Digital Commons Network^™

Bruen Was Right, J. Joel Alicea

Scholarly Articles

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen is one of the most methodologically significant—and widely maligned—constitutional law decisions of the last several decades. By rejecting the tiers of scrutiny that have loomed large in rights jurisprudence since the 1960s and substituting a text-and-history test for Second Amendment cases, Bruen signals a potential transformation of American constitutional law far beyond the Second Amendment context. Given Bruen’s methodological significance and the text-and-history approach it represents, one might have expected that the debate over Bruen would break down along familiar lines, with originalists defending Bruen and non-originalists critiquing it. Yet, the …

Constitutional Theory At A Catholic University, J. Joel Alicea

Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Equitable Incorporation: How History And Tradition Can Progressively Redefine The Fourteenth Amendment, Robert D'Alessandro

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The Fourteenth Amendment, designed to ensure equality before the law, has been misinterpreted by the Supreme Court through its incorporation doctrine, leading to rulings that harm marginalized communities. The article advocates for "Equitable Incorporation," a doctrine requiring courts to consider the impact of their decisions on historically discriminated groups, ensuring the Amendment's purpose of equity and justice is upheld. This approach would necessitate the incorporation of unincorporated rights and reinterpret existing ones to reflect the Amendment's equitable intent.

Popular Originalism, Thomas G. Donnelly

Law Faculty Publications

Scholars are obsessed with the Roberts Court’s recent turn to history and tradition. But another source of authority has also emerged as an important feature of the Roberts Court’s approach to constitutional cases. In previous work, I have referred to this source of authority as popular meaning. While original meaning identifies the best reading of the Constitution’s text at the time of its ratification, popular meaning draws on sources of authority outside the courts to capture the constitutional views of the American people today. In this Article, I demonstrate how interpreters might draw on the Constitution’s popular meaning to help …

A Crust Of Bread: Religious Resistance And The Fourteenth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash, Stephanie Hall Barclay

Law Faculty Publications

In Employment Division v. Smith, the U.S. Supreme Court denied heightened constitutional protection to religiously motivated exercise burdened by neutral and generally applicable laws. The history presented in this Article suggests that the Smith approach conflicts with the original understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment. Out of the crucible of religious abolitionist resistance to the Fugitive Slave Act emerged a substantive theory of constitutional religious freedom: American citizens should have the right to obey the Biblical command to care for the needy and provide the hungry a "crust of bread," even if doing so was contrary to neutral and generally …

The Inadequacy Of Perpetuating Vestiges Of Segregation In K-12 Curriculum: The Justiciability Of Reviewing Duties To Adequacy In Florida's Education Clause, Soumya Sreerama

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Although the Supreme Court declared segregation the most abusive affront to education and ruled to eliminate vestiges of segregation “root and branch,” those same roots have grown unchecked to remain prominent today. One of the undercurrents of state-sponsored discrimination that has escaped desegregation remedies is the skewed, whitewashed curriculum that permeated K-12 classrooms in Jim Crow America. More troubling, is that those vestiges of an inadequately biased curriculum are still slithering in students’ courses today. Although student movements and education reformists have attempted to counter skewed curricula by supplementing them with separate ethnic studies courses, states like Florida recently passed …

From The Kkk To The Modern Day: How An Accurate Understanding Of History Can Inform The Proper Standard For Punishing Civil Rights Conspiracies Under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3), Bair Srivastav

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Following the Civil War, Congress passed the Reconstruction Amendments, which secured political rights for newly freed slaves and ushered in a new era for the United States. The Union defeated white Southerners on the battlefield and removed former Confederates from the halls of political power. But white Southerners were still Confederates in spirit. Full of racial hatred, they did not perceive a new era of freedom, but a world twisted into an unnatural order where African Americans walked freely amongst white people and participated in the political process of Southern society. In response to the extension of basic freedoms to …

Respect And Submission In Contexts Of Transition: Reviewing Judicial Interpretation From R V Drybones To R V Montour, Joshua Nichols

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

Since the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's call in 2015 for the adoption and implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN Declaration), Canada has seen significant legislative developments. Notably, the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA) in British Columbia, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (UNDRIPA) at the federal level, and subsequent amendments to the Interpretation Act in British Columbia have introduced innovative frameworks for procedural implementation. However, these legislative actions pose unique challenges, particularly in their interpretation by the judiciary.

This paper navigates through …

The Inevitability Of Adaptability - Comparative Contributions To Understanding Originalism, Anna C. Conley

Faculty Law Review Articles

What can comparative law teach us about originalism as a constitutional interpretation method? After synthesizing existing comparative analyses, this article seeks to redefine comparative law’s role in understanding originalism. When defining originalism strictly to require adherence to fixed original meaning, originalism is not used by courts anywhere in the world. Instead, courts use history purposively to understand the intent behind constitutional text as one of many methods of interpretation. Comparative works suggest historical constitutional interpretation has a complex relationship with rights, politics and culture.

Comparative law can provide not only descriptive understandings of originalism but also interrogate its mandate that …

Personal Jurisdiction’S Aberrant Theory Of Consent, Roger Michalski

American University Law Review

Consent has been a pillar of personal jurisdiction doctrine at least since Pennoyer. The Supreme Court recently strengthened this pillar by deeming a corporate registration statute to constitute consent. Consent to submit to a court’s adjudicatory power can now be unintentional, based on inaction, is irrevocable, does not have to be informed, is all-or-nothing, and is blind to power inequalities. Failing to say “no” at the right time in the right way means “yes.”

Such a theory of consent clashes with what consent means elsewhere. In other contexts, we are reminded that “no means no,” the “absence of no does …

Shrines Of Discrimination: A Comparative Exploration Of American And Indian Approaches To Balancing Religious Freedom And Equal Rights, Sree Vedala

MC Law Review

Religious freedom and equality, foundational human rights, often clash in legal contexts, particularly when religious practices justify discriminatory actions. The U.S. judiciary has grappled with this tension, as exemplified in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission and Yeshiva University v. YU Pride Alliance. These cases reflect opposing judicial tendencies: deference to religious beliefs versus prioritization of equality. However, neither case established a clear framework for balancing these rights. This article examines India’s "essentiality test," which assesses whether a religious practice is integral to a faith, as a potential model for resolving such conflicts. By comparing U.S. and Indian …

Amending Rule 15.3 Of The Mississippi Rules Of Criminal Procedure To Fully Capture Boykin V. Alabama And Acknowledge Systemic Coercion Indigent Defendants Face In Mississippi, Sarina P. Larson

MC Law Review

The U.S. Constitution—not a state—is what governs questions of constitutionality. It follows that for a state court to make a constitutionally sufficient record of a defendant’s waiver at their plea, the complete interpretation as to sufficiency by the United States Supreme Court must be followed. This Comment stands for the proposition that when Rule 15.3 of the Mississippi Rule of Criminal Procedure was adopted in 2017, it misinterpreted the call of the United States Supreme Court in Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969). Ultimately, this Comment suggests amendments to Rule 15.3 that would place it in compliance with Boykin, …

College Courts: Administrative Abuse Of Title Ix And Its Consequences, Noah Bloomberg

MC Law Review

This article examines the contentious application of Title IX in addressing campus sexual assault, tracing its evolution through recent presidential administrations. Initially designed to combat sex-based discrimination in education, Title IX has been expansively interpreted to regulate university adjudication of sexual violence cases. Policies introduced during the Obama administration mandated quasi-judicial procedures, sparking debates over fairness and due process, while Trump-era reforms shifted focus toward protecting the rights of accused students, prompting criticism from victims' advocates. The article argues that these approaches have overstepped Title IX's intended purpose, burdening universities and creating systemic challenges for survivors and the accused alike. …

Clarifying Concreteness: Statutory Grants Of Standing After Spokeo And Transunion, Naomi Eid

FIU Law Review

Article III limits the federal judicial power to deciding “cases” and “controversies,” demanding that a plaintiff suffer real, concrete, de facto harm to sue in federal court. In Spokeo and TransUnion, the Supreme Court clarified the outer limits of concreteness by making clear to plaintiffs that an injury in law is not an injury in fact. The Court largely grounded the decisions in the separation of powers, setting a tone that appears less deferential to Congress in its creation of statutory rights of action. A plaintiff does not automatically satisfy the injury-in-fact requirement whenever Congress grants a right and purports …

White Christian Nationalism & Antisemitism: A True Threat, Doron Kalir

FIU Law Review

The ideology of Jewish hatred, also known as antisemitism, has deep roots. In the United States, antisemitism has known a long and complicated history; in the early 1940s, it reached peak levels. Now, more than 80 years later, antisemitism again rears its ugly head, aiming to end the Golden Age of American Jewry. The exclusionary ideology aiming to obliterate the wall separating Church and state, and to institutionalize Christian identity and values into the public square, also known as White Christian Nationalism, has deep roots. In the United States, it had a long and complicated history; by the mid 1920s, …

Lessons For The Trump Administration From The Biden U.S. National Strategy To Counter Antisemitism, Lili Levi

FIU Law Review

In May 2023, the Biden Administration issued the first-ever U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism with a goal of hindering further normalization of antisemitism by increasing public awareness of antisemitism and highlighting positive Jewish contributions to America. Recent events, however, particularly the social and political upheaval over protests of the war in Gaza, have led to public contestation over Israel, increased instances of antisemitism, and the partisan politicization of Jewish issues. All this has raised questions about whether the National Strategy's assumptions about public attitudes, the viability of antisemitism awareness initiatives, and the possibility of whole-of-society agreement on countering antisemitism …

Sabbath Accommodations As A Civil Right: History, Title Vii, And The Path To Groff V. Dejoy, Isaac May

FIU Law Review

In Groff v. DeJoy, which concerned a Christian Sabbath observer, Jewish groups were vindicated by the Court’s overturning Hardison v. Transworld Airlines and strengthening Title VII’s protections for religion, particularly around employees’ Sabbath observance. This article positions Groff within the history of Jewish efforts to secure employment protections for Sabbath worship. Efforts to secure Sabbath accommodations were an outgrowth and expansion of early twentieth-century efforts to ensure Jews were protected by public accommodation laws and a product of attempts by litigators such as Leo Pfeffer to end mandatory Sunday closing laws in the mid-twentieth century. Sabbath accommodations became a critical …

Emergency Oversight, Catherine Baylin Duryea

FIU Law Review

This Article examines one of the most pressing questions in administrative law: How much judicial oversight should administrative agencies face during an emergency? This issue was particularly salient during the COVID epidemic, but it is not new. The Second World War saw a significant expansion and consolidation of the power of administrative agencies as well as experimentation with the appropriate oversight role for courts. This Article analyzes one such experiment: judicial oversight of agencies implementing wartime anti-inflationary measures, i.e. price controls and rationing. During the war, Congress created a specialized court, the Emergency Court of Appeals (ECA), to hear disputes …

Being Pregnant In Someone Else's Body, Jennifer S. Hendricks

FIU Law Review

In the wake of the Dobbs decision overturning the right to abortion, now is a critical time to re-assess how legal feminism theorizes the pregnant body. Before Dobbs, feminist legal scholarship had blazed a path of anti-maternalism, a stance rooted in liberal, formalist notions of equality that denigrates the “feminine” and too often minimizes the importance of reproductive issues both as tools of sex-based subordination in the present and as foundations for liberation in the future. Anti-maternalism is attractive to legal scholars because it minimizes sex and gender differences and may appear to be gender-inclusive. It has produced arguments that …

Constitutional Comparisons And Language, De Maartje Visser

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Language can be seen as an intuitive challenge for those who embark on comparative constitutional research: its intricate entanglement with law is often overlooked and not engaged with explicitly. This chapter argues that this is a missed opportunity at best, and arguably presents a hazard for the collective quality of the scholarly discourse. It discusses four ways in which language matters when engaging in constitutional comparisons: the problem of literal translation; the problem of legal-conceptual translation; a multilingual discourse that is marked by fragmentation; and expectations in communication with a foreign or international readership. The approach taken is constructive, with …

The Violence Of Bright Lines, Terrell Woolfolk, Kathryn E. Miller

Articles

The U.S. Supreme Court interprets the Eighth Amendment to prohibit members of certain groups from serving extreme punishments, such as the death penalty and life without parole. For example, the Court has long banned death sentences for people with intellectual disability and for those who were under eighteen years old at the time of their crime. More recently, in Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama, the Court extended this reasoning to sentences of life without parole for those under eighteen—prohibiting the sentence altogether for nonhomicide crimes and barring its mandatory imposition for homicides.

Many scholars and advocates have applauded …

Response: Diagonal Representation, Alma Magaña

Articles

A lot has been written about the crisis of indigent defense and the plethora of factors that have led to the crisis, like the lack of guidance on how indigent defense providers can most efficiently distribute their insufficient resources. This lack of guidance has left jurisdictions across the country to their own devices, resulting in a national landscape of very different models, each with its own variations of the same problems plaguing indigent defense.

Original Discontent, William Magnuson

Vanderbilt Law Review

There are many theories of constitutional interpretation. Most, but not all, assert that, in interpreting the U.S. Constitution’s provisions, we should start by taking seriously the intentions of the enactors, meaning, roughly speaking, its drafters, defenders, and ratifiers. This Article argues that, in doing so, judges, scholars, and policymakers have underestimated an important feature of the process of constitution-making: the discontent of the enactors themselves with the Constitution they were enacting. Time and again, during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, during the penning of the Federalist Papers, and during the state ratifying conventions, the enactors expressed deep reservations about the …

Discriminatory Censorship Laws, Jonathan Feingold, Joshua Weishart

Faculty Scholarship

The summer of 2020 ignited global protests for racial justice. Across the United States, millions marched with a modest plea: that America reckon with its racism. For K-12 schools, this moment pushed local communities and district leaders to create more inclusive classrooms and curricula. Yet before the summer had ended, America's antiracist turn provoked a backlash campaign that has proven far more impactful and enduring.

This campaign has featured the rise and spread of "discriminatory censorship laws"-a term we apply to government action designed to demean inclusionary values and to deny students access to critical knowledge, inquiry, and thinking. As …

Amicus In Wilcox V. Trump On Presidential Removal And Unitary Executive Theorists’ Errors, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

As courts ask whether Free Enterprise and Seila Law call into question Humphrey’s Executor and independent officers or agencies, the more immediate questions should be focused on new historical evidence and new fact-checking finding pervasive and repeated historical errors and misinterpretations at the foundation of the unitary executive theory of removal.

Since the Supreme Court decided Seila Law, a wave of new historical research has shown that the Founding generation did not understand Article II to grant the President an indefeasible removal power over executive officials. In response, pro-unitary executive scholars have tried to offer new historical support. That …

Under What Circumstances Is "Caste" Likely To Be Useful As An Analytic Concept (And Should We Care)?, Sanford V. Levinson, Robert L. Tsai

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay is the product of the 2025 “Constitutional Law Schmooze,” where academics from a variety of disciplines and from all over the country meet to discuss a common topic of constitutional law chosen by the moderator. This year’s topic was “caste.” The two of us, having written independent “tickets” of admission for the schmooze—i.e., short essays setting out our tentative thoughts about “caste”—turned out to be relative skeptics about the value of the term for lawyers. We are certainly not hostile to those who differ with us. This should be regarded as a “friendly dissent,” as distinguished, say, from …

Originalisms' Indifferences?: Friendly Amendments To Sherif Girgis's "Originalism's Difference?", Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

Sherif Girgis’s Lecture Originalism’s Differences? reflects on what had differentiated originalism from other methods and why those differences are eroding. The differences are (or were): (1) avoiding “ostentatious moral reasoning”; (2) relatedly, constraining judges by requiring originalist historical evidence (i.e., tying judges’ hands); and (3) engaging historical research with more “intensity.” Girgis rightly criticizes the Court for engaging in the same kind of flexibility and creativity that originalists had long rejected.

In this commentary, I highlight our areas of agreement and offer friendly amendments. My title takes Girgis’s title two or three steps further: I use an “s-apostrophe” because I …

Structural Originalism: A Second Amendment Case Study, Ian C. Bartrum

Scholarly Works

“Originalism” is having a national moment, even if it is not entirely clear what the word means. What should we be originalist about? The leading academic approach asks us to parse the communicative content of text ratified in a very different linguistic culture; then construct a modern legal meaning consistent with our semantic speculations. Too often the result enforces policy judgments made in a radically different moral and technological world. This makes very little sense.

In this paper I recommend a more perspicuous and coherent use of constitutional history, which I call “structural originalism.” Rather than saddle ourselves with the …

Ecarrots: Prison Control And Profits From Correctional Tablets, Justin Iverson

Scholarly Works

In recent years, tablets have gained tremendous popularity behind bars for their ability to expand access to educational and rehabilitative services for people in prison. However, there are downsides to tablet implementation, including high costs at the expense of a captive population and shifting power dynamics resulting in possible volatility. This Article examines the use of correctional tablets in jails and prisons as mechanisms for administrative control and profit-making in an era of beleaguered correctional budgets. It also considers legal and policy implications related to the disproportionately negative impact of the introduction of tablets on people in poverty, increased dependency …

Facial Recognition Technology And The First Amendment, Joseph A. Tomain

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The growing ubiquity of facial recognition technology (FRT) is a problem. While much has been written on harmful government use of FRT, little has been written regarding harmful private actor use. This Article helps fill a gap in the literature by providing a detailed analysis of the First Amendment interests at stake when private actors use FRT. Specifically, this Article analyzes whether laws that limit the use of publicly available photographs to create faceprints for inclusion in FRT databases violate the First Amendment rights of private actors.

In May 2025, a multidistrict litigation against Clearview AI, an FRT company, offered …