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. …

The Income Tax, The Constitution, And The Unrealized Importance Of Helvering V. Griffiths, Lawrence Zelenak

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Moore v. United States, for the purpose of deciding whether the realization doctrine remains a constitutional limitation on Congress's ability to impose an unapportioned income tax, as the Court held in its famous 1920 decision in Eisner v. Macomber. Although it is natural to look to 1920 and Macomber as the cause of today's uncertain scope of the congressional power to tax income, what did not happen in the Court's 1943 decision in Helvering v. Griffiths is as significant as what did happen in 1920. the presence of Moore on the Court's docket …

Firearms Law And Scholarship Beyond Bullets And Bodies, Joseph Blocher, Jacob D. Charles, Darrell A. H. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

Academic work is increasingly important to court rulings on the Second Amendment and firearms law more generally. This article highlights two recent trends in social science research that supplement the traditional focus on guns and physical harm. The first strand of research focuses on the changing ways that gun owners connect with firearms, with personal security, status, identity, and cultural markers being key reasons people offer for possessing firearms. The second strand focuses on broadening our understanding of the impact of guns on the public sphere beyond just physical safety. This research surfaces the ways that guns can create fear, …

Return To Sender?: Analyzing The Senior Leader “Open Letter” On Civilian Control Of The Military, Charles J. Dunlap Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

In response to the September 2022 open letter, “To Support and Defend: Principles of Civilian Control and Best Practices of Civil-Military Relations,” by eight former secretaries of defense and five former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, this Article adds a piece to the unsettled puzzle of civil-military relations. The Letter attempts to detail “core principles or best practices” (CP/BP) regarding civil-military relations, and in response, this Article comments on and clarifies these well-intended efforts. This Article sequentially dissects each CP/BP in today’s context of hyper-politicization, partisanship, technology, and more. Where necessary, the Article explains how the law may …

The Territories Under Text, History, And Tradition, Andrew Willinger

Faculty Scholarship

In two of its major decisions in the 2021–2022 Term, New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen and Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Court continued solidifying its originalist method of constitutional interpretation by looking increasingly to historical regulatory practice to construe how the Constitution protects individual rights. The Court is focused not only on the original public meaning of constitutional provisions, but also on historical practice. Historical laws and practices are now key to understanding how those who lived at the relevant time thought a constitutional provision might be applied and what regulatory approaches were consistent …

Guided By History: Protecting The Public Sphere From Weapons Threats Under Bruen, Joseph Blocher, Reva B. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

Since the Founding era, governments have banned guns in places where weapons threaten activities of public life. The Supreme Court reaffirmed this tradition of “sensitive places” regulation in District of Columbia v. Heller, and locational restrictions on weapons have become a central Second Amendment battleground in the aftermath of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Liberals have criticized Bruen for requiring public safety laws to mimic founding practice, while conservatives have criticized it for licensing regulatory change not within the original understanding. In this Article we argue that Bruen’s analogical method looks to the past to guide …

A Meditation On The Thirteenth Amendment And Constitutional Redemption, Darrell A. H. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Originalism-By-Analogy And Second Amendment Adjudication, Joseph Blocher, Eric Ruben

Faculty Scholarship

In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court held that the constitutionality of modern gun laws must be evaluated by direct analogy to history, unmediated by familiar doctrinal tests. Bruen’s novel approach to historical decision-making purported to constrain judicial discretion but instead enabled judicial subjectivity, obfuscation, and unpredictability. Those problems are painfully evident in courts’ faltering efforts to apply Bruen to laws regulating 3D-printed guns, assault weapons, large-capacity magazines, obliterated serial numbers, and the possession of guns on subways or by people subject to domestic-violence restraining orders. The Court’s recent grant of certiorari in United …

Extreme Risk Protection Orders In The Post-Bruen Age: Weighing Evidence, Scholarship, And Rights For A Promising Gun Violence Prevention Tool, Andrew Willinger, Shannon Frattaroli

Faculty Scholarship

Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) are civil court orders that temporarily prohibit gun purchase and possession by people who are behaving dangerously and at risk of committing imminent violence. As of September 2023, ERPOs are available in 21 states and the District of Columbia. This Article presents an overview of ERPO laws, the rationale behind their development, and a review and analysis that considers emerging constitutional challenges to these laws (under both the Second Amendment and due process protections) in the post-Bruen era. This Article notes that the presence of multiple constitutional challenges in many ERPO-related cases has confused judicial …

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 …

Designing Constitutions For A Lasting Democracy, Donald L. Horowitz, Elisabeth Perham

Judicature International

No abstract provided.

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 …