Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Supreme Court of the United States Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (312)
- Courts (176)
- State and Local Government Law (142)
- Judges (94)
- Jurisprudence (75)
-
- Criminal Procedure (72)
- Criminal Law (52)
- Fourteenth Amendment (51)
- Legal History (38)
- Civil Procedure (37)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (36)
- First Amendment (36)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (35)
- Fourth Amendment (33)
- Legislation (33)
- Civil Law (30)
- Law and Politics (24)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (24)
- Election Law (21)
- Litigation (18)
- Jurisdiction (17)
- President/Executive Department (15)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (15)
- Law and Race (14)
- Law and Society (14)
- Rule of Law (13)
- Legal Profession (10)
- Administrative Law (9)
- Institution
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (146)
- University of Michigan Law School (110)
- New York Law School (13)
- University of Richmond (9)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (8)
-
- Cleveland State University (6)
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (6)
- Wayne State University (6)
- Boston University School of Law (4)
- Brooklyn Law School (4)
- Georgetown University Law Center (4)
- Selected Works (4)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (3)
- Penn State Dickinson Law (3)
- Roger Williams University (3)
- St. John's University School of Law (3)
- The University of Akron (3)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (3)
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
- Columbia Law School (2)
- Florida State University College of Law (2)
- Pepperdine University (2)
- Seattle University School of Law (2)
- Southern Methodist University (2)
- St. Mary's University (2)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (2)
- University of Washington School of Law (2)
- Florida International University College of Law (1)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- Liberty University (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Touro Law Review (140)
- Michigan Law Review (53)
- Articles (41)
- NYLS Law Review (10)
- University of Richmond Law Review (8)
-
- Faculty Scholarship (7)
- Indiana Law Journal (6)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (6)
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (6)
- Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity (5)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (5)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (4)
- Journal of Law and Policy (4)
- Akron Law Review (3)
- Articles & Chapters (3)
- Reviews (3)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (2)
- Books (2)
- Cleveland State Law Review (2)
- Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present) (2)
- Faculty Articles (2)
- Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters (2)
- Faculty Publications (2)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (2)
- Northwestern University Law Review (2)
- Pepperdine Law Review (2)
- Scholarly Publications (2)
- Scholarly Works (2)
- Seattle University Law Review (2)
- St. John's Law Review (2)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 373
Full-Text Articles in Supreme Court of the United States
Originalism After Dobbs, Bruen, And Kennedy: The Role Of History And Tradition, Randy E. Barnett, Lawrence B. Solum
Originalism After Dobbs, Bruen, And Kennedy: The Role Of History And Tradition, Randy E. Barnett, Lawrence B. Solum
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In three recent cases, the constitutional concepts of history and tradition have played important roles in the reasoning of the Supreme Court. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization relied on history and tradition to overrule Roe v. Wade. New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen articulated a history and tradition test for the validity of laws regulating the right to bear arms recognized by the Second Amendment. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District looked to history and tradition in formulating the test for the consistency of state action with the Establishment Clause.
These cases raise important questions about …
Using Bruen To Overturn New York Times V. Sullivan, Michael L. Smith, Alexander S. Hiland
Using Bruen To Overturn New York Times V. Sullivan, Michael L. Smith, Alexander S. Hiland
Pepperdine Law Review
While New York Times Co. v. Sullivan is a foundational, well-regarded First Amendment case, Justice Clarence Thomas has repeatedly called on the Court to revisit it. Sullivan, Thomas claims, is policy masquerading as constitutional law, and it makes almost no effort to ground itself in the original meaning of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Thomas argues that at the time of the founding, libelous statements were routinely subject to criminal prosecution—including libel of public figures and public officials. This Essay connects Justice Thomas’s calls to revisit Sullivan to his recent opinion for the Court in New York State Rifle & …
No Sense Of Decency, Kathryn E. Miller
No Sense Of Decency, Kathryn E. Miller
Washington Law Review
For nearly seventy years, the Court has assessed Eighth Amendment claims by evaluating “the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.” In this Article, I examine the evolving standards of decency test, which has long been a punching bag for critics on both the right and the left. Criticism of the doctrine has been fierce but largely academic until recent years. Some fault the test for being too majoritarian, while others argue that it provides few constraints on the Justices’ discretion, permitting their personal predilections to rule the day. For many, the test is seen …
A Country In Crisis: A Review Of How The Illegitimate Supreme Court Is Rendering Illegitimate Decisions And Doing Damage That Will Not Soon Be Undone., Regina L. Ramsey ,Esq
A Country In Crisis: A Review Of How The Illegitimate Supreme Court Is Rendering Illegitimate Decisions And Doing Damage That Will Not Soon Be Undone., Regina L. Ramsey ,Esq
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
This article will discuss in detail exactly how the court is illegitimate and makes decisions that are illegitimate, using examples from the October 2021 term. It will also explain why action needs to be taken immediately to reign in this run-away Court to restore public trust. As discussed herein, we cannot sit by and patiently wait for the Court to right itself over time because there are important issues on the current docket, such as race-conscious admissions policies of colleges and universities to ensure student bodies are diverse as future leaders are prepared to live and work in a diverse …
Depoliticizing The Supreme Court: How To Rein In Those Answerable To No One?, Dana Ortiz-Tulla ,Esq
Depoliticizing The Supreme Court: How To Rein In Those Answerable To No One?, Dana Ortiz-Tulla ,Esq
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
This Note will discuss some of the Commission’s findings and other interesting suggestions to determine whether it is possible to rein in the modern-day Court. Part I will explain the inherently political nature of the Supreme Court. Part II will briefly present how the Supreme Court acquired its power. Part III will discuss several prominent proposals for Supreme Court reform. Finally, Part IV will examine whether any recommendations may depoliticize the Court.
The Ripple Effects Of Dobbs On Health Care Beyond Wanted Abortion, Maya Manian
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 Arc Of The Moral Universe": Christian Eschatology And U.S. Constitutionalism, Nathan Chapman
"The Arc Of The Moral Universe": Christian Eschatology And U.S. Constitutionalism, Nathan Chapman
Scholarly Works
At the heart of American constitutionalism is an irony. The United States is constitutionally committed to religious neutrality; the government may not take sides in religious disputes. Yet many features of constitutional law are inexplicable without their intellectual and cultural origins in religious beliefs, practices, and movements. The process of constitutionalization has been one of secularization. The most obvious example is perhaps also the most ideal of liberty of conscience that fueled religious disestablishment, free exercise, and equality was born of a Protestant view of the individual’s responsibility before God.
This Essay explores another overlooked instance of constitutional secularization. Many …
Confrontation, The Legacy Of Crawford, And Important Unanswered Questions, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman
Confrontation, The Legacy Of Crawford, And Important Unanswered Questions, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This is a short piece for the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform as part of its 2024 Symposium on “Crawford at 20: Reforming the Confrontation Clause.” The piece's purpose is to highlight certain important questions left unanswered by Crawford v. Washington and subsequent confrontation cases.
Systemic Racism In The U.S. Immigration Laws, Kevin R. Johnson
Systemic Racism In The U.S. Immigration Laws, Kevin R. Johnson
Indiana Law Journal
This Essay analyzes how aggressive activism in a California mountain town at the tail end of the nineteenth century commenced a chain reaction resulting in state and ultimately national anti-Chinese immigration laws. The constitutional immunity through which the Supreme Court upheld those laws deeply affected the future trajectory of U.S. immigration law and policy.
Responding to sustained political pressure from the West, Congress in 1882 passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, an infamous piece of unabashedly racist legislation that commenced a long process of barring immigration from all of Asia to the United States. In upholding the Act, the Supreme Court …
Holmes V. Walton And Its Enduring Lessons For Originalism, Justin W. Aimonetti
Holmes V. Walton And Its Enduring Lessons For Originalism, Justin W. Aimonetti
Marquette Law Review
Originalism is nothing new. And the New Jersey Supreme Court’s 1780 decision in Holmes v. Walton shows it. In that case, the New Jersey Supreme Court disallowed a state law as repugnant to the state constitution because the law permitted a jury of only six to render a judgment. To reach that result, the court looked to the fixed, original meaning of the jury trial guarantee embedded in the state constitution, and it then constrained its interpretive latitude in conformity with that fixed meaning. Holmes thus cuts against the common misconception that originalism as an interpretive methodology is a modern …
Original(Ism) Sin, G. Alex Sinha
Original(Ism) Sin, G. Alex Sinha
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
During President Trump’s term in office, the Senate confirmed nearly 250 of his federal judicial nominees, including 3 to the Supreme Court of the United States. That number amounts to nearly a third of the federal judiciary’s roughly 800 active members. By and large, the judges nominated by President Trump purport to apply some form of originalist constitutional interpretation or construction, though the subject of originalism featured perhaps most prominently at the confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett, whom President Trump nominated in October of 2020 to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Whatever one thinks of the vast literature …
Tort Law Implications Of Compelled Physician Speech, Nadia N. Sawicki
Tort Law Implications Of Compelled Physician Speech, Nadia N. Sawicki
Indiana Law Journal
Abortion-specific informed consent laws in many states compel physicians to communicate state-mandated information that is arguably inaccurate, immaterial, and inconsistent with their professional obligations. These laws face ongoing First Amendment challenges as violations of the constitutional right against compelled speech. This Article argues that laws compelling physician speech also pose significant problems that should concern scholars of tort law.
State laws that impose tort liability on physicians who refuse to communicate a state-mandated message often do so by deviating from foundational principles of tort law. Not only do they change the substantive disclosure duties of physicians under informed consent law, …
The Pledge Of Allegiance And Compelled Speech Revisited: Requiring Parental Consent, Caroline Mala Corbin
The Pledge Of Allegiance And Compelled Speech Revisited: Requiring Parental Consent, Caroline Mala Corbin
Indiana Law Journal
Since the Supreme Court decided West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette in 1943, free speech law has been clear: public schools may not force students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Nevertheless, in two states—Texas and Florida— students may decline to participate only with parental permission. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law on the grounds that the parental requirement furthered parents’ substantive due process right to control the upbringing of their children.
The Eleventh Circuit decision is flawed both in its understanding of the First Amendment right to be free of compelled speech and the …
Nifla And The Construction Of Compelled Speech Doctrine, Robert Post
Nifla And The Construction Of Compelled Speech Doctrine, Robert Post
Indiana Law Journal
Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. There are good and convincing explanations for the Court’s decision in Barnette, but the Court’s recent expansion of the doctrine, culminating in National Institute of Family & Life Advocates (NIFLA) v. Becerra, holds that compelled speech is in most instances “content-based” regulation requiring heightened judicial scrutiny.
Using examples ranging from professional malpractice to compulsory tax returns, this Article argues that the doctrinal rule of NIFLA is demonstrably incorrect. It suggests that the doctrinal category of “compelled speech” may itself be confused insofar as it imagines that all legal obligations to communicate are equally …
Compelled Disclosure And The Workplace Rights It Enables, Catherine Fisk
Compelled Disclosure And The Workplace Rights It Enables, Catherine Fisk
Indiana Law Journal
Worker and consumer protection laws often rely on the regulated entity to notify workers or consumers of their legal rights because it is effective and efficient to provide information at the time and place where it is most likely to be useful. Until the Supreme Court ruled in NIFLA v. Becerra in 2018 that a California law regulating crisis pregnancy centers was an unconstitutional speaker-based, contentdiscriminatory regulation of speech, mandatory disclosure laws were constitutionally uncontroversial economic regulation. Yet, the day after striking down a disclosure law in NIFLA, the Court in Janus v. AFSCME Council 31 expanded the right of …
Constitutional Interpretation: Have The Methods Used By The Supreme Court Changed Over Time?, Morgan A. Matney
Constitutional Interpretation: Have The Methods Used By The Supreme Court Changed Over Time?, Morgan A. Matney
Chancellor’s Honors Program Projects
No abstract provided.
When Police Volunteer To Kill, Alexandra L. Klein
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 …
When Interpretive Communities Clash On Immigration Law: The Courts’ Mediating Role In Noncitizens’ Rights And Remedies, Peter Margulies
When Interpretive Communities Clash On Immigration Law: The Courts’ Mediating Role In Noncitizens’ Rights And Remedies, Peter Margulies
Touro Law Review
Immigration law gains clarity through the lens of Robert Cover's compelling work on law as a "system of meaning." Cover's vision inspires us to consider immigration law as a contest between two interpretive communities: acolytes of the protective approach, which sees law as a haven for noncitizens fleeing harm in their home countries, and followers of the regulatory approach, which stresses sovereignty and strict adherence to legal categories. Immigration law's contest between contending camps need not be a zero-sum game. As Cover and Alex Aleinikoff observed in their classic article on habeas corpus, a legal remedy can also be a …
The Immigrant Struggle For Effective Counsel: An Empirical Assessment, Jayanth K. Krishnan
The Immigrant Struggle For Effective Counsel: An Empirical Assessment, Jayanth K. Krishnan
Articles by Maurer Faculty
Recently, in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, the Supreme Court upheld 8 U.S.C. § 1252(e)(2), a statutory provision placing restrictions on certain noncitizens from seeking habeas review in the federal judiciary. The Court focused on the Constitution’s Suspension Clause, but it also discussed the Due Process Clause, declaring that there was no violation there either.
One question which flows from this decision is whether the federal courts will soon be precluded from hearing other types of claims brought by noncitizens. Consider ineffective assistance of counsel petitions, which in the immigration law context are rooted in the Due Process Clause. …
Can The Fourth Amendment Keep People "Secure In Their Persons"?, Bruce A. Green
Can The Fourth Amendment Keep People "Secure In Their Persons"?, Bruce A. Green
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
House Rules: Congress And The Attorney-Client Privilege, David Rapallo
House Rules: Congress And The Attorney-Client Privilege, David Rapallo
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In 2020, the Supreme Court rendered a landmark decision in Trump v. Mazars establishing four factors for determining the validity of congressional subpoenas for a sitting president’s personal papers. In an unanticipated move, Chief Justice John Roberts added that recipients of congressional subpoenas have “long been understood” to retain not only constitutional privileges, but common law privileges developed by judges, including the attorney-client privilege. This was particularly surprising since Trump was not relying on the attorney-client privilege and the Court had never treated this common law privilege as overriding Congress’s Article I power to set its own procedures for conducting …
Winston Churchill On The American Constitution, Gerard N. Magliocca
Winston Churchill On The American Constitution, Gerard N. Magliocca
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
Though best known for leading Britain during World War II, Winston Churchill was a keen observer of constitutional law. Most of his insights concerned the unwritten conventions of the British Constitution, but Churchill also commented extensively on the American Constitution. Intellectual curiosity and a desire to forge a closer alliance between Great Britain and the United States were at the root of Churchill’s interest in the institutions of what he called “The Great Republic.” As with all things Churchill, his observations on our Constitution were sometimes inspiring, sometimes illuminating, and sometimes noxious.
This Article provides the first comprehensive analysis …
The Meaning, History, And Importance Of The Elections Clause, Eliza Sweren-Becker, Michael Waldman
The Meaning, History, And Importance Of The Elections Clause, Eliza Sweren-Becker, Michael Waldman
Washington Law Review
Historically, the Supreme Court has offered scant attention to or analysis of the Elections Clause, resulting in similarly limited scholarship on the Clause’s original meaning and public understanding over time. The Clause directs states to make regulations for the time, place, and manner of congressional elections, and grants Congress superseding authority to make or alter those rules.
But the 2020 elections forced the Elections Clause into the spotlight, with Republican litigants relying on the Clause to ask the Supreme Court to limit which state actors can regulate federal elections. This new focus comes on the heels of the Clause serving …
The Religion Of Race: The Supreme Court As Priests Of Racial Politics, Audra Savage
The Religion Of Race: The Supreme Court As Priests Of Racial Politics, Audra Savage
Utah Law Review
The tumultuous summer of 2020 opened the eyes of many Americans, leading to a general consensus on one issue—racism still exists. This Article offers a new descriptive account of America’s history that can contextualize the zeitgeist of racial politics. It argues that the Founding Fathers created a national civil religion based on racism when they compromised on the issue of slavery in the creation of the Constitution. This religion, called the Religion of Race, is built on a belief system where whiteness is sacred and Blackness is profane. The sacred text is the Constitution, and it is interpreted by the …
Suspect Spheres, Not Enumerated Powers: A Guide For Leaving The Lamppost, Richard Primus, Roderick M. Hills Jr.
Suspect Spheres, Not Enumerated Powers: A Guide For Leaving The Lamppost, Richard Primus, Roderick M. Hills Jr.
Michigan Law Review
Despite longstanding orthodoxy, the Constitution’s enumeration of congressional powers does virtually nothing to limit federal lawmaking. That’s not because of some bizarrely persistent judicial failure to read the Constitution correctly. It’s because the enumeration of congressional powers is not a well-designed technology for limiting federal legislation. Rather than trying to make the enumeration do work that it will not do, decisionmakers should find better ways of thinking about what lawmaking should be done locally rather than nationally. This Article suggests such a rubric, one that asks not whether Congress has permission to do a certain thing but whether a certain …
2nd Annual Women In Law Leadership Lecture: A Fireside Chat With Debra Katz, Esq. 03-03-2021, Roger Williams University School Of Law
2nd Annual Women In Law Leadership Lecture: A Fireside Chat With Debra Katz, Esq. 03-03-2021, Roger Williams University School Of Law
School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events
No abstract provided.
Amen Over All Men: The Supreme Court’S Preservation Of Religious Rights And What That Means For Fulton V. City Of Philadelphia, Christopher Manettas
Amen Over All Men: The Supreme Court’S Preservation Of Religious Rights And What That Means For Fulton V. City Of Philadelphia, Christopher Manettas
Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity
No abstract provided.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Wise Legal Giant, Thomas A. Schweitzer
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Wise Legal Giant, Thomas A. Schweitzer
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The People's Court: On The Intellectual Origins Of American Judicial Power, Ian C. Bartrum
The People's Court: On The Intellectual Origins Of American Judicial Power, Ian C. Bartrum
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
This article enters into the modern debate between “consti- tutional departmentalists”—who contend that the executive and legislative branches share constitutional interpretive authority with the courts—and what are sometimes called “judicial supremacists.” After exploring the relevant history of political ideas, I join the modern minority of voices in the latter camp.
This is an intellectual history of two evolving political ideas—popular sovereignty and the separation of powers—which merged in the making of American judicial power, and I argue we can only understand the structural function of judicial review by bringing these ideas together into an integrated whole. Or, put another way, …
Re-Reading Chevron, Thomas W. Merrill
Re-Reading Chevron, Thomas W. Merrill
Faculty Scholarship
Though increasingly disfavored by the Supreme Court, Chevron remains central to administrative law doctrine. This Article suggests a way for the Court to reformulate the Chevron doctrine without overruling the Chevron decision. Through careful attention to the language of Chevron itself, the Court can honor the decision’s underlying value of harnessing comparative institutional advantage in judicial review, while setting aside a highly selective reading that unduly narrows judicial review. This re-reading would put the Chevron doctrine – and with it, an entire branch of administrative law – on firmer footing.