Digital Commons Network^™

Baby & Bathwater: Standing In Election Cases After 2020, Steven J. Mulroy

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The current consensus among commentators is that the flood of cases challenging the 2020 presidential election results was almost completely meritless. This consensus is correct as to the ultimate result, but not as to the courts’ treatment of standing. In their (understandable) zeal to reject sometimes frivolous attempts to overturn a legitimate election and undermine public confidence in our electoral system, many courts were too quick to rule that plaintiffs lacked standing. These rulings resulted in unjustified sweeping rulings that voters were not injured even if their legal votes were diluted by states accepting illegal votes; that campaigns did not …

Qualified Immunity: Round Two, Andrew Coan, Delorean Forbes

Washington and Lee Law Review

For the first time in its fifty-year history, the future of qualified immunity is in serious doubt. The doctrine may yet survive for many years. But thanks largely to the recent mass movement for racial justice, major reform and abolition are now live possibilities. This development raises a host of questions that have been little explored in the voluminous literature on qualified immunity because its abolition has been so difficult to imagine before now. Perhaps the most pressing is how overworked federal courts will respond to a substantial influx of new cases fueled by qualified immunity’s curtailment or demise. Might …

Police Or Pirates? Reforming Washington's Civil Asset Forfeiture System, Jasmin Chigbrow

Washington Law Review

Civil asset forfeiture laws permit police officers to seize property they suspect is connected to criminal activity and sell or retain the property for the police department’s use. In many states, including Washington, civil forfeiture occurs independent of any criminal case—many property owners are never charged with the offense police allege occurred. Because the government is not required to file criminal charges, property owners facing civil forfeiture lack the constitutional safeguards normally guaranteed to defendants in the criminal justice system: the right to an attorney, the presumption of innocence, the government’s burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, …

The Case Of The Dishonest Scrivener: Gouverneur Morris And The Creation Of The Federalist Constitution, William Michael Treanor

Michigan Law Review

At the end of the Constitutional Convention, the delegates appointed the Committee of Style and Arrangement to bring together the textual provisions that the Convention had previously agreed to and to prepare a final constitution. Pennsylvania delegate Gouverneur Morris drafted the document for the Committee, and, with few revisions and little debate, the Convention adopted Morris’s draft. For more than two hundred years, questions have been raised as to whether Morris covertly altered the text in order to advance his constitutional vision, but modern legal scholars and historians studying the Convention have either ignored the issue or concluded that Morris …

How Chevron Deference Fits Into Article Iii, Kent H. Barnett

Scholarly Works

U.S. Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, along with Professor Philip Hamburger, assert that Chevron deference-under which courts defer to reasonable agency statutory interpretations-violates Article III. Chevron does so because, they argue, it either permits agencies, not courts, "to say what the law is" or requires judges to forgo independent judgment by favoring the government's position. If they are correct, Congress could not require courts to accept reasonable agency statutory interpretations under any circumstances. This Article does what these critics, perhaps surprisingly, do not do-situates challenges to Chevron within the broad landscape of the Court's current Article III …

Manufacturing Sovereign State Mootness, Daniel Bruce

William & Mary Law Review

The idea that public defendants should receive any special treatment in the mootness context has been subject to intense criticism among commentators. Most notably, in the lead-up to the New York Rifle decision, Joseph Davis and Nicholas Reaves—two prominent First Amendment litigators from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty—urged the Supreme Court to take the opportunity to correct the lower courts’ practice of blessing government abuse of the voluntary cessation doctrine. Indeed, the Supreme Court has never adopted a presumption in favor of government defendants such as the one applied by the Seventh Circuit in Killeen, and it failed to …

I Choose, You Decide: Checking The Judiciary From Within, Jeremy N. Sheff

Cardozo Law Review

Efforts to rein in partisanship (or the perception thereof) on the Supreme Court tend to focus either on what Ryan Doerfler and Samuel Moyn call “personnel reforms”—changes to the selection, appointment, or tenure of Justices—or on what they call “disempowering reforms”—changes that divert some of the judiciary’s authority to the political branches, for example via jurisdiction stripping. I propose a different—and perhaps complementary—reform, which would achieve some of the goals of both types of reform without requiring a constitutional amendment. I propose that the selection of a case for the Supreme Court’s discretionary appellate docket should be performed by a …

Race-Based Remedies In Criminal Law, Ion Meyn

William & Mary Law Review

This Article evaluates the constitutional feasibility of using race-based remedies to address racial disparities in the criminal system. Compared to white communities, communities of color are over-policed and over-incarcerated. Criminal system stakeholders recognize that these conditions undermine perceptions of legitimacy critical to ensuring public safety. As jurisdictions assiduously attempt race-neutral fixes, they also acknowledge the shortcomings of such interventions. Nevertheless, jurisdictions dismiss the feasibility of deploying more effective race-conscious strategies due to the shadow of a constitutional challenge. The apprehension is understandable. Debates around affirmative action in higher education and government contracting reveal fierce hostility toward race-based remedies.

This Article, …

Bleeding From The Holes In The Theory: How Flawed Deterrence In Federal Tort Claims Enables Police Brutality, Andrew Reisman

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note argues that federal tort laws, particularly the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and Bivens actions, are ineffective in deterring police brutality due to structural flaws that prevent individual accountability. It proposes reforms to strengthen these legal mechanisms and promote transparency and accountability within federal law enforcement agencies.

Populism And Constitutionalism: An Essay On Definitions And Their Implications, Mark Tushnet, Bojan Bugarič

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Amplified Speech, Erin L. Miller

Cardozo Law Review

This Article introduces the concept of amplification into First Amendment law. Amplification, or the size of the audience reached by speech, lies at the heart of many contemporary free speech struggles. Yet the concept is surprisingly absent as a category of analysis from constitutional doctrine and virtually undiscussed in legal scholarship. Amplification deserves its own set of legal rules and doctrines, because the right to amplify one’s speech serves the two core types of First Amendment interests—those of audiences and those of speakers—differently than the right to choose the content of one’s speech. The higher the degree of amplification, the …

Quilombo Land Rights, Brazilian Constitutionalism, And Racial Capitalism, Karen Engle, Lucas Lixinski

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The 1988 Brazilian Constitution, the first in a wave of new democratic and multicultural constitutions in Latin America, contains a transitory provision guaranteeing collective land rights to quilombo communities. These communities are composed of quilombolas, primarily descendants of formerly enslaved Africans, many of whom had escaped slavery. A 2003 executive decree to implement the land title provision became the subject of a constitutional challenge lasting over fifteen years. When the Brazilian constitutional court eventually upheld the decree in 2018, it relied heavily on the work of US political theorist Nancy Fraser to justify quilombo land title as both recognition and …

Long Overdue: Fifth Amendment Protection For Corporate Officers, Tracey Maclin

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court has extended to corporations many of the same constitutional rights that were originally intended to protect people.One notable exception, however, is the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition on compulsory self-incrimination.

“Corporations may not take the Fifth.” There is a long line of cases dating back to the start of the twentieth century stating—but never directly holding— that corporations are not protected by the Self-Incrimination Clause.

But the fact that a corporation cannot invoke the Fifth Amendment does not explain why a person who works for a corporation cannot. As a matter of text, the Fifth Amendment draws no distinction …

Inspectors General And The Law Of Oversight Independence, Andrew C. Brunsden

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

President Trump’s defiance of basic norms threatened the oversight institutions of American democracy. His brazen assault on the prosecutorial and investigative independence of federal law enforcement was well documented. Yet few have thoroughly scrutinized his violations of the oversight independence of internal institutions that monitor the government to promote integrity, transparency, and accountability. This Article examines the independence of Inspectors General (IGs), the internal watchdogs of the Executive Branch, and the President’s attacks on the institution. President Trump breached long-standing independence norms when he fired or replaced IGs in retaliation for their legitimate exercise of oversight duties. Then, in some …

Disloyalty & Disqualification: Reconstructing Section 3 Of The Fourteenth Amendment, Myles S. Lynch

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

To become President of the United States, you must be constitutionally qualified. You must be thirty-five years old, a natural born citizen, and fourteen years a resident within the United States. Neither Congress nor any state can set this threshold higher; the same is true for congresspeople. But since it was last successfully invoked in 1917, most have forgotten the other qualifier—for officers at both the state and federal levels—from Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Those who have violated their oath to uphold our Constitution can be disqualified from holding any public office under the United States or any …

Education, Antidomination, And The Republican Guarantee, Kip M. Hustace

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article offers a new interpretation of the United States Constitution’s republican guarantee and theorizes its protection of a fundamental right to education. Courts and education law scholars have identified the republican guarantee as a plausible source of educational rights but have not detailed how. Drawing on recent work by legal scholars, historians, political scientists, and philosophers, this Article reinterprets the guarantee as the federal government’s obligation to secure freedom as nondomination, and it argues that excellent, equitable public education is necessary to fulfilling this duty. Nondomination, a robust conception of freedom, is freedom from subjection to the will of …

The Modest Impact Of The Modern Confrontation Clause, Jeffrey Bellin, Diana Bibb

Faculty Publications

The Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause grants criminal defendants the right "to be confronted with the witnesses against" them. A strict reading of this text would transform the criminal justice landscape by prohibiting the prosecution's use of hearsay at trial. But until recently, the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Clause was closer to the opposite. By tying the confrontation right to traditional hearsay exceptions, the Court's longstanding precedents granted prosecutors broad freedom to use out-of-court statements to convict criminal defendants.

The Supreme Court's 2004 decision in Crawford v. Washington was supposed to change all that. By severing the link between the …

When “Empty Is Not Closed”: Organizing Efforts To (Officially) Close St. Louis’ Infamous Workhouse, Brianna Coppersmith

SLU Law Journal Online

Despite years of community organizing, legal advocacy, and policy change to close St. Louis’ Medium Security Institution, the jail has reopened. In this article, Brianna Coppersmith provides a brief history of the campaign to close the jail, commonly called the Workhouse, and discusses what its reopening might mean for related pending litigation.

Analisis Yuridis Kedudukan Narapidana Sebagai Justice Collaborator, Bambang Sugiri, Nurini Aprilianda, Hanif Hartadi

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

This article aims to examine the inmates position as a justice collaborator in the disclosure of organized crime that can assist law enforcement officers. This is againstthe backdrop of crown witnesses who are often used in proving criminal cases but are judged to be in violation of human rights. The difficulty of disclosure of organized crime is that the perpetrators involved in organized crime are bound by the oath of silence (omerta). Information from inmates related to crime networks he has committed, facilitates the disclosure of organized crime by law enforcement officers. This paper is based on the results of …

Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization: Brief For Constitutional Law Scholars Lee C. Bollinger, Erwin Chemerinsky, Sherry F. Colb, Michael C. Dorf, Daniel Farber, Joanna L. Grossman, Leah Litman, Martha Minow, Jane S. Schacter, Suzanna Sherry, Geoffrey R. Stone, David A. Strauss, And Laurence H. Tribe As Amici Curiae Supporting Respondents, Leah Litman

Appellate Briefs

Amici, listed in Appendix A, are constitutional law scholars who teach and write in the field of constitutional law, including on limits on the regulation of abortion. They share an interest in promoting the stability of this Court’s abortion jurisprudence as well as its continuity with the constitutional law governing related rights.<\p>

For nearly 50 years, the Supreme Court has recognized that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects a woman’s fundamental right to decide whether to have an abortion. See Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 153-54 (1973). Accordingly, in Roe, the Court held that prior …

Why The Civil Rights Cases Belong In The Anti-Canon: Black Citizenship, The Fourteenth Amendment, And Judicial Interposition, Matthew Norman, Christopher Bryant

ConLawNOW

This essay analyzes the Supreme Court’s ruling in The Civil Rights Cases (1883) and surveys both contemporary and scholarly responses to it. Citizenship should mean something, and the Court’s ruling in The Civil Rights Cases invalidated much of the Civil Rights Act of 1875, the most ambitious and progressive civil rights legislation that Congress enacted prior to 1964. When the Supreme Court issued its decision in Dred Scott, Abraham Lincoln warned of a sequel that would nationalize slavery. While the Thirteenth Amendment eliminated the possibility of such a decision, Dred Scott is widely recognized as one of the Court’s …

Solidarity As A Constitutional Value, Tamar Hostovsky Brandes

Buffalo Human Rights Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rethinking Immigration Enforcement, Peter L. Markowitz

Articles

As the nation turns the page away from the dark chapter of President Trump's relentless assault on immigrants, it is time to take stock of the nation's unprecedented immigration enforcement regime. During its relatively short existence, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) has deported more than twice as many people as were deported in the entire previous history of the United States. The human and fiscal costs of ICE's mass deportation agenda are astronomical, and there is almost universal agreement across the political spectrum that the United States' immigration enforcement apparatus is badly broken. That, however, is where the …

R. C. Bissonnette And The (Un)Constitutionality Of Consecutive Periods Of Parole Ineligibility For A Life Sentence: Why The Qcca Got It Right And Why Section 745.51 Should Never Be Re-Written, Adelina Iftene

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

This article reviews the constitutional arguments upheld by the QCCA in Bissonnette and weighs them against the challenges that trial judges have encountered in applying s. 745.51 since 2012. By drawing on a qualitative review of cases in which s. 745.51 has been applied, as well as Charter principles, sentencing case law, and international practices, this article posits that the QCCA was correct in its approach to s. 745.51, both in finding it unconstitutional and in finding that the provision should not be read down to render it constitutional. This article advances the central argument that, in the context of …

The Supreme Court's Reticent Qualified Immunity Retreat, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Publications

The recent outcry against qualified immunity, a doctrine that disallows damages actions against government officials for a wide swath of constitutional claims, has been deafening. But when the Supreme Court in November 2020 and February 2021 invalidated grants of qualified immunity based on reasoning at the heart of the doctrine for the first time since John Roberts became Chief Justice, the response was muted. With initial evaluations and competing understandings coming from legal commentators in the months since, this Essay explores what these cases appear to say about qualified immunity for today and tomorrow.

The Essay traces idealistic, pessimistic, and …

Scrutiny-Determination Avoidance In First Amendment Cases: Laudable Minimalism Or Condemnable Evasion?, Clay Calvert

Nevada Law Journal

This Article examines the United States Supreme Court’s practice in First Amendment cases of not resolving the precise level of scrutiny that applies to measure a statute’s validity. Rather than opting for one of two tiers of scrutiny— one more rigorous than the other—the Court sometimes dodges the issue. It does this by concluding that a statute would not pass muster under the more lenient standard, thereby rendering it unnecessary to decide which test was, in fact, more appropriate. The Court thus adopts an “assuming-without-deciding” logic in such cases, simply supposing the lesser standard applies without definitively holding as much. …

Due Process On Campus: Where Do Procedural Rights Come From, And What Do They Require?, R. George Wright

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court's Reticent Qualified Immunity Retreat, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Scholarship

The recent outcry against qualified immunity, a doctrine that disallows damages actions against government officials for a wide swath of constitutional claims, has been deafening. But when the Supreme Court in November 2020 and February 2021 invalidated grants of qualified immunity based on reasoning at the heart of the doctrine for the first time since John Roberts became Chief Justice, the response was muted. With initial evaluations and competing understandings coming from legal commentators in the months since, this Essay explores what these cases appear to say about qualified immunity for today and tomorrow.

The Essay traces idealistic, pessimistic, and …

Jus Ad Bellum, Natural Law, And The Invasion Of Iraq, Johnny Davis, Johnny B. Davis

Liberty University Journal of Statesmanship & Public Policy

The thesis is the coalition invasion of Iraq violated international law because it went beyond the limited authority to use force given by United Nations Resolution 144 and violated natural law just war principles. The involvement of the United States not only violated just war principles but the requirements of the United States Constitution because Congress did not declare war as was required. The invasion also went beyond the legal limits imposed by the United States Joint Congressional Resolution authorizing the use passed on 2 October 2002. Further, the invasion was not justified by any prior United Nations resolution nor …

Subnational Constitutionalism In The United States: Powerful States In A Powerful Federation, James A. Gardner

Contributions to Books

Published as Chapter 19 in Routledge Handbook of Subnational Constitutions and Constitutionalism, Patricia Popelier, Nicholas Aroney & Giacomo Delledonne, eds.

The United States has an extremely robust network of subnational constitutions. It is one of the few federations in the world in which subnational entities are understood to be fully competent polities with virtually complete constituent powers of self-organization and self-authorization. The authority to adopt a subnational constitution is consequently understood to be an incident of subnational sovereignty, a concept in turn derived from a conception of the basic federal order itself as highly decentralized.