Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Supreme Court of the United States (366)
- Constitutional Law (106)
- Courts (50)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (43)
- Judges (30)
-
- First Amendment (28)
- Criminal Law (21)
- Election Law (16)
- Criminal Procedure (15)
- Legal History (15)
- Commercial Law (11)
- Labor and Employment Law (9)
- Property Law and Real Estate (8)
- Law and Politics (7)
- Legal Biography (7)
- American Politics (6)
- Education Law (6)
- Political Science (6)
- Religion Law (6)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (6)
- Business (5)
- Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics (5)
- Environmental Law (4)
- Fourth Amendment (4)
- Jurisdiction (4)
- Fourteenth Amendment (3)
- International Law (3)
- Juvenile Law (3)
- Law and Gender (3)
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 373
Full-Text Articles in Law
The New Insular Cases, Willie Santana
The New Insular Cases, Willie Santana
William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice
The Insular Cases is a name given to a series of cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court dealing with the status of the territories the United States acquired at the turn of the twentieth century. The Insular Cases rely on outmoded assumptions about the peoples who live in those islands, ninety-eight percent of whom belong to racial and ethnic minorities, and extend the extraconstitutional doctrine of territorial incorporation, a Plessy-style doctrine of separate governance for these territories that is different than the territories that preceded them. These cases, and the doctrine they announced, have been universally decried as …
Constitutional Memories, Jack M. Balkin
Constitutional Memories, Jack M. Balkin
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Many arguments in constitutional law invoke collective memory. Collective memory is what a group—for example, a religion, a profession, a people, or a nation—remembers and forgets about its past. This combination of remembering and forgetting helps constitute the group’s identity and structures its values and its commitments. Precisely because memory is selective, it may or may not correspond to the best account of historical facts.
The use of collective memory in constitutional argument is constitutional memory. It shapes people’s views about what the law means and why people have authority. Lawyers and judges continually invoke and construct memory; judicial decisions …
A New Takings Clause? The Implications Of Cedar Point Nursery V. Hassid For Property Rights And Moratoria, Benjamin Alexander Mogren
A New Takings Clause? The Implications Of Cedar Point Nursery V. Hassid For Property Rights And Moratoria, Benjamin Alexander Mogren
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
In part, the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution holds that “no person . . . shall [have their] private property . . . taken for public use, without just compensation.” In Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “a California regulation that permits union organizers to enter the property of agricultural business to talk with employees about supporting a union is unconstitutional.” The purpose of this Note is to discuss what Cedar Point Nursery means generally for the future of Takings Clause analysis and will argue that Cedar Point Nursery should be seen as a …
Qualified Immunity, Sovereign Immunity, And Systemic Reform, Katherine Mims Crocker
Qualified Immunity, Sovereign Immunity, And Systemic Reform, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Publications
Qualified immunity has become a central target of the movement for police reform and racial justice since George Floyd’s murder. And rightly so. Qualified immunity, which shields government officials from damages for constitutional violations even in many egregious cases, should have no place in federal law. But in critical respects, qualified immunity has become too much a focus of the conversation about constitutional-enforcement reform. The recent reappraisal offers unique opportunities to explore deeper problems and seek deeper solutions.
This Article argues that the public and policymakers should reconsider other aspects of the constitutional-tort system—especially sovereign immunity and related protections for …
The Supreme Court's Reticent Qualified Immunity Retreat, Katherine Mims Crocker
The Supreme Court's Reticent Qualified Immunity Retreat, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Publications
The recent outcry against qualified immunity, a doctrine that disallows damages actions against government officials for a wide swath of constitutional claims, has been deafening. But when the Supreme Court in November 2020 and February 2021 invalidated grants of qualified immunity based on reasoning at the heart of the doctrine for the first time since John Roberts became Chief Justice, the response was muted. With initial evaluations and competing understandings coming from legal commentators in the months since, this Essay explores what these cases appear to say about qualified immunity for today and tomorrow.
The Essay traces idealistic, pessimistic, and …
A Scapegoat Theory Of Bivens, Katherine Mims Crocker
A Scapegoat Theory Of Bivens, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Publications
Some scapegoats are innocent. Some warrant blame, but not the amount they are made to bear. Either way, scapegoating can allow in-groups to sidestep social problems by casting blame onto out-groups instead of confronting such problems--and the in-groups' complicity in perpetuating them--directly.
This Essay suggests that it may be productive to view the Bivens regime's rise as countering various exercises in scapegoating and its retrenchment as constituting an exercise in scapegoating. The earlier cases can be seen as responding to social structures that have scapegoated racial, economic, and other groups through overaggressive policing, mass incarceration, and inequitable government conduct more …
Reconsidering Section 1983'S Nonabrogation Of Sovereign Immunity, Katherine Mims Crocker
Reconsidering Section 1983'S Nonabrogation Of Sovereign Immunity, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Publications
Motivated by civil unrest and the police conduct that prompted it, Americans have embarked on a major reexamination of how constitutional enforcement works. One important component is 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which allows civil suits against any "person" who violates federal rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has long held that "person" excludes states because Section 1983 flunks a condition of crystal clarity.
This Article reconsiders that conclusion--in legalese, Section 1983's nonabrogation of sovereign immunity--along multiple dimensions. Beginning with a negative critique, this Article argues that because the Court invented the crystal-clarity standard so long after Section 1983's enactment, the caselaw …
Unduly Burdening Abortion Jurisprudence, Mark Strasser
Unduly Burdening Abortion Jurisprudence, Mark Strasser
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
The undue burden standard is the current test to determine whether abortion regulations pass constitutional muster. But the function, meaning, and application of that test have varied over time, which undercuts the test’s usefulness and the ability of legislatures to know which regulations pass constitutional muster. Even more confusing, the Court has refused to apply the test in light of its express terms, which cannot fail to yield surprising conclusions and undercut confidence in the Court. The Court must not only clarify what the test means and how it is to be used, but must also formulate that test so …
Supreme Court Fact-Finding And The Distortion Of American Democracy: Hearing Before The Subcommittee On Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action And Federal Rights Of The Committee On The Judiciary, Senate, One Hundred Seventeenth Congress, First Session, Allison Orr Larsen
Congressional Testimony
No abstract provided.
Eager To Follow: Methodological Precedent In Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Eager To Follow: Methodological Precedent In Statutory Interpretation, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
An important recent development in the field of statutory interpretation is the emergence of a movement calling for "methodological precedent"--a regime under which courts give precedential effect to interpretive methodology. In such a system, a case would establish not only what a particular statute means but could also establish binding rules of methodology--which tools are valid, in what order, and so on. The movement for methodological precedent has attracted sharp criticism on normative grounds. But both sides of the normative debate agree on the premise that the federal courts generally do not give precedential effect to interpretive methodology today.
This …
The Remand Power And The Supreme Court's Role, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
The Remand Power And The Supreme Court's Role, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
"Reversed and remanded." Or "vacated and remanded." These familiar words, often found at the end of an appellate decision, emphasize that an appellate court's conclusion that the lower court erred generally does not end the litigation. The power to remand for further proceedings rather than wrap up a case is useful for appellate courts because they may lack the institutional competence to bring the case to a final resolution (as when new factual findings are necessary) or lack an interest in the fact-specific work of applying a newly announced legal standard to the particular circumstances at hand. The modern Supreme …
A Voice In The Wilderness: John Paul Stevens, Election Law, And A Theory Of Impartial Governance, Cody S. Barnett, Joshua A. Douglas
A Voice In The Wilderness: John Paul Stevens, Election Law, And A Theory Of Impartial Governance, Cody S. Barnett, Joshua A. Douglas
William & Mary Law Review
Justice John Paul Stevens retired from the Supreme Court almost a decade ago and turned ninety-eight years old in April 2018. How should we remember his legacy on the Supreme Court? This Article places his legacy within his election law jurisprudence. Specifically, Justice Stevens provided a consistent theory, which we term “impartial governance,” that has had a lasting impact on the field. This theory undergirds Justice Stevens’s creation of the important Anderson-Burdick-Crawford balancing test that federal courts use to construe the constitutionality of laws that impact the right to vote, such as voter ID laws. It is part of his …
The Federalist Society Majority, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
The Federalist Society Majority, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Beyond Headlines & Holdings: Exploring Some Less Obvious Ramifications Of The Supreme Court’S 2017 Free-Speech Rulings, Clay Calvert
Beyond Headlines & Holdings: Exploring Some Less Obvious Ramifications Of The Supreme Court’S 2017 Free-Speech Rulings, Clay Calvert
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Digging behind the holdings, this Article analyzes less conspicuous, yet highly consequential aspects of the United States Supreme Court’s First Amendment rulings during the opening half of 2017. The four facets of the opinions addressed here—items both within individual cases and cutting across them—hold vast significance for future free-speech battles. Nuances of the justices’ splintering in Matal v. Tam, Packingham v. North Carolina, and Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman are examined, as is the immediate impact of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s Packingham dicta regarding online social networks. Furthermore, Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s solo concurrence in the threats case of Perez …
Section 2: Trump And The Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 2: Trump And The Court, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Protean Statutory Interpretation In The Courts Of Appeals, James J. Brudney, Lawrence Baum
Protean Statutory Interpretation In The Courts Of Appeals, James J. Brudney, Lawrence Baum
William & Mary Law Review
This Article is the first in-depth empirical and doctrinal analysis of differences in statutory interpretation between the courts of appeals and the Supreme Court. It is also among the first to anticipate how the Supreme Court’s interpretive approach may shift with the passing of Justice Scalia.
We begin by identifying factors that may contribute to interpretive divergence between the two judicial levels, based on their different institutional structures and operational realities. In doing so, we discuss normative implications that may follow from the prospect of such interpretive divergence. We then examine how three circuit courts have used dictionaries and legislative …
Federalist Court: How The Federalist Society Became The De Facto Selector Of Republican Supreme Court Justices, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
Federalist Court: How The Federalist Society Became The De Facto Selector Of Republican Supreme Court Justices, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Separating Amicus Wheat From Chaff, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl, Adam Feldman
Separating Amicus Wheat From Chaff, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl, Adam Feldman
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Split Definitive: How Party Polarization Turned The Supreme Court Into A Partisan Court, Neal Devins, Lawrence Baum
Split Definitive: How Party Polarization Turned The Supreme Court Into A Partisan Court, Neal Devins, Lawrence Baum
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The Amicus Machine, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins
The Amicus Machine, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins
Faculty Publications
The Supreme Court receives a record number of amicus curiae briefs and cites to them with increasing regularity. Amicus briefs have also become influential in determining which cases the Court will hear. It thus becomes important to ask: Where do these briefs come from? The traditional tale describes amicus briefs as the product of interest-group lobbying. But that story is incomplete and outdated. Today, skilled and specialized advocates of the Supreme Court Bar strategize about what issues the Court should hear and from whom they should hear them. They then “wrangle” the necessary amici and “whisper” to coordinate the message. …
Legal Scholarship Highlight: The Amicus Machine, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins
Legal Scholarship Highlight: The Amicus Machine, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Section 2: The Court And The 2016 Election, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 2: The Court And The 2016 Election, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Some Thoughts On The Study Of Judicial Behavior, Lee Epstein
Some Thoughts On The Study Of Judicial Behavior, Lee Epstein
William & Mary Law Review
Back in the 1940s the political scientist C. Herman Pritchett began tallying the votes and opinions of Supreme Court Justices. His goal was to use data to test the hypothesis that the Justices were not only following the “law,” but were also motivated by their own ideological preferences.
With the hindsight of nearly eighty years, we know that Pritchett’s seemingly small project helped to create a big field: Judicial Behavior, which I take to be the theoretical and empirical study of the choices judges make. Political scientists continue to play a central role, but they are now joined by economists, …
The Second Dimension Of The Supreme Court, Joshua B. Fischman, Tonja Jacobi
The Second Dimension Of The Supreme Court, Joshua B. Fischman, Tonja Jacobi
William & Mary Law Review
Describing the Justices of the Supreme Court as liberals and conservatives has become so standard and the left-right division on the Court is considered so entrenched that any deviation from that pattern is treated with surprise. Attentive Court watchers know that the Justices are not just politicians in robes, deciding each case on a purely ideological basis. Yet the increasingly influential empirical legal studies literature assumes just that that a left-right ideological dimension fully describes the Supreme Court. We show that there is a second, more legally-focused dimension of judicial decision making. A continuum between legalism and pragmatism also divides …
Does The 'Mcconnell Principle' Make Sense?, Jeffrey Bellin
Does The 'Mcconnell Principle' Make Sense?, Jeffrey Bellin
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
How Merrick Garland Could Help Heal America, Jeffrey Bellin
How Merrick Garland Could Help Heal America, Jeffrey Bellin
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Ideological Imbalance: Why Democrats Usually Pick Moderate-Liberal Justices And Republicans Usually Pick Conservative Ones, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
Ideological Imbalance: Why Democrats Usually Pick Moderate-Liberal Justices And Republicans Usually Pick Conservative Ones, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Stanley V. Illinois’S Untold Story, Josh Gupta-Kagan
Stanley V. Illinois’S Untold Story, Josh Gupta-Kagan
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Stanley v. Illinois is one of the Supreme Courts more curious landmark cases. The holding is well known: the Due Process Clause both prohibits states from removing children from the care of unwed fathers simply because they are not married and requires states to provide all parents with a hearing on their fitness. By recognizing strong due process protections for parents rights, Stanley reaffirmed Lochner-era cases that had been in doubt and formed the foundation of modern constitutional family law. But Peter Stanley never raised due process arguments, so it has long been unclear how the Court reached this decision. …
Neutral Principles And Some Campaign Finance Problems, John O. Mcginnis
Neutral Principles And Some Campaign Finance Problems, John O. Mcginnis
William & Mary Law Review
This Article has both positive and normative objectives. As a positive matter, it shows that the Roberts Courts campaign finance regulation jurisprudence can be best explained as a systematic effort to integrate that case law with the rest of the First Amendment, making the neutral principles refined in other social contexts govern this more politically salient one as well. It demonstrates that the typical Roberts Court majority in campaign finance cases follows precedent, doctrine, and traditional First Amendment theory, while the dissents tend to carve out exceptions at each of these levels.
As a normative matter, it argues that following …
Extralegal Supreme Court Policy-Making, Joëlle Anne Moreno
Extralegal Supreme Court Policy-Making, Joëlle Anne Moreno
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
The Colbert Report aired its final episode on December 18, 2014.1 Nine years earlier, on the first episode, Stephen Colbert coined the word “truthiness.” Truthiness satirized contemporary disinterest in empirical information in a country increasingly “divided between those who think with their head and those who know with their heart.” Truthiness was not just the Merriam-Webster word of the year. Over the past decade, it has been the unspoken mantra of reporters who give equal time to climate science denialists, faith healers, and vaccine refusers. When Justices of the Supreme Court decide questions of scientific or empirical fact—such as whether …