Law Commons^™

Book Review: Half American, Half Amazing: A Review Of Half American By Matthew F. Delmont And An Exploration Of Executive Action During World War Ii And Its Impact On Black Soldiers, Ainslee Johnson-Brown

ConLawNOW

This essay reviews Matthew F. Delmont’s new book, Half American: The Epic Story of African Americans Fighting World War II at Home and Abroad (2022). The book enriches the ongoing scholarship related to critical race theory and the effects of executive action on the lived experience of Black Americans. Delmont presents a well-woven narrative of the experience of Black American soldiers during World War II. Pieced together from letters, court documents, and articles published during the war, this book sheds light on accounts previously buried beneath a shield of trauma, frustration, and disbelief.

Decolonizing Equal Sovereignty, Rosa Hayes

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

In Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529 (2013), the Supreme Court announced that a tradition of equal sovereignty among the states prohibits unwarranted federal intrusions into state sovereignty and invoked this newly created doctrine to strike down Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act. Scholarly critiques in Shelby County’s immediate aftermath debated the constitutional validity of the Court’s equal sovereignty reasoning and warned of the dire threat the VRA’s effacement posed to voting rights—concerns that recent litigation have vindicated.

But other recent litigation suggests that, abstracted from its problematic and consequential origins, equal sovereignty may be deployed …

The Ripple Effects Of Dobbs On Health Care Beyond Wanted Abortion, Maya Manian

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

The Supreme Court’s momentous decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to overturn fifty years of precedent on the constitutional right to abortion represents a sea of change, not only in constitutional law, but also in the public health landscape. Although state laws on abortion are still evolving after Dobbs, the decision almost immediately wreaked havoc on the delivery of medical care for both patients seeking abortion care and those not actively seeking to terminate a pregnancy.

This Article also argues that focusing the public’s attention on the deleterious consequences of abortion bans for health care beyond wanted abortion …

The Promise Of Telehealth For Abortion, Greer Donley, Rachel Rebouché

Book Chapters

The COVID-19 pandemic catalyzed a transformation of abortion care. For most of the last half century, abortion was provided in clinics outside of the traditional healthcare setting. Though a medication regimen was approved in 2000 that would terminate a pregnancy without a surgical procedure, the Food & Drug Administration required, among other things, that the drug be dispensed in person. This requirement dramatically limited the medication’s promise to revolutionize abortion because it subjected medication abortion to the same physical barriers of procedural care.

Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, however, that changed. The pandemic’s early days exposed how the …

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 …

In Defense Of The Juggernaut: The Ethical And Constitutional Argument For Prosecutorial Discretion, David A. Lord

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Within days of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, progressive prosecutors throughout the country announced that if their jurisdictions enacted restrictions on abortion, they would not prosecute the individuals who had these procedures or the doctors who performed them. This is the latest example of situations, like drug crimes, illegal gun possession, and other offenses, where prosecutors have declined to enforce a state law as a matter of public policy. Critics of this broad use of prosecutorial discretion have argued that it violates the constitutional separation of powers.

This Article argues that prosecutorial discretion is well-founded in American …

Pro-Choice (Of Law): Extraterritorial Application Of State Law Using Abortion As A Case Study, Marnie Leonard

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Madison Underwood was scheduled to receive a life-saving abortion at a clinic in Tennessee when her doctor told her the procedure had been canceled. The Supreme Court had overturned the constitutional right to abortion a few days prior. Although Underwood’s abortion was still legal in Tennessee, her doctor felt performing the procedure was too risky with the law changing so quickly.

Judicial Federalization Doctrine, Gerald S. Dickinson

Articles

This Article explores the concept of “judicial federalization doctrine.” The doctrine emanates from well-documented areas of federal constitutional law, including exactions, racially motivated peremptory challenges, the exclusionary rule, same-sex sodomy, marriage, and freedom of speech and press. The origin and development of these federal doctrines, however, is anything but federal. The U.S. Supreme Court has, on rare occasions, heavily consulted with or borrowed from state court doctrines to create a new federal jurisprudence. While the literature addressing the Court’s occasional vertical dependence on state court doctrine is sparse, there is a complete absence of scholarly attention studying the Court’s reluctance …

Airdropping Justice: The Constitutionality Of Service Of Process Via Non-Fungible Token, Jenifer Jackson

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

No abstract provided.

The New Laboratories Of Democracy, Gerald S. Dickinson

Articles

Nearly a century ago, Justice Louis D. Brandeis’s dissent in New State Ice Co. v. Liebman coined one of the most profound statements in American law: “It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.” Justice Brandeis reminded us of our strong tradition of federalism, where the states, exercising their sovereign power, may choose to experiment with new legislation within their separate jurisdictions without the concern that such …

Third Annual Report To The Editor-In-Chief, Thomas E. Baker

FIU Law Review

This the third annual report of the results of the constitutional law haiku contest conducted in my section of Constitutional Law at the FIU College of Law.

Outcome Sensitivity And The Constitutional Law Of Criminal Procedure, Lee Kovarsky

Indiana Law Journal

Iconic criminal procedure doctrines that perform the same function go by different names. When constitutionally disfavored conduct taints a criminal proceeding, courts must determine how much the taint affected an outcome—and whether the damage requires judicial relief. These doctrinal constructs calibrate judicial responses to, among other things, deficient defense lawyering (prejudice), wrongful State suppression (materiality), unlawful policing (attenuation), and an assortment of trial-court mistakes (harmless error). I refer to these constructs, which tightly orbit the constitutional law of criminal procedure, as rules of “outcome sensitivity.” Formal differences in sensitivity rules remain enduring puzzles subject to only the most superficial inspection. …

A Theory Of Federalization Doctrine, Gerald S. Dickinson

Articles

The doctrine of federalization—the practice of the U.S. Supreme Court consulting state laws or adopting state court doctrines to guide and inform federal constitutional law—is an underappreciated field of study within American constitutional law. Compared to the vast collection of scholarly literature and judicial rulings addressing the outsized influence Supreme Court doctrine and federal constitutional law exert over state court doctrines and state legislative enactments, the opposite phenomenon of the states shaping Supreme Court doctrine and federal constitutional law has been under-addressed. This lack of attention to such a singular feature of American federalism is striking and has resulted in …

First Amendment Scrutiny: Realigning First Amendment Doctrine Around Government Interests, John D. Inazu

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Article proposes a simpler way to frame judicial analysis of First Amendment claims: a government restriction on First Amendment expression or action must advance a compelling interest through narrowly tailored means and must not excessively burden the expression or action relative to the interest advanced. The test thus has three prongs: (1) compelling interest; (2) narrow tailoring; and (3) proportionality.

Part I explores how current First Amendment doctrine too often minimizes or ignores a meaningful assessment of the government’s purported interest in limiting First Amendment liberties. Part II shows how First Amendment inquiry is further confused by threshold inquiries …

Using State Law Before The Glaciers Thaw: Climate Torts After Bp V. Baltimore, Jillian Mayer

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

We are living in the beginning stages of Earth’s sixth mass extinction. Since the Industrial Revolution of the nineteenth century, the burning of fossil fuels has released huge quantities of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses (“GHGs”) into the atmosphere. The increased concentration of GHGs causes the atmosphere to retain more heat. Consequently, ecosystems and weather patterns shift and change faster than most plants, animals, and human societies can adapt. Climate change threatens global peace, crashes economies, and creates humanitarian crises.

Freeze-Frames And Blanket Bans: The Unconstitutionality Of Prisons’ Denial Of Gender Confirmation Surgery To Transgender Inmates, Aranda Stathers

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

It is long established that the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against imposing cruel and unusual punishments requires prisons to adequately address their inmates’ medical needs. Inmates identifying with the LGBTQ+ community are not exempt from this constitutional mandate. Trans inmates with gender dysphoria require specific treatment, including, but not limited to, gender confirmation surgery. While courts acknowledge that prisons owe a duty to provide some transition-related care, the extent of that duty remains contested. With no guidance from Congress or the Supreme Court, the constitutionality of prisons’ denial of gender confirmation surgery is in the hands of the circuit courts, which …

Dangerous And Unusual: How An Expanding National Firearms Act Will Spell Its Own Demise, Oliver Krawczyk

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) is the strictest federal gun control law currently in effect. It criminalizes the mere possession and transfer of specifically enumerated categories of firearms deemed to be especially dangerous and unusual, such as machine guns and silencers. Commensurate with this viewpoint, the NFA imposes on violators harsh felony penalties, from lengthy prison sentences to six-figure fines. However, the NFA permits lawful civilian ownership of these firearms under a taxation and registration scheme administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). In its 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller decision, the United …

Symposium: The Future Of Reproductive Rights: Perilous Private Enforcement Strategies: From Posses And Citizen's Arrest To Texas Heartbeat Statutes, Jennifer A. Brobst

ConLawNOW

The utility of state private enforcement statutes restricting abortion in Texas and other states is worthy of close scrutiny. Placing private enforcement in historical context aids in understanding when it may be a sustainable strategy. First, the strategy of involving the populace in the enforcement of legislative mandates has a long history in the United States. Self-help is a necessity where law enforcement is not equipped to prevent and respond to every call for assistance. Citizen’s arrest, posse comitatus, and mandatory reporting of misconduct by citizens, including professional misconduct, all involve private action for the common good in state and …

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 …

Tragedies Of The Cultural Commons, Etienne C. Toussaint

Faculty Publications

In the United States, Black cultural expressions of democratic life that operate within specific historical-local contexts, yet reflect a shared set of sociocultural mores, have been historically crowded out of the law and policymaking process. Instead of democratic cultural discourse occurring within an open and neutral marketplace of ideas, the discursive production and consumption of democratic culture in American politics has been rivalrous. Such rivalry too often enables dominant White supremacist cultural beliefs, values, and practices to exercise their hegemony upon law’s production and meaning. The result has been tragedy for politically disempowered and socioeconomically excluded communities.

This Article uses …

The Legal Origins Of Catholic Conscientious Objection, Jeremy Kessler

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article traces the origins of Catholic conscientious objection as a theory and practice of American constitutionalism. It argues that Catholic conscientious objection emerged during the 1960s from a confluence of left-wing and right-wing Catholic efforts to participate in American democratic culture more fully. The refusal of the American government to allow legitimate Catholic conscientious objection to the Vietnam War became a cause célèbre for clerical and lay leaders and provided a blueprint for Catholic legal critiques of other forms of federal regulation in the late 1960s and early 1970s—most especially regulations concerning the provision of contraception and abortion.

Over …

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 …

The Collective Right Endures: Pre-Heller Precedent And Our Understanding Of The Modern Second Amendment, William Reach

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Prior to 2008, legal scholars who examined the Second Amendment fell roughly into two camps: those who believed “the right of the people to . . . bear arms” only covered state militias, and those who believed it extended to individual citizens.

After District of Columbia v. Heller conclusively established that the “Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms," discussion of the collective right to bear arms largely receded from public discussion and most litigation surrounding the Second Amendment shifted to define the outer edges of the individual right. But the pre-Heller showdown between these …

Indoctrination By Elimination: Why Banning Critical Race Theory In Public Schools Is Unconstitutional, Emma Postel

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Note argues that Texas public school students’ First Amendment Rights have been violated by the passage of Senate Bill 3 (SB 3), which bans the teaching of Critical Race Theory (CRT) in K–12 public schools. The First Amendment is violated here because (1) students have a First Amendment right to speech, and this law bans protected speech; (2) students have a right to receive information, and this ban prevents them from receiving information; and (3) schools are meant to be the marketplace of ideas for students and banning CRT amounts to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination. This Note does not suggest …

Symposium: The Future Of Reproductive Rights: Concrete Reliance On Stare Decisis In A Post-Dobbs World, Michael Gentithes

ConLawNOW

This Article will describe two ways in which Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has muddied the Supreme Court’s precedent on precedent. First, it will examine how the Court’s decision to overrule Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey undermines not only its substantive due process holding, but also its status as a precedent on precedent. Without Casey in place, Dobbs further elevates a weakened version of stare decisis that has been ascendant on the Court in recent decades, one which threatens to undermine legal stability in all areas of constitutional law. Second, the Article will examine the Dobbs majority’s …

Provisions Of Authenticity Under The Jordanian Constitutional Court Rulings And Their Implications: A Comparative Study, Dr. Shatha A. Al-Assaf

مجلة جامعة الإمارات للبحوث القانونية UAEU LAW JOURNAL

The importance of constitutional judiciary derives from its major role in exercising control over the constitutionality of laws; thereby providing a strong fence protecting the provisions of the Constitution as the supreme legislation in the State. The judgments issued by Constitutional Courts and the authenticity they enjoy along with the impacts incurred constitute ones of the most important topics which should receive major attention and deliberation. This research has concentrated on the authenticity of the judgments of the Jordanian Constitutional Court and their impacts on the Jordanian Law, and on comparing such judgments to those of the Egyptian Law. The …

No-One Receives Psychiatric Treatment In A Squad Car, Judy A. Clausen, Joanmarie Davoli

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Next Fight Over Guns In America, Timothy Zick, Diana Palmer

Popular Media

With Thursday’s Supreme Court decision [in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen], the only real remaining question is not whether Americans can carry firearms, but where.

Disentangling Textualism And Originalism, Katie Eyer

ConLawNOW

Textualism and originalism are not the same interpretive theory. Textualism commands adherence to the text. Originalism, in contrast, commands adherence to history. It should be self-evident that these are not—put simply—the same thing. While textualism and originalism may in some circumstances be harnessed to work in tandem—or may in some circumstances lead to the same result—they are different inquiries, and command fidelity to different ultimate guiding principles.

In this Essay, I argue that disentangling textualism and originalism is critical to the future vibrancy and legitimacy of textualism as an interpretive methodology. When conflated with originalism, textualism holds almost endless opportunities …

Roe V. Wade Under Attack: Choosing Procedural Doctrines Over Fundamental Constitutional Rights, Simona Grossi

ConLawNOW

This Article details the Texas litigation on abortion rights in and out of the U.S. Supreme Court in 2021 and its implications for the future of constitutional rights. The litigation focused primarily on procedural issues like standing and sovereign immunity that prevented the plaintiffs’ claims of violation of fundamental constitutional rights to proceed to their merits. Such procedural doctrines have become a powerful tool in the hands of the Supreme Court used to control social and economic development. Thus procedure, originally conceived as the handmaid of justice, has become one of its main antagonists. This Article argues against such abuses …