Digital Commons Network^™

Overruled Cases As A Tool For Inculcating Legal Realism, Michael C. Dorf

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The changes wrought by Dobbs and Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (SFFA) are hardly the only examples of momentous changes to constitutional law in the last few years. Doctrines involving the religion clauses of the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the scope of the president’s removal power, and much more have been changing rapidly since Amy Coney Barrett replaced Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the fall of 2020, thereby solidifying a conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court. I imagine that the strengthening of the major questions doctrine, the overruling of Chevron deference to federal administrative …

Teaching Firearms Law: One Big Opportunity And Three Pedagogical Challenges, Joseph Blocher, Jacob D. Charles, Darrell A.H. Miller

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The U.S. Supreme Court’s groundbreaking 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller ushered in a new era for the Second Amendment: one in which the right to keep and bear arms, long dormant as a matter of practical impact and even “embarrassing” as a matter of legal scholarship, vaulted into the front ranks of constitutional law. The Court itself has only revisited the Amendment a few times since then—albeit once by revolutionizing the doctrine. Meanwhile, lower courts have issued thousands of decisions giving shape to the right, while scholars have generated work that is increasingly deep, diverse, and challenging. …

Show And Tell: Writing Constitutional Law Casebooks When The Law Doesn't Matter, William D. Araiza

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Writing a constitutional law casebook today presents significant challenges. One reason among several stands out: law matters less—indeed, sometimes very little—to those charged with interpreting our constitutional law and implementing our constitutional system.

This Essay examines this challenge and explains how my contribution to the constitutional casebook genre attempts to answer it. It argues that the current moment requires instructors, and the books they use, to “show”—that is, to demonstrate to their students both the handiwork of those interpreters and implementers and alternative pathways. Sometimes, however, practical considerations preclude such showing. In those situations, “telling” may be required. But regardless …

Coping With A Court One Disagrees With, Randy E. Barnett, Josh Blackman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I of this Essay focuses on our approach to teaching the constitutional canon. This part is adapted from the Preface to our constitutional law casebook. Part II traces the evolution of our casebook from the First Edition to the Fourth Edition, and the forthcoming Fifth Edition. We demonstrate that the constitutional canon has changed, but remains remarkably stable. Part III addresses how we, and other like-minded law professors, managed to teach decisions that we fundamentally disagreed with.

This abstract has been taken from the authors' introduction. 

What Should A Constitutional Law Casebook Be?, William Funk

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

What is the purpose of a “casebook”? It is not a “hornbook,” designed to summarize or explain the law in a specific area, generally aimed at law students or lawyers to provide a straightforward statement of the law. It is not a “treatise,” a comprehensive, systematic exposition of the law in a particular field, involving an in-depth analysis and interpretation of the law. And it is not a “study aid,” supplementary material designed to help students do better in their classes. It is the book used by professors in their classes. For professors of constitutional law, it is a tool …

Intellectual Integrity, Collaboration, And The Market, Mark Tushnet

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

My reflections are those of someone who co-edited/co-authored two casebooks that were commercially and intellectually successful and one that was intellectually but not commercially successful. I start with the assumption that people decide to do a casebook because they find that existing materials don’t do some things they think ought to be done in the course (and do some things that aren’t really necessary for teaching purposes). That is, doing a casebook is at the outset an intellectual project.

Executing that project runs up against some constraints almost immediately. A simple one is that you might well think that you …

What Belongs In A Constitutional Law Casebook?, Ernest A. Young

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Essay argues that constitutional law cannot (and should not) be an autonomous subject within the legal curriculum. This argument echoes a long-standing debate about whether law itself is an autonomous scholarly discipline. The answer to that question is surely, as Allan Farnsworth put it, “sometimes YES and sometimes NO.” But this Essay does not focus on law’s autonomy from other disciplines, such as political science, psychology, or economics. Rather, I consider the extent to which constitutional law should overlap with other legal subjects, such as legal history, administrative law, or statutory interpretation. My conclusion is that, at least in …

Per Se Non-Takings, Nestor M. Davisdson, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Faculty Scholarship

In the discourse on the Takings Clause, disputes over methodology have long formed a kind of proxy war, with per se rules ordinarily underwriting strong constitutional protection for property rights and ad hoc standards more often vindicating public interests. At a moment when the Supreme Court is increasingly embracing the rules end of this rules-standards spectrum, this Article offers a novel perspective to challenge the conventional link between categorical reasoning and classical liberal conceptions of constitutional property.

To do so, the Article excavates a vast body of law denying takings liability through rule-like reasoning, an approach the Article calls per …

Masthead

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

June 30, 2023: Resurrections And Bad Omens Of A Nadir Court, Zamir Ben-Dan

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

June 29, 2023 was monumental for racial justice advocates and scholars; the U.S. Supreme Court issued a major decision that eviscerated affirmative action while declaring itself a vanguard of racial equality. The Court’s race-related juridical activities on the following day, June 30th, received far less attention. On June 30, 2023, the Court denied certiorari in five cases directly implicating race. Those denials of certiorari generated five opinions, two concurring in the denial and three dissenting from denial. These five opinions should have created as much buzz as the Court’s affirmative action decision the day prior; examined together, they tell a …

The Role Of Procedural Due Process In Equal Protection And Affirmative Action Analysis: The Narrowly Tailored Prong, Simona Grossi

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

The Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College marked the end of affirmative action as traditionally practiced in higher education admissions, forcing universities to seek alternative legal pathways for fostering diversity. At the same time, the Trump administration’s executive orders targeting DEI initiatives have exacerbated the legal uncertainty, raising critical questions about how institutions can preserve fairness in admissions while withstanding both judicial and political scrutiny.

This article argues that Procedural Due Process—when read in conjunction with Equal Protection—provides a constitutionally sound and structurally fair framework for admissions policies that align with strict scrutiny while preserving …

Federal Courts, Class Actions, And The Jurisdictional Void, Courtney T. Welch

Fordham Law Review

To invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court, a plaintiff must satisfy the requirements of Article III. Among other things, Article III requires a plaintiff to have and maintain personal stake throughout the lifespan of the litigation. Though a simple premise, this constitutional requirement has a complicated history. This is especially true as applied to class action lawsuits, where plaintiffs bring claims both on behalf of themselves and other harmed individuals.

The U.S. Supreme Court has applied flexible rules to some—but not all—of Article III’s requirements in class actions. The breadth of this flexibility, though, is uncertain. Accordingly, so too …

Repealing Reorgs, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah

Law & Economics Working Papers

Under the Supreme Court's opinion in Moore, it is likely that realization is essential for defining income as a constitutional matter. Therefore, when a transaction involves realization, it should presumptively be taxable unless there are very good reason for nonrecognition of gain. Given this reality, there are good reasons for Congress to consider repealing tax-free reorganizations and the other nonrecognition rules of the corporate tax, primarily for non-tax reasons. Acquisitive A, B, and C reorganizations and acquisitive section 351 transactions typically are used for large public corporations to acquire startups, which encourages monopolies. Triangular mergers raise corporate governance concerns …

Clark Memorandum: Fall 2025, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Byu Law School Alumni Association, J. Reuben Clark Law Society

The Clark Memorandum

• Our Constitutional Anchor
• Divine Law
• The Courage of Our Convictions
• Our Call to Action

Opioids And Oblivion: Corporate Bankruptcy And The Erosion Of Accountability In Big Pharma, Ying Yuan

Washington Law Review

In June 2024, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma that nonconsensual releases for nondebtors are unconstitutional. The decision marked a key development in mass tort litigation involving Purdue Pharma, the company at the center of the opioid crisis. The Sackler family sought to use Purdue’s bankruptcy proceedings to shield themselves from liability, but the Court’s ruling invalidated the use of nondebtor releases to protect third parties from claims without the full consent of affected parties. While the ruling strengthens creditor protections, it creates uncertainty regarding how mass tort bankruptcies can efficiently compensate victims, particularly in …

Self-Determination Through Children's Rights: Resisting The Paradoxical Pretext Of Parents' Rights Legislation, Jeremiah Chin

Washington Law Review

Washington state law balances the interests of parents and the state in education, healthcare, and the general wellbeing of children. Despite the fact that children are at the center of emerging controversies, children’s rights are rarely discussed in state legislation debating the obligations and relationships between the state of Washington and parents. In education, for example, RCW 28A.605.005 finds “[p]arents are the primary stakeholders in their children’s upbringing.” While this may be true relative to the state, it overlooks the fact that children are the primary actors, agents, and rights bearers in their own personhood. This Article therefore considers ongoing …

From The Bench To The Feed: Conflict Between Public Official Accounts And The First Amendment, Betty Yu

Washington Law Review

Imagine one day waking up, opening Facebook, and discovering that the official White House account blocked you because you left a comment expressing a viewpoint. In this case, your First Amendment right to free speech would most likely be violated. However, what happens if your local official blocks you or deletes your comments? Are your First Amendment rights violated? Well, it depends.

Historically, public officials have used public forums such as town halls to meet with citizens and answer questions. However, as social media platforms like X and Facebook have become increasingly crucial tools for communication, the distinction between personal …

A Dangerous Challenge To The Constitutionality Of The Felon-In-Possession Statute: United States V. Bullock, Matthew Matherne

MC Law Review

In United States v. Bullock, Judge Carlton Reeves held that the federal felon-in-possession statute was unconstitutional as applied to Mr. Bullock. Although Mr. Bullock had been previously convicted of multiple violent felonies involving a firearm, including one that resulted in the death of an individual, Judge Reeves dismissed the charges because the government failed to establish a historical tradition of prohibiting felons from possessing firearms. Judge Reeves’ determination that § 922(g)(1) is unconstitutional as applied to Mr. Bullock is a decision that is not only “dangerous” to society, but it contradicts the historical tradition of firearm regulation in America. …

Divine Detachment: Beachy V. Assemblies Of God And A New Interpretation Of The Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine, Juarez Mcleod Johnson

MC Law Review

In the landmark case of Beachy v. Mississippi District Council for Assemblies of God, the Mississippi Supreme Court redefined its interpretation of the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine—marking a pivotal shift in church-state jurisprudence. Traditionally, this doctrine instructed courts to defer to the highest internal authority of a church when deciding disputes within hierarchical religious organizations. However, the court’s decision in Beachy significantly departed from this principle by designating the local pastor and congregation as the supreme authority over local church affairs, even within a hierarchical structure.

This Casenote explores the profound implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling, focusing on its …

Auer Deference: He Who Writes The Law Must Not Adjudge Its Violation, William G. Kennedy

MC Law Review

This Comment explores Auer deference and its application to the Sentencing Guidelines, the Sentencing Commission, and its commentary. Auer deference, in its simplest form, requires courts to give controlling weight to an agency’s interpretation of its own regulations unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation. Following the Court’s decision in Kisor—expressly limiting Auer’s application, the circuit courts have disagreed on the applicability of Auer to the Sentencing Commission’s commentary regarding career offender designation. This disagreement begs for an appearance before the Court of Last Resort, but until that day, the courts must rigidly apply Kisor to …

Local Government Standing As State Standing, Katharine Cooney, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Scholarship

It is increasingly common, and controversial, for local governments to bring lawsuits as plaintiffs in federal court. Many questions about this practice raise matters that sound in policy. But some, including the issue of standing to sue, also raise issues of constitutional law. How local governments fit into standing rules should reflect how they fit into the U.S. constitutional system more broadly. As the Supreme Court put it in the famous (and infamous) 1907 case Hunter v. City of Pittsburgh, "[m]unicipal corporations are political subdivisions of the State, created as convenient agencies for exercising such of the governmental powers of …

A True Fact Should Not Be Controversial: Analyzing The Zauderer Standard And Defining “Uncontroversial”, Edina Hartstein

Fordham Law Review

In Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized an exception to the compelled speech doctrine that allowed the government to regulate commercial speech if it was “purely factual and uncontroversial.” However, the Court failed to define what it meant for a disclosure to be “purely factual” or what it meant to be “uncontroversial.” This lack of clarity led to lower courts inconsistently applying the Zauderer standard. In 2018, the Supreme Court decided National Institute for Family Life & Advocates v. Becerra (NIFLA), which held that the Zauderer standard cannot apply when the disclosure …

Red, White-, And Blue-Collar Crime: Federal Sentencing Practices Among White-Collar And Blue-Collar Offenders, Henna Judge

Fordham Law Review

Under the current federal sentencing regime, district courts exercise immense amounts of discretion when sentencing. Though strict adherence to the U.S. Sentencing Commission Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) was once mandatory, courts must now use these Guidelines as an advisory starting point and make a series of fact-specific determinations when sentencing a defendant. Though judicial discretion in this realm aids in preventing undue reliance on Guidelines-range recommendations that can lack nuance, it also invites bias.

In recent years, scholars and courts alike have called attention to a potential disparity in the way blue-collar and white-collar offenders are sentenced. This Note examines relevant …

Settling On A Standard: Reviewing The Right To Self-Representation, Lauren Lipson

Fordham Law Review

Courts appoint counsel for indigent criminal defendants who cannot afford legal representation to uphold their Sixth Amendment rights. In its seminal waiver case, Faretta v. California, the U.S. Supreme Court elevated the corollary right—the right to self-representation—to constitutional status. In dicta, the Court created a standard by which defendants must waive their right to counsel “knowingly and intelligently” to proceed pro se. The Court subsequently sculpted the right to self-representation as it came to standby counsel and mental competency, but it never prescribed a precise waiver colloquy for district court judges to administer, causing the Faretta colloquy to look …

The Political Dynamics Of Constitutional Law, Neal Devins

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Penambahan Jumlah Kementerian Negara: Analisis Terhadap Efektivitas Dan Efisiensi Pemerintahan, Bayu Saputro, Alfi Syahri Lubis, Renaldy Wijaksana Wibowo, M. Fariz Al-Qindi

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

The revision of Law 39/2008 on State Ministries, which removes the maximum limit of 34 ministries, has become a polemic issue in society. Analysis shows that increasing the number of ministries is not urgent and runs counter to the spirit of bureaucratic reform. This policy also does not improve the effectiveness of government administration, because the main issue affecting the effectiveness of ministries lies in the quality of ministers, not the number of ministries. The addition of ministries has the potential to cause overlapping authorities, regulatory disharmony, and sectoral egos. From an efficiency perspective, this policy places a heavy burden …

Doktrin Penyalahgunaan Hak (Abus Des Droit), Syukron Salam

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

The present article examines the emergence of the doctrine of abus de droit in France in the mid-twentieth century through an analysis of key judicial decisions and the debates that followed them. The study commences with an exposition of the manner in which the evolution of capitalism, concomitant with the escalating economic disparity and the propagation of societal challenges, has influenced the judicial approach to the abstract Roman-law tradition of absolute rights. In light of this, the article contends that the civil-law tradition exhibited a fundamental flaw in its conceptualisation of rights as absolute, thereby overlooking objections that were firmly …

Should The Army Be Involved In Divorce? Re-Examining The Pre-Divorce Defaults For Spousal Support, Artem M. Joukov, Thomas Godfrey

MC Law Review

Army Regulation 608-99 assigns a large portion of a Soldier’s paycheck to the spouse upon marital separation. The assignment occurs without a hearing, discovery, or consideration of critical evidence which might moderate the amount of support. The obligation rests on the Soldier to obtain a court order or spousal agreement to reduce the financial burden. The adversarial nature of modern divorces renders these requirements unrealistic. Amending the regulation would ease the burden of the Soldier, which is desirable in light of the ongoing recruitment crisis and the need to attract recruits and retain those already in the service.

Mississippi Redistricting And The Voting Rights Act: An Historical Supplement, Leslie H. Southwick

MC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Edward A. And Doris Zelinsky In The Appellate Division, Third Department, New York Supreme Court, Edward A. Zelinsky, Doris Zelinsky

Amicus Briefs

To combat COVID, New York in 2020 forbade an out-of-state employee like the petitioner to commute into his New York office, forcing him to instead work at his home in Connecticut. New York now takes the remarkable position that it can tax the income Governor Cuomo forced this out-of-state employee to earn at his home exclusively outside New York. That position is as wrong as it sounds.

Both as a matter of New York law and of federal constitutional law under the Due Process and dormant Commerce Clauses, New York may not tax the income the petitioner earned exclusively at …