefits, and employment. Specifically, thousands of the formerly incarcerated individuals are barred from working in or pursuing a career of their choice based on state statutes that prohibit entry into a given profession based on criminal history. …

Universalizing Fraud, Parmida Enkeshafi

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The criminal trial of Elizabeth Holmes has reanimated public interest in fraud. Holmes, once a Silicon Valley prodigy, was charged with two counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and eleven counts of wire fraud. A jury found Holmes guilty on four counts, potentially subjecting her to 80 years in prison. This Note uses the example of Elizabeth Holmes's case to examine more broadly the role of morality in fraud and argues for a new framework by which to articulate and prosecute fraud.

Criminal jurisprudence has struggled to construct a satisfactory definition of "white-collar crime" since sociologist Edwin H. Sutherland …

The Shurtleff Conundrum: Resolving The Conflict In Government-Speech And Public Forum Analysis, James Walraven

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Shurtleff v. Boston is the Supreme Court's latest opportunity to clarify the murky line between the "government-speech" and "public forum" doctrines. The Court will decide whether the City of Boston violated the Free Speech Clause by refusing to fly a flag with Christian imagery in front of City Hall. The City had previously allowed the flying of numerous national and cultural flags by various organizations, but refused to fly a conservative social organization's "Christian flag" because of the City's fear of appearing to endorse a particular religion.

Under the public forum doctrine, private citizens' free speech is protected to varying …

Xiaomi Corporation V. U.S. Department Of Defense: Defending The International Emergency Economic Powers Act, Bailey Williams

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) provides the Executive with emergency authority to act in the realm of foreign affairs and national security. As global power struggles increasingly play out in financial markets as opposed to battle fields, the United States is leveraging global capital markets, banking, and financial systems to effectuate national security goals – and is relying on IEEPA to do so. However, critics argue IEEPA lacks appropriate procedural safeguards given the courts' general deference to the Executive acting pursuant to national security and the corresponding lack of Congressional oversight.

After assessing various criticisms of IEEPA, this …

Noncitizens' Rights In The Face Of Prolonged Detention: Johnson V. Arteaga-Martinez, Samantha L. Fawcett

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Under the Immigration and Nationality Act (the "INA"), codified in part at 8 U.S.C. § 1231, the federal government generally has ninety days to successfully deport a detained noncitizen who has reentered illegally after being removed once before. While exceptions to this time limit exist, the United States Supreme Court determined in 2001 that detention under Section 1231 cannot be indefinite.[1]

Now, more than two decades later, the Court must elaborate further. In Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez, the Court must decide how long a detainment can last beyond the ninety-day statutory limit while a detainee seeks relief from deportation through …

Name And Shame: How International Pressure Allows Civil Rights Activists To Incorporate Human Rights Norms Into American Jurisprudence, Lily Talerman

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The United States has ratified international human rights treaties sparingly. Where it has ratified, it has provided such a large number of reservations that the treaties’ domestic effects are effectively nullified. Even though international human rights law has not been directly incorporated into American jurisprudence, however, international human rights norms have greatly affected civil rights provisions in the United States by naming and shaming American civil rights abuses. Recognizing the relatively low success rate of tackling systemic racism in the United States through treaty implementation, this Note instead argues that naming and shaming American civil and human rights abuses more …

Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization And The Likely End Of The Roe V. Wade Era, Jeffrey Hannan

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

F.B.I. V. Fazaga: The Secret Of The State-Secrets Privilege, Rebecca Reeves

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

When the government successfully invokes the state-secrets privilege, it allows for evidence to be excluded from trial if making that evidence public would threaten national security. It is unclear, however, under what circumstances this privilege can be invoked, what happens when it is successfully invoked, and what occurs after the evidence is excluded. In Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fazaga, the Supreme Court will have the opportunity to clarify the state-secrets privilege. Additionally, the Court will be asked to determine whether the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) displaces this privilege when the government invokes it regarding evidence …

Proper Cause For Concern: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association V. Bruen, Ali Rosenblatt

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Gun rights and gun control advocates alike are watching the Supreme Court, to see what happens in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. In this pivotal Second Amendment case, the Court finds its first opportunity to substantially extend its 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, and to define the scope of the Second Amendment right to bear arms outside the home. The Court can decide this case narrowly by limiting its decision to the statutes at issue, New York’s “proper cause” regime (the “New York law”). Alternatively, the Court can rule broadly and use …

Addressing Interstate Ground Water Ownership: Mississippi V. Tennessee, Alec Sweet

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Contemporaneous with significant climate change and heightened environmental concerns, the Supreme Court has seen an increasing number of water-related lawsuits between states. These lawsuits include disputes over water storage and water compacts as well as disputes over water usage affecting aquaculture. Scientists predict that in the future, the United States could face rising temperatures, droughts, and natural disasters. If states cannot cooperate to conserve the water they share, these catastrophes could cause immense suffering and numerous conflicts between states. The Supreme Court needs a consistent doctrine to apply in water disputes.

In prior disputes over surface water, the Court has …

Privilege In Peril: U.S. V. Zubaydah And The State Secrets Privilege, Alana Mattei

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

U.S. v. Zubaydah presents an opportunity for the Court to settle the scope of the state secrets privilege and the role of the judiciary when the government invokes a claim of privilege. The state secrets privilege, invoked by the executive, gives courts the power to prevent the disclosure of information that could pose a threat to national security by excluding the particular evidence or dismissing the case. The Court will decide whether the Ninth Circuit erred by rejecting the Government’s assertion of the state secrets privilege over the depositions of former CIA contractors requested by Abu Zubaydah. The Ninth Circuit …

Protecting Procedural Safeguards In Federal Capital Trials: United States V. Tsarnaev, Ashley Dabiere

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The Commentary considers the constitutionality of (1) the trial court’s exclusion of relevant mitigating evidence during the trial’s penalty phase and (2) the imposition of a death sentence by the Supreme Court during a moratorium on federal executions. In the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, the jury ultimately convicted Dzhokhar of thirty counts and recommended death sentences for six of the capital offenses. On appeal, the First Circuit vacated these death sentences and remanded the case for a new sentencing hearing with a different jury. First, the Court of Appeals held that the voir dire used …

Fourth Amendment Limits On Extensive Quarantine Surveillance, Benjamin Wolters

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The devastation wreaked by the COVID-19 pandemic spurred innovations in technology and public policy. Many countries rushed to implement extensive quarantines, and some introduced disease surveillance, including location tracking to enforce quarantines. Though the United States has never implemented high-tech quarantine surveillance, such technology will certainly be available for the next disease outbreak.

Absent significant doctrinal change, the Fourth Amendment likely bars some, but not all, forms of quarantine surveillance. Quarantine surveillance probably constitutes a Fourth Amendment “search” that generally must be backed by probable cause. This probable cause requirement, and its subcomponent of individualized suspicion, likely applies differently to …

Trouble With Names: Commercial Speech And A New Approach To Food Product Label Regulation, William Cusack

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The Supreme Court has recognized First Amendment protection for “commercial speech” since 1975. Commercial speech doctrine seeks to balance advertiser interest in speech, consumer interest in information, and society’s interest that “economic decisions in the aggregate be intelligent and well-informed.” Regulations and compulsory disclosures of commercial speech play a part in ensuring consumers are well-informed. Yet, there continues to be consumer confusion surrounding the commercial speech doctrine’s application to food labeling. Lawmakers continue to pass regulations that are unnecessary or nonsensical. Regulators continue to enforce these regulations, even if the state interest in doing so is minimal or non-existent. There …