Digital Commons Network^™

Alexander Hamilton And Administrative Law: How America’S First Great Public Administrator Informs And Challenges Our Understanding Of Contemporary Administrative Law, Rodger D. Citron

Scholarly Works

Alexander Hamilton’s recognition and reputation have soared since the premiere of “Hamilton,” Lin-Manuel Miranda’s musical about him in 2015. For lawyers, Hamilton’s work on the Federalist Papers and service as the nation’s first Treasury Secretary likely stand out more than other aspects of his extraordinary life. Politics and economics were fundamental concerns addressed by the Framers in a number of ways, including what we now refer to as administrative law—the laws and procedures that guide government departments (or, as we say today, agencies). Indeed, “Hamilton” reminds us that questions of administration and administrative law have been with us since the …

“The Cruelty Is The Point”: Using Buck V. Bell As A Tool For Diversifying Instruction In The Law School Classroom, Tiffany C. Graham

Scholarly Works

Instructors who are looking for opportunities to expose their students to the ways in which intersectional forms of bias impact policy and legal rules can use Buck v. Bell to explore, for instance, the impact of disability and class on the formation of doctrine. A different intersectional approach might use the discussion of the case as a gateway to a broader conversation about the ways in which race and gender bias structured the implementation of sterilization policies around the nation. Finally, those who wish to examine the global impact of American forms of bias can use this case and the …

Second Amendment Sanctuaries: Defiance, Discretion, And Race, Nicholas J. Johnson

Faculty Scholarship

Second Amendment Sanctuaries deploy nonenforcement policies and strategies in defiance of firearms laws of superior jurisdictions. The scholarship so far has focused on whether Second Amendment Sanctuary policies are legally enforceable. This Article advances the scholarship beyond questions of de jure validity by examining the potential for practical, de facto efficacy of Second Amendment Sanctuary policies. This Article concludes that even where Second Amendment Sanctuaries have weak claims to formal validity, defiant public officials still have broad opportunities to implement Second Amendment Sanctuary policies through the exercise of enforcement discretion. The conclusion that enforcement discretion can effectuate sanctuary policies is …

Originalism, Common Good Constitutionalism, And Transparency, Michael L. Smith

Faculty Articles

A theory of interpretation that is more transparent tends to be preferable to less transparent alternatives. Increased transparency tends to promote the values of constraint, democratic legitimacy, and an understanding of what the law is. Under a transparency rubric, originalism, as a standard of interpretation, performs better than common good constitutionalism. Originalism provides a better defined (though still imperfect) basis for determining the correctness of claims about what the Constitution means. Common good constitutionalism's reliance on morally and politically loaded terminology makes it elusive as a standard of interpretation which tends to match the desires of the interpreter. At the …

A Vague, Overconfident, And Malleable Approach To Constitutional Law, Michael L. Smith

Faculty Articles

In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, the Supreme Court overturned a century-old firearms licensing scheme that required people seeking concealed carry permits to demonstrate that they had a special need for self-defense. The Court did so by applying a “historical tradition” approach to determine the scope of Second Amendment protection. Under this approach, where the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, a law restricting that conduct must be consistent with “the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” At first glance, the historical tradition approach may seem objective and easier than an empirical analysis …

Establishment As Tradition, Marc O. Degirolami

Scholarly Articles

Traditionalism is a constitutional theory that focuses on concrete political and cultural practices, and the endurance of those practices before, during, and after the ratification of the Constitution, as the presumptive determinants of constitutional meaning and constitutional law. The Supreme Court has long interpreted traditionally but now says explicitly that it uses a method of “text, history, and tradition” in several areas of constitutional law. Foremost among these is the Establishment Clause. This Essay examines two questions about traditionalism, both of which concern the Establishment Clause in distinct but related ways. First, why has traditionalism had special salience in this …

Sincerity, Subjectivity & Religion: The Evolution Of Rfra From A Constitutional Shield To A Political Sword, Emily Kathryn Tubb

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Legitimate State Interest Or Educational Censorship: The Chilling Effect Of Oklahoma House Bill 1775, Jennie A. Hill

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Rise And Fall Of The Horseracing Integrity And Safety Act: How Congress Could Save The “Sport Of Kings”, Lucy Mcafee

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) has undergone several unsuccessful changes over the past decade in an effort to change how horseracing is regulated. After Congress successfully passed HISA in 2020, several lawsuits were filed to stop HISA from going into effect. Congress quickly passed an amendment to HISA—which the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld—seemingly stopping such litigation, but it is clear from opponents’ statements that this is just the beginning. This Note will examine the constitutional arguments’ strengths and weaknesses through precedent to determine whether the long-awaited act, as amended, can stand the test …

The Not-So-Standard Model: Reconsidering Agency-Head Review Of Administrative Adjudication Decisions, Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Nina A. Mendelson

Articles

The Supreme Court has invalidated multiple legislative design choices for independent agency structures in recent years, citing Article II and the need for political accountability through presidential control of agencies. In United States v. Arthrex, Inc., the Court turned to administrative adjudication, finding an Appointments Clause violation in the assignment of certain final patent adjudication decisions to appellate panels of unconfirmed administrative patent judges. As a remedy, a different majority declared unenforceable a statutory provision that had insulated Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) administrative adjudication decisions from political review for almost a century. The Court thereby enabled the politically appointed …

The Appropriate Appropriations Inquiry, Chad Squitieri

Scholarly Articles

The Supreme Court is set to hear oral argument this fall concerning whether the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is unconstitutionally self-funded. The question presented in the case asks whether the statute establishing the CFPB’s self-funding scheme, 12 U.S.C. § 5497, “violates the Appropriations Clause.” But that question is incomplete at best, because although the Appropriations Clause requires that “appropriations” be “made by law,” the Appropriations Clause does not itself vest Congress with any authority to make “law” in the first place. Instead, Congress’s authority to make appropriations laws is vested in part by the Necessary and Proper Clause. Thus, …

The President Of The Senate, The Original Public Meaning Of The Twelfth Amendment, And The Electoral Count Reform Act, Derek T. Muller

Journal Articles

When Congress convenes under the Twelfth Amendment and the votes of presidential electors are counted, there are three different responsibilities to consider. First, who presides over the joint session where counting takes place, and what is the role of that presiding officer? Second, who counts the electoral votes? Third, who resolves disputes about those electoral votes?

This Essay answers those questions. First, the presiding officer in the joint session is the President of the Senate, and she acts as any other presiding officer of a legislature. She initiates actions pursuant to precedent, parliamentary procedures, and the wishes of the chamber. …

Lear’S Daughters? Unenumerated Fundamental Rights And The Constitution, Thomas Halper

Publications and Research

How to determine whether fundamental unenumerated constitutional rights exist, and if so, what they are? The questions are of obvious enormous importance—witness the current controversy over abortion—and yet courts have generally been content to address the issues superficially, sometimes, cavalierly. Their treatment of the most common rationale, an historical/traditional consensus, exemplifies this shallow approach. The underdeveloped character of the argumentation on this topic stubbornly remains one of the most glaring shortfalls of modern constitutional law.

Social Construction Of Race Undergirds Racism By Providing Undue Advantages To White People, Disadvantaging Black People And Other People Of Color, And Violating The Human Rights Of All People Of Color, Adjoa A. Aiyetoro

University of Colorado Law Review

No abstract provided.

Slave Law, Race Law, Gabriel J. Chin

University of Colorado Law Review

No abstract provided.

Separation Of Church And Law: The Ministerial Exception In Demkovich V. St. Andrew The Apostle Parish, Jonathan Murray

University of Colorado Law Review

Religious freedom is increasingly invoked to defeat liability for behavior that has long been regulated under accepted, neutral law, an argument to which many courts and judges appear receptive. One such area of law seeing this activity is the ministerial exception-a judicial principle recognized under the First Amendment. The ministerial exception guarantees religious organizations' discretion in how they select their "ministers,"or religious employees dedicated to the organization's religious mission. However, current law lacks clarity regarding the application of the exception to an organization's treatment of its ministers. Recently, the Seventh Circuit, sitting en banc, chose to categorically expand the application …

Immigration Enforcement Preemption, Pratheepan Gulasekaram

Publications

The Supreme Court's 2012 decision, Arizona v. United States, turned back the most robust and brazen state regulation of immigration in recent memory, striking down several provisions of Arizona's omnibus enforcement law. Notably, the Court did not limit preemption inquiries to conflicts between the state law and congressional statutes. The Court also based its decision on the tension between the state law and Executive Branch enforcement policies. The landmark decision seemed to have settled the Court's approach to immigration enforcement federalism. Yet, a scant eight years after Arizona, in Kansas v. Garcia, the Court upheld Kansas's prosecutions of noncitizens who …

The Second Amendment's "People" Problem, Pratheepan Gulasekaram

Publications

The Second Amendment has a “people” problem. In 2008, District of Columbia v. Heller expanded the scope of the Second Amendment, grounding it in an individualized right of self-protection. At the same time, Heller’s rhetoric limited “the people” of the Second Amendment to “law-abiding citizens.” In 2022, New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen doubled down on the Amendment’s self-defense rationales but, once again, framed the right as one possessed by “citizens.” In between and after the two Supreme Court cases, several lower federal courts, including eight federal courts of appeals, wrestled with the question whether the right …

Original Public Meaning, Lawrence B. Solum

Faculty Scholarship

“Original public meaning” has become increasingly important in constitutional discourse. This Article investigates the nature of original public meaning in three steps. First, each word in the phrase “original public meaning” is explicated and clarified. The word “original” represents the idea that the meaning of the constitutional text is fixed at the time each provision is framed and ratified. The word “public” signifies that the relevant meaning is ordinary meaning, the understanding of the text conveyed to the public at the time each provision was framed and ratified. The word “meaning” refers to the set of ideas (concepts and propositions) …

Etika Hakim Dalam Kehidupan Sehari-Hari: Penggunaan Media Sosial Oleh Hakim Di Indonesia, Farrel Eden Surbakti

Jurnal Konstitusi & Demokrasi

With the development of technology which is rapidly making the community easier in communicating and searching for information such as social media. Social media itself has different characteristics and types and has advantages and disadvantages. The use of social media does not look at a person's status such as age, gender, religion, or profession. At this time many judges use social media to communicate and search for information and interact with the community. Judges in carrying out their obligations as bearers of the legal profession are framed by an institutional institution that is formulated into a code of ethics for …

Domestic Terrorism Classification In The United States V. Canada And The United Kingdom, Michelle Hayek

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

For the past two decades, discourse on terrorism (both global and domestic) has been commonplace throughout the international sphere. Following the attacks on September 11, 2001, many nations have followed suit in launching counterterrorism operations to identify and prevent attacks by both radical groups and lone actors. While the common narrative has focused on “why” terrorist actors commit heinous acts and “how” to best prevent future incidents from emerging, it is important to analyze the legal nuances between prosecuting domestic versus international terrorists. With the rise on “homegrown” domestic lone actors, nations have had to reevaluate and adapt counterterrorism statutes …

Embracing The End: A Comparative Analysis Of Medical Aid In Dying In Canada And The United States, Joel Krinsky

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

Since the late nineteenth century, debate has unfolded over the use of euthanasia and physician-assisted death to alleviate the suffering of individuals with medical illnesses. The controversy surrounding the issue persists and its implications are significant. While most countries prohibit Aid in Dying (AID), legalization of the practice has expanded globally in recent years. Canada and the United States (US) are two such jurisdictions that have expanded access to AID. Canada has federally legalized the practice, which the country refers to as Medical Aid in Dying (MAID), and in 2021, the country expanded the eligibility criteria for individuals seeking access …

Do All Dogs Go To Heaven? How Our Secular Culture Views Death, Bruce Ledewitz

Newspaper Columns

Collected biweekly contributions to the Pennsylvania Capital-Star, a nonpartisan, nonprofit news site.

The Congruent Constitution (Part Two): Reverse Incorporation, Jay S. Bybee

BYU Law Review

In Bolling v. Sharpe (1954), a companion case to Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court thought it “unthinkable” that the Equal Protection Clause would not apply to the federal government as well as the states and declared it “reverse incorporated” through the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The Equal Protection Clause is the most familiar example of reverse incorporation, but it is neither the first nor the only provision of the Constitution that, by its terms, applies to the states alone, but which the Supreme Court has made applicable to the federal government through the Due …

Evaluating The Pro Se Plight: A Comprehensive Review Of Access To Justice Initiatives In Ohio Landlord-Tenant Law, Caleigh M. Harris

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Revisiting Employment Division V. Smith, Blaine L. Hutchison

University of Cincinnati Law Review

The Supreme Court wrongly decided Employment Division v. Smith. Without briefing or argument over the Free Exercise Clause’s meaning, Smith eliminated the constitutional right to exercise religion and replaced it with an equal protection rule. The decision threatens religious freedom and encourages conflict. The Supreme Court should revisit Smith. This article shows that the majority’s arguments in Smith fail and contradict the Free Exercise Clause’s text, purpose, and original meaning.

The Smith majority gave no sound legal or policy reason for its decision. Indeed, the decision conflicted with settled precedents that no party questioned. Nor did it determine …

Mutually Intelligible Principles?, Andrew J. Ziaja

Pace Law Review

Are the nondelegation, major questions, and political question doctrines mutually intelligible? This article asks whether there is more than superficial resemblance between the nondelegation, major questions, and political question concepts in Wayman v. Southard, 23 U.S. (10 Wheat.) 1 (1825), an early nondelegation case that has become focal in recent nondelegation and major questions scholarship and jurisprudence. I argue that the nondelegation and political question doctrines do interact conceptually in Wayman, though not as current proponents of the nondelegation doctrine on the Supreme Court seem to understand it. The major questions doctrine by contrast conscripts the nondelegation …

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 …

Meaningless Dna: Moore’S Inadequate Protection Of Genetic Material, Natalie Alexander

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Moore v. Regents of the University of California represents the seminal case regarding the protection of genetic material. In this case, the California Supreme Court held that patients do not retain property rights in their excised genetic material; instead, informed consent laws serve as genetic material’s only protection. Many states have accepted the Moore court’s decision not to extend property rights to genetic material, and most states choose to protect genetic material through informed consent alone. Moore and informed consent do not adequately protect genetic material, creating unjust results in which “donors” of genetic material have little to no recourse …

Navigating Beyond The Lodestar: Borrowing The Federal Sentencing Guidelines To Provide Fee-Shifting Predictability, Matthew Ahn

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The lodestar has been the dominant calculation method for fee-shifting awards for nearly 40 years. But the lodestar has numerous persistent issues: it leads to extra litigation and judicial effort, it results in highly variable fee awards, and it incentivizes plaintiffs’ attorneys to bill extravagantly and reject settlement. This Article argues that these issues with the lodestar, along with many others, result from a mismatch between the lodestar and the purpose of the underlying fee-shifting statutes, which is to encourage attorneys to bring suits that would not normally be economically viable. Encouraging attorneys to do so requires the fee awards …