Law Commons^™

Concrete Reliance On Stare Decisis In A Post-Dobbs World, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

The Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization will be remembered primarily for its destabilizing effect on abortion rights across the country; in its wake, the legality of abortions performed in various states and at various stages of pregnancy was thrown into turmoil that will take years to resolve. In Dobbs’s immediate aftermath, substantive due process jurisprudence has been at least destabilized, if not prepared for greater limitation in the terms to come. But the Court’s approach to that line of cases has also turned stare decisis doctrine into an unclear jumble that may be considered …

Suspect Classifications, Immutability, And Moral Responsibility, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

Immutability is an important thread in equal protection jurisprudence.1 It helps explain when a government classification is constitutionally suspect, requiring courts to evaluate that classification under the exacting strict scrutiny standard.2 Recently the Supreme Court, though not expressly relying on equal protection arguments to reach its holding, has suggested that sexual orientation is an immutable trait of the sort that traditionally triggers strict scrutiny when the government relies upon it.3 But the suggestion that sexual orientation is immutable, and thus subject to strict scrutiny, has not found wide acceptance across the judiciary. Furthermore, the scientific evidence surrounding sexual orientation is …

Exigencies, Not Exceptions: How To Return Warrant Exceptions To Their Roots, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

When a police officer interacts with an individual, the encounter is subject to myriad exceptions to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement that lack a coherent justifying theory. For instance, officers can warrantlessly search if an automobile was involved in the interaction, an arrest occurred, or a protective sweep was necessary to prevent a third-party ambush. Officers and individuals struggle to understand the breadth and complexity of these exceptions. The resulting confusion breeds widespread distrust and raises the tension in millions of interactions across the country.

There is an easier way. The Supreme Court has recently reaffirmed its support for a …

Appealable Tros, Bernadette Bollas Genetin

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

It’s textbook law that temporary restraining orders (TROs) are not appealable. That bright-line rule, however, has never told the whole story. Today, a majority of circuit courts permit appeal of TROs in narrow instances when, for instance, the TRO has the practical effect of an injunction, threatens serious or irreparable injury, and can only be reviewed effectively by immediate appeal. This accords with the Supreme Court’s conclusion in Carson v. American Brands, Inc., which permitted limited appeal of orders that, like TROs, are not express injunctions but may threaten the same irreparable injury as an injunction. The Carson Court emphasized …

Rulifying Reasonable Expectations: Why Judicial Tests, Not Originalism, Create A More Determinate Fourth Amendment, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

For decades, commentators have decried the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment search jurisprudence as a hopelessly confusing jumble. Critics save their harshest barbs for the judicially created “reasonable expectations of privacy” test, suggesting that it provides little guidance and leaves search cases open to wide judicial discretion. Motivated by such critiques, several Justices have recently claimed that an originalist approach could replace the reasonable expectations test, limit judicial discretion, and clarify the Fourth Amendment’s meaning.

This Article provides a comprehensive defense of the reasonable expectations test against originalist calls to abandon it. It notes two flaws in the originalist response. First, …

The Jurisprudence Of The First Woman Judge, Florence Allen: Challenging The Myth Of Women Judging Differently, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

A key question for legal scholars and political scientists is whether women jurists judge differently than men. Some studies have suggested that women judges are more likely to support plaintiffs in sexual harassment, employment, and immigration cases. Other studies conclude that women are more likely to vote liberally in death penalty and obscenity cases, and more likely to convince their male colleagues to join a liberal opinion. Yet other studies have found little evidence that women judge differently from men.

This article explores the jurisprudence of the first woman judge, Judge Florence Allen, to test these claims of gender difference …

The Long History Of Feminist Legal Theory, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

This chapter challenges the conventional idea that feminist legal theory began in the 1970s. The advent of legal feminism is usually placed in the second wave feminist movement, birthed by the political activism of the women’s liberation movement and nurtured by the intellectual leadership of women scholars newly entering legal academia. However, legal feminism has a much longer history, going back more than a century earlier. While the term “feminist” was not used in the United States until the 1910s, the foundations of feminist legal theory were first conceptualized as early as 1848 and developed over the next one hundred …

Reclaiming The Long History Of The "Irrelevant" Nineteenth Amendment For Gender Equality, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

The Nineteenth Amendment has been called an “irrelevant” amendment. The women’s suffrage amendment has been deemed insignificant as a constitutional authority, reduced to a historical footnote. In the Supreme Court canon, it has been diminished as a text that “merely gives the vote to women.” With the accomplishment of that simple task, the amendment has been assumed to offer little guidance to modern constitutional analysis or gender equality. The Nineteenth Amendment has become a “constitutional orphan,” disconnected from its historical origins and precedential place in constitutional jurisprudence.

This constricting view of the Nineteenth Amendment ignores the structural implications and significant …

Pandemic Surveillance - The New Predictive Policing, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

Now that the first wave of the coronavirus is behind us, what will the future bring? As governments reopen society following lengthy stay-at-home orders, they must strike a difficult balance. If the return to normalcy is too abrupt, infections could spike again in just a few months, creating a death toll as high as it might have been with no quarantine at all.1 An effective removal of quarantine orders, then, must ensure that the return to normalcy is appropriately paced. But how can we best plan to put our economy back together without jeopardizing public health?

Officials in New York …

Felony Disenfranchisement & The Nineteenth Amendment, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

The Nineteenth Amendment and the history of the women’s suffrage movement can offer a compelling argument against felony disenfranchisement laws. These laws leave approximately six million citizens unable to vote, often for crimes wholly unrelated to the political process. They also increasingly threaten gains in female enfranchisement.

Today’s arguments in support of felony disenfranchisement laws bear striking similarities to the arguments of anti-suffragists more than a century earlier. Both suggest that a traditionally subordinated class of citizens is inherently incapable of bearing the responsibility that the right to vote entails, and that their votes are somehow less worthy than others. …

Gobbledygook: Political Questions, Manageability, & Partisan Gerrymandering, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

In finding that extreme partisan gerrymandering is a nonjusticiable political question in Rucho v. Common Cause, the Supreme Court fixated upon the lack of judicially manageable standards to evaluate their constitutionality. The decision culminated in the Court’s recent reinforcement of that manageability focus in partisan gerrymandering cases, with Chief Justice Roberts even calling efforts to numerically calculate the extremity of such gerrymandering “sociological gobbledygook.”

Such belabored fears about manageability misread the questions in the political question doctrine. The doctrine requires the Justices to initially ask, as a normative matter, whether the judiciary should resolve the controversy in our constitutional system, …

Suspicionless Witness Stops: The New Racial Profiling, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

Young men of color in high-crime neighborhoods are surrounded by poverty and crime, yet distrustful of the police who frequently stop, frisk, and arrest them and their friends. Every encounter with the police carries the potential for a new arrest or worse, fostering a culture of fear and distrust of law enforcement. That culture exacerbates the problems facing the officers patrolling these neighborhoods as more crimes go unsolved because witnesses are unwilling to come forward.

In the past several decades, officers have responded by using a stop-and-frisk technique of dubious constitutionality to control crime. Despite its disastrous implications for the …

App Permissions And The Third-Party Doctrine, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

Apple’s trademarked catchphrase “there’s an app for that”1 suggests that every app on a modern digital device is perfectly tailored to provide a specific, necessary convenience. Whether the user wants to check the weather, get updates on her favorite baseball team, find a coupon for her next purchase, or track her fitness and activity levels, she can use an app to fill gaps in her life that she may not have known existed. What the user might also not know, however, is that “permissions” either she or the phone’s operating system have granted to the app allow it to access …

Janus-Faced Judging: How The Supreme Court Is Radically Weakening Stare Decisis, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

Drastic changes in Supreme Court doctrine require citizens to reorder their affairs rapidly, undermining their trust in the judiciary. Stare decisis has traditionally limited the pace of such change on the Court. It is a bulwark against wholesale jurisprudential reversals. But, in recent years, the stare decisis doctrine has come under threat.

With little public or scholarly notice, the Supreme Court has radically weakened stare decisis in two ways. First, the Court has reversed its long-standing view that a precedent, regardless of the quality of its reasoning, should stand unless there is some special, practical justification to overrule it. Recent …

Book Review, Strange Bedfellows: Marriage In The Age Of Women's Liberation, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

No abstract provided.

From Nineteenth Amendment To Era: Constitutional Amendments For Women's Equality, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

No abstract provided.

More Than The Vote: The Nineteenth Amendment As Proxy For Gender Equality, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

The original idea behind the Nineteenth Amendment was never just about the vote. Instead, the first women's rights movement 175 years ago, like the modern movement for the Equal Rights Amendment, sought comprehensive equality for women in all avenues of life. The constitutional text for women’s full equality and emancipation has changed over the centuries; first embodied in the grant of the vote as a proxy for structural change, and now incorporated into the demand for “equal rights.” Yet women have been consistent over time in understanding the radical idea that systems of governance, family, industry, and church need dismantling …

The End Of Miller's Time: How Sensitivity Can Categorize Third-Party Data After Carpenter, Michael Gentithes

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

For over 40 years, the Supreme Court has permitted government investigators to warrantlessly collect information that citizens disclose to third-party service providers. That third-party doctrine is under significant strain in the modern, networked world. Yet scholarly responses typically fall into unhelpfully extreme camps, either championing an absolute version of the doctrine or calling for its abolition. In Carpenter v. United States, the Court suggested a middle road, holding that some categories of data—such as digital location information collected from cell phones—do not neatly fall into the third-party doctrine’s dichotomy between unprotected, disclosed information and protected, undisclosed information. But the majority …

Leveling Down Gender Equality, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

The U.S. Supreme Court recently revived its jurisprudence of “leveling down,” that is, curing an equal protection violation of gender discrimination by denying the requested benefit to all rather than extending the benefit to the excluded class. This article challenges the continuation of the conventional acceptance of leveling down as an equally legitimate remedial option for gender discrimination. Instead, it argues for the adoption of an alternative remedial calculus of a strong presumption of leveling up remedies, overcome only by limited equitable considerations. Such a presumption better effectuates the substantive right of gender equality, as well as the correlative due …

After Suffrage Comes Equal Rights? Era As The Next Logical Step, Tracy Thomas, Tracey Jean Boisseau

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

No abstract provided.

Legal Resources On The Trump Immigration Ban, Center For Constitutional Law

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

This resource bibliography provides legal resources related to the litigation over the presidential immigration ban issued on Jan. 27, 2017. These resources include the executive order, key court decisions, and explanatory commentary.

The Origins Of Constitutional Gender Equality In The Nineteenth-Century Work Of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

This introduction to the symposium previews the colloquium held at the Center for Constitutional Law at Akron on the intellectual work of pioneering feminist Elizabeth Cady Stanton. It highlights the talks from scholars in law, history, and women’s studies, published in this symposium issue, that explore Stanton’s philosophical and political work for gender equality in the political, domestic, and religious spheres.

The "Radical Conscience" Of Nineteenth-Century Feminism, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

No abstract provided.

Reconsidering The Remedy Of Gender Quotas, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

When newly-elected Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was asked by surprised reporters why he appointed women as fifty percent of his new cabinet, he responded simply, “Because it’s 2015.” Just because. Because it’s time. In fact, he suggested, it is long past time for having to justify including women as one-half of the power structure when women constitute one-half of the population. And it’s time for meaningful change in shared governance by something as pragmatically simple as selecting fifteen women and fifteen men for appointments.

Similarly, it is long past time for justifying the need to reform American institutions that …

Scotus Summary: The Supreme Court's Decision In King V. Burwell On Healthcare, Wilson Huhn

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

This report analyzes the Supreme Court’s decision in King v. Burwell, which was handed down on June 25, 2015. In this case the Supreme Court revisited the Affordable Care Act, the statute whose constitutionality was upheld in the 2012 case of NFIB v. Sebelius. In NFIB the Court ruled that it was constitutional for Congress to impose a tax on persons who fail to purchase health insurance.

Scotus Summary: Separation Of Powers In Zivotofsky V. Kerry, Wilson Huhn

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

Welcome to Supreme Podcast, and the summary of the decision of the Supreme Court in Zivotofsky v. Kerry.

This is a Separation of Powers case involving a dispute between the President and Congress over the recognition of a foreign country, in this case the power of the President to determine which foreign government, if any, has territorial sovereignty over the City of Jerusalem. By a vote of 6-3 the Supreme Court upheld the President’s exclusive and conclusive authority to make that determination.

An Introduction To The Women In Law Symposium, Tracy Thomas

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

This collected symposium gives context and definition to these continuing problems of sex discrimination. The included articles pull back the curtain to provide examples of how and why sex discrimination still exists. The articles go deeper, fleshing out persistent notions of gender as subordinate, exploring the public perception of gender in appearance of femininity and masculinity. They illustrate the tangible legal results of these gendered notions to legal issues as varied as forced sterilization of the mentally disabled, equal employment, or the criminalization of prostitution.

Tradition, Policy And The Establishment Clause: Justice Kennedy's Opinion In Town Of Greece V. Galloway, Wilson Huhn

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

The great jurisprudential battle that has raged in the Supreme Court for more than a century and the question that our society has struggled with since the advent of the Civil War is whether the Constitution is a command by our ancestors that we retain the same political structures, social hierarchies, and cultural traditions that they had, or whether it reflects ideals of liberty, equality, fairness, and tolerance that they aspired to and that they expected us to reach for. That struggle between rules and standards, doctrine and principles, conventionalism and consequentialism, tradition and policy in the interpretation of the …

Back To Class: Lessons From The Roberts Court Class Action Jurisprudence, Bernadette Bollas Genetin

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

This symposium issue on The Class Action After a Decade of Roberts Court Decisions provides perspectives on how the class action has fared under persistent Supreme Court scrutiny. Over the past ten years, the Roberts Court has repeatedly returned to questions concerning class action litigation...This ten-year retrospective on the Roberts Court’s class action decisions provides a timely opportunity to reflect on the Supreme Court’s institutional role in construing the Federal Rules and in creating class action policy through decisions construing Rule 23...The contributors to this symposium focus on the Roberts Court class action decisions as a whole; the Roberts Court’s …

Tying The Knot With A Surname? The Constitutionality Of Japan's Law Requiring A Same Marital Name, Koji Higashikawa

Con Law Center Articles and Publications

The Japanese Supreme Court issued a decision denying married women the right to retain their separate maiden name legally after marriage. It upheld the constitutionality of an old law requiring both marital partners to adopt the same surname. This essay by a Japanese scholar provides insight and explanation into the Supreme Court’s decision.