Law Commons^™

Originalism And The Meaning Of "Twenty Dollars", Michael L. Smith

Faculty Articles

Originalism claims to provide answers, or at least assistance, for those hoping to interpret a Constitution filled with wide-ranging, morally loaded terminology. Originalists claim that looking to the original public meaning of the Constitution will constrain interpreters, maintain consistency and predictability in judicial decisions, and is faithful to ideals like democratic legitimacy. This essay responds with the inevitable, tough question: whether originalism can tell interpreters what the Seventh Amendment's reference to "twenty dollars" means--both as a matter of original meaning and for interpreters today.

While this appears to be an easy question, I demonstrate that rather than telling modern legal …

When Police Volunteer To Kill, Alexandra L. Klein

Faculty Articles

The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of lethal injection, yet states continue to struggle with drug shortages and botched executions. Some states have authorized alternative methods of execution, including the firing squad. Utah, which has consistently carried out firing squad executions throughout its history, relies on police officers from the jurisdiction where the crime took place to volunteer to carry out these executions. This represents a plausible-and probable method for other states in conducting firing squad executions.

Public and academic discussion of the firing squad has centered on questions of pain and suffering. It has not engaged with the …

Originalism's Implementation Problem, Michael L. Smith, Alexander S. Hiland

Faculty Articles

Originalism has received a great deal of recent, mainstream attention. President Donald Trump's nomination of three justices to the Supreme Court amplified discussions of their judicial philosophies during and following their confirmation proceedings. Supporters of these nominations highlighted the nominees' originalist credentials, arguing that originalism was the dominant approach to constitutional interpretation.

In the academic sphere, volumes of articles and books set forth originalist theories and methodology. Its academic proponents also refer to it as the dominant form of constitutional interpretation—often asserting that opponents of originalism have failed to enunciate a coherent alternative theory. Some argue that originalism (at least, …

Originalism And The Inseparability Of Decision Procedures From Interpretive Standards, Michael L. Smith

Faculty Articles

In his article, Originalism: Standard and Procedure, Professor Stephen E. Sachs describes a never-ending debate between originalism's advocates and critics. Originalists argue that certain historical facts determine the Constitution's meaning. But determining these facts is difficult, if not impossible for judges, attorneys, and the public. Sachs seeks to rise above this debate, arguing that the legal community should not expect originalism to offer a procedure for interpreting the Constitution. Instead, the legal community should treat originalism as a

standard to judge interpretations.

This Article takes issue with this approach. Originalism is not like other instances in law where statutes or …

"Only To Have A Say In The Way He Dies:" Bodily Autonomy And Methods Of Execution, Alexandra L. Klein

Faculty Articles

Capital punishment is one of the most significant intrusions into a person's bodily autonomy; the state takes a person's life. Even though the state has stripped a person on death row of much of their autonomy and intends to kill them, removing all autonomy, a person sentenced to death may, in some circumstances, choose how they will die. While most states rely on a single method of execution, some states permit a condemned person to choose among two or more methods of execution. Constitutional challenges to methods of execution requires the challenger to demonstrate a substantial risk of severe pain …

The Third Amendment In 2020, Michael L. Smith

Faculty Articles

Compared with other Amendments in the Bill of Rights, the Third Amendment does not get much attention. Its prohibition on the quartering of soldiers in houses during peacetime, along with its prohibition on similar quartering during times of war absent legal prescription, is rarely the subject of litigation or scholarship. Indeed, most people—and likely most attorneys—probably cannot tell you what the Third Amendment covers if put on the spot. This Article aims to fix this by giving the Third Amendment the respect that one of the Constitution's original amendments deserves. This Article surveys and analyzes caselaw, scholarship, and popular media …

Meaningless Guarantees: Comment On Mitchell E. Mccloy's “Blind Justice: Virginia's Jury Sentencing Scheme And Impermissible Burdens On A Defendant's Right To A Jury Trial", Alexandra L. Klein

Faculty Articles

Despite the important role that jurors play in the American criminal justice system, jurors are often deprived of critical information that might help them make sense of the law their oaths require them to follow. Such information with regard to sentencing might include the unavailability of parole, geriatric release, sentencing guidelines, or other information that is relevant to determining a defendant's penalty. Withholding information from juries, particularly in sentencing, risks unjust and inequitable sentences. Keeping jurors in the dark perpetuates injustices and undermines public confidence and trust in the justice system.

Mitch McCloy's excellent Note provides a compelling illustration of …

A Case For The Electoral College And For Its Faithless Elector, Stephen M. Sheppard

Faculty Articles

Every four years, the cry goes up to destroy the Electoral College. That cry is especially loud in years when a candidate is elected president who receives a minority of the votes. The election of a "minority president" happened with the election of 2000, but it had happened before. The Electoral College has elected three presidents whom a majority of the voters voted against: Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876, Benjamin Harrison in 1888, and George W. Bush in 2000. (A fourth president was also elected with a minority of the popular vote—John Quincy Adams in 1824—through that election was by …

The Anti-Federalists’ Toughest Challenge: Paper Money, Debt Relief, And The Ratification Of The Constitution, George Van Cleve

Faculty Articles

During the mid-1780s many American states facing widespread financial and social instability in the aftermath of the Revolutionary War actively managed their economies. They authorized paper money, adopted debtor-relief measures, or both. Several historians of these anti-recession measures conclude that such efforts were beneficial. But despite that, the Constitution, as contemporaries understood it, abrogated state powers to issue paper money or provide debtor relief in Article I, Section 10. During ratification, Anti-Federalists were often silent on Section 10, though there were exceptions and popular support for paper money and debtor relief probably prevented ratification in some states. Anti-Federalists did not …

Universities As Constitutional Law Makers (And Other Hidden Actors In Our Constitutional Orders), Adam J. Macleod

Faculty Articles

In the stories told by opinion makers and many law professors, American constitutional law is concerned with two things-individual rights and the powers of government-and it is settled by the Court, which was established by Article III of our national Constitution. In those now-familiar tales, the United States Supreme Court creates constitutional law when heroic individuals assert their fundamental rights against an overreaching state and when Congress, state legislatures, and executive agencies are called upon to justify their expert enactments to an overreaching judiciary. To settle these constitutional disputes the Court looks either to the text of the written Constitution …

Still Patently Unconstitutional: A Reply To Professor Nard, Margo A. Bagley

Faculty Articles

In Defense of Geographic Disparity is Professor Craig Nard's response to my article Patently Unconstitutional: The Geographical Limitation on Prior Art in a Small World (Patently Unconstitutional). According to Professor Nard, my article advocates "the elimination of [the] geographic disparity" of 35 U.S.C § 102 in order to "protect developing nations and indigenous peoples from Western countries' patent law regimes." Professor Nard is correct in his assertion that I seek the elimination of the geographical disparity in U.S. patent law; however, he misses the mark as to my reasons. My opposition to the geographical limitation does not derive from …

One View To Add To The Many, Bill Piatt

Faculty Articles

The United States offers its citizens the opportunity to participate in the legal and political system through which it governs. The Constitution ensures that its citizens may engage, participate, and represent the body politics in government and the application of its laws. The recent attacks on America and the failure of the immigration system in monitoring its applicants has resulted in more restrictive immigration laws and policy.

The country’s legal education system must continue to improve its efforts in diversifying the nation’s law schools. More minorities should be represented as students, professors, and deans. Accomplishing a more diversified legal education …