Law Commons^™

Nuclear Weapons, The War Powers, And The Constitution: Mutually Assured Destruction?, John M. Dipippa

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Post-Truth First Amendment, Sarah Haan

Indiana Law Journal

Post-truthism is widely viewed as a political problem. This Article explores posttruthism as a constitutional law problem, and argues that, because post-truthism offers a normative framework for regulating information, we should take it seriously as a basis for law.

In its exploration of the influence of post-truth ideas on law, the Article focuses on the compelled speech doctrine. When the State mandates disclosure, it pits the interests of unwilling speakers against the interests of listeners. In the twenty-first century, speakers who are targeted by mandatory disclosure laws are often organizational actors with informational advantages, such as corporations. Listeners who stand …

Hard Cases Make Bad Law: Extraterritorial Application Of The United States Constitution, Brendan O. Beutell

West Virginia Law Review

The Constitution’s extraterritorial scope does not arise often in litigation. Two recent decisions broached the issue. Both arrived at opposite conclusions. And these decisions share a common thread: They confuse more than they clarify while begetting novel questions of law. Does the Constitution protect noncitizens abroad? If so, how? If not, why not? This Note addresses each of these questions in turn. Ultimately, this Note concludes that the Constitution does not have any extraterritorial application whatsoever to noncitizens abroad.

The Need For A Wealth Inequality Amendment, Stuart Ford

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Symposium: 50 Years With The 25th Amendment: Interpreting The Twenty-Fifth Amendment: Major Controversies, Harold Hongju Koh

ConLawNOW

In recent months, probably no constitutional provision has been more discussed, but less well understood, than Section Four of the Twenty-fifth Amendment. In its fifty-year history, the provision has never been triggered. But were that to happen, that constitutional provision could lead to the permanent separation of an American President from his powers and duties within less than one month. The Amendment's text raises numerous interpretive questions. This lecture functions as a reader's guide to Yale Law School Rule of Law Clinic's Reader's Guide to the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which seeks to answer those questions. The …

The Popular Constitutional Canon, Tom Donnelly

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Popular constitutionalism scholarship has often left out the American people. Sure, ordinary citizens make cameo appearances—often through the actions of elected officials and elite movement leaders. However, focusing on high politics among elite actors—even if those actors are not judges—simply is not enough. If popular constitutional views do, indeed, matter, then we can expect constitutional partisans to try to manipulate the processes through which these views emerge. Some constitutional scholars have made a start, reflecting on the importance of the constitutional canon. However, these scholars focus mostly on the legal canon and often ignore its popular analog. At the same …

Symposium: Erie At Eighty: Choice Of Law Across The Disciplines: Erie, Remedies, And Trade Secrets, Camilla A. Hrdy

ConLawNOW

At “Erie at Eighty: Choice of Law Across the Disciplines,” I learned a lot from my colleagues on the intellectual property law panel. I also learned a lot from remedies expert Professor Michael Morley. Professor Morley argued quite vociferously that federal courts have wrongly been applying federal rules in deciding whether to grant injunctions for state law claims in diversity cases. In other words, federal courts regularly violate the Erie doctrine.

This has some fascinating implications for trade secret law. Prior to federalization, when plaintiffs could only bring state civil trade secret claims, federal courts in diversity cases naturally …

Symposium: Erie At Eighty: Choice Of Law Across The Disciplines: Erie Doctrine, State Law, And Civil Rights Litigation, Alexander A. Reinert

ConLawNOW

How should state law questions and claims be resolved when they arise in federal civil rights litigation? In prior work, I have criticized the given wisdom that the Erie doctrine, while originating in diversity cases, applies in all cases whatever the basis for federal jurisdiction. In that work, I proposed a framework, “Erie Step Zero,” to place Erie questions in their jurisdictional context. As I have argued, the concern with forum shopping and unequal treatment that prompted Erie have less salience in federal question cases. Different concerns emerge when one focuses on the presence of state law issues in …

Symposium: Erie At Eighty: Choice Of Law Across The Disciplines: An Erie Approach To Privilege Doctrine, Megan M. La Belle

ConLawNOW

Privilege rules, which determine whether information is discoverable in a particular litigation, often vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Consequently, the Erie doctrine and other choice-of-law principles play an important role in shaping privilege law. This essay, written for the Sixth Annual Constitutional Law Conference at the University of Akron School of Law, considers two recent privilege cases—HannStar Display Corp. v. Sony Electronics, Inc. and In re Silver—which involved the California mediation privilege and the federal patent-agent privilege, respectively. While the HannStar court ignored well-established choice-of-law principles, the Silver decision shows that, when applied and interpreted appropriately, doctrines …

Symposium: Erie At Eighty: Choice Of Law Across The Disciplines: Erie'S Intellectual History, Craig Green

ConLawNOW

Erie R.R. v. Tompkins is an iconic case in American law, and it has held that status for a very long time. One byproduct of such longevity is that the decision’s meaning and context have changed dramatically through the ages. Indeed, the sheer variability of Erie’s interpretations helps to explain why the decision has remained such an important, controversial, and influential feature of American legal thought for eighty years. This essay offers a brief and schematic account of Erie’s intellectual history, while also offering cautionary signals about Erie’s most recent group of interpreters. Even for observers who might endorse Erie’s …

States As Civil Rights Actors: Assessing Advocacy Mechanisms Within A State’S Legislative, Executive, And Judicial Branches, Jennifer Safstrom

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reframing The Affirmative Action Debate To Move Beyond Arguments For Diversity And Interest Convergence, Adrian Jamal Mclain, Steven L. Nelson

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Comprehensive Rethinking Of Equal Protection Post-Obergefelll: A Plea For Substantivity In Law, Shannon Gilreath

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trusting The Federalism Process Under Unique Circumstances: United States Election Administration And Cybersecurity, Eric S. Lynch

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Doctrine Of The Same-Sex Marriage Cases: A Brief Analysis Of Animus, Samuel G. Gustafson

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

This paper delves into the background of two fundamental Supreme Court cases in order to clarify and explain the basics of the animus doctrine. It proposes dividing the animus test into two parts, a triggering test to determine when a review for animus is appropriate and the actual test for animus. This split clarifies when challenges of animus can be brought and when they are clearly not present. The split also serves as a check on animus to prevent its over application. Finally, this paper proposes that the animus doctrine can solve many of issues that courts continue to identify …

Panel 4: Criminal Procedure And Affirmative Action

Georgia State University Law Review

Moderator: Lauren Sudeall

Panelists: Dan Epps, Gail Heriot, and Corinna Lain

Panel 6: The Median Justice

Georgia State University Law Review

Moderator: Eric Segall

Panelists: Jonathan Adler, Lee Epstein, and Sasha Volokh

Panel 2: Justice Kennedy's Prose — Style And Substance

Georgia State University Law Review

Moderator: Eric Segall

Panelists: Eric Berger, Michael Dorf, and Jamal Greene

Panel 3: Free Speech And Freedom Of Religion

Georgia State University Law Review

Moderator: Eric Segall

Panelists: Mike Dorf and Eugene Volokh

Panel 5: Federalism And Separation Of Powers

Georgia State University Law Review

Moderator: Eric Segall

Panelists: Stephen Griffin, Neil Kinkopf, and Ilya Somin

Antitrust As Speech Control, Hillary Greene, Dennis A. Yao

William & Mary Law Review

Antitrust law, at times, dictates who, when, and about what people can and cannot speak. It would seem then that the First Amendment might have something to say about those constraints. And it does, though perhaps less directly and to a lesser degree than one might expect. This Article examines the interface between those regimes while recasting antitrust thinking in terms of speech control.

Our review of the antitrust-First Amendment legal landscape focuses on the role of speech control. It reveals that while First Amendment issues are explicitly addressed relatively infrequently within antitrust decisions that is, in part, because certain …

Accommodating Competition: Harmonizing National Constitutional And Antitrust Commitments, Jonathan B. Baker

William & Mary Law Review

This Article shows how the norm supporting governmental action to protect and foster competitive markets was harmonized with economic rights to contract and property during the 19th century, and with the development of the social safety net during the 20th century. It explains why the Constitution, as understood today, does not check the erosion of the entrenched but threatened national commitment to assuring competitive markets.

Scrutinizing Anticompetitive State Regulations Through Constitutional And Antitrust Lenses, Daniel A. Crane

William & Mary Law Review

State and local regulations that anticompetitively favor certain producers to the detriment of consumers are a pervasive problem in our economy. Their existence is explicable by a variety of structural features—including asymmetry between consumer and producer interests, cost externalization, and institutional and political factors entrenching incumbent technologies. Formulating legal tools to combat such economic parochialism is challenging in the post-Lochner world, where any move toward heightened judicial review of economic regulation poses the perceived threat of a return to economic substantive due process. This Article considers and compares two potential tools for reviewing such regulations—a constitutional principle against anticompetitive parochialism …

Parker V. Brown, The Eleventh Amendment, And Anticompetitive State Regulation, William H. Page, John E. Lopatka

William & Mary Law Review

The Parker v. Brown (or “state action”) doctrine and the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution impose different limits on antitrust suits challenging anticompetitive state regulation. The Supreme Court has developed these two versions of state sovereign immunity separately, and lower courts usually apply the immunities independently of each other (even in the same cases) without explaining their relationship. Nevertheless, the Court has derived the two immunities from the same principle of sovereign immunity, so it is worth considering why and how they differ, and what the consequences of the differences are for antitrust policy. The state action immunity is based …

Religious Freedom Through Market Freedom: The Sherman Act And The Marketplace For Religion, Barak D. Richman

William & Mary Law Review

In prior work, I examined certain restraints by private religious organizations and concluded that the First Amendment did not immunize these organizations from antitrust liability. In short, the First Amendment did not preempt enforcing the Sherman Act against certain religious monopolies or cartels.

This Article offers a stronger argument: First Amendment values demand antitrust enforcement. Because American religious freedoms, enshrined in the Constitution and reflected in American history, are quintessentially exercised when decentralized communities create their own religious expression, the First Amendment’s religion clauses are best exemplified by a proverbial marketplace for religions. Any effort to stifle a market organization …

“Competition Policy In Its Broadest Sense:” Michael Pertschuk’S Chairmanship Of The Federal Trade Commission 1977-1981, William E. Kovacic

William & Mary Law Review

In the late 1960s and through the 1970s, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) undertook an ambitious program of reforms. Among other measures, the agency expanded the focus of antitrust enforcement to address economic concentration, including the use of Section 5 of the FTC Act to restructure dominant firms and oligopolies. In many ways Michael Pertschuk, who chaired the agency from 1977 to 1981, became the symbol of the FTC’s efforts to stretch the boundaries of antitrust policy—to pursue a conception of “competition policy in its broadest sense.” Despite a number of valuable accomplishments, the FTC achieved relatively few litigation successes, …

Antitrust And The Politics Of State Action, Thomas B. Nachbar

William & Mary Law Review

In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners, the Court refused to exempt the board from the second element of Parker immunity—active supervision by the state—because the Board was made up largely of “active market participants.” This Article argues that the “active market participant” rule laid out in North Carolina State Board, while intuitively appealing, ignores important political values represented by antitrust law, values most evident in the context of state action immunity. By focusing on the potential market harm from self-interested regulators, the Court ignored a series of political harms inherent in the structure of the North …

Epilogue: From Too Tall To Trim And Small, Mark A. Drumbl

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

State Empowerment And The Compact Clause, James F. Blumstein, Thomas J. Cheeseman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The (Limited) Constitutional Right To Compete In An Occupation, Rebecca Haw Allensworth

William & Mary Law Review

Is there a constitutional right to compete in an occupation? The “right to earn a living” movement, gaining steam in policy circles and winning some battles in the lower courts, says so. Advocates for this right say that the right to compete in an occupation stands on equal footing with our most sacred constitutional rights such as the right to be free from racial discrimination. This Article takes a different view, arguing that while there is a limited constitutional right to compete in an occupation, it is—and should be—weaker than these advocates claim. Some state licensing laws run afoul of …