Digital Commons Network^™

The Unconstitutionality Of Governor Youngkin's Felon Re-Enfranchisement Scheme (Or Lack Thereof): An Examination Of Hawkins V. Youngkin'S Challenge To Virginia's Current Felon Re-Enfranchisement Scheme, Olivia Rovin

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

This Note argues that Governor Youngkin’s felon re-enfranchisement “scheme” violates the Constitution. Ultimately, I will be evaluating the argument made in Hawkins v. Youngkin, formerly known as Nolef Turns v. Youngkin, noting its strengths and its weaknesses. Part I describes both American history and Virginia’s specific history of denying people convicted of felonies their right to vote. It also details the Supreme Court case, Richardson v. Ramirez, in which the Court held that denying people convicted of a felony the right to vote is constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause. Part I also gives a brief history …

The Rights Of Englishmen, A Primary Source Reader For Students Of Early Modern British History & Early American History, Robin Brooks Ishler

Open Touro Created

2025

This book is a collection of primary sources from the United Kingdom and English-Speaking North America from the Magna Carta in 1215 through the middle of the 19th Century, with commentary and an introduction from Dr. Robin Ishler. The purpose of the book is not only to act as a resource for students of Early Modern British history and early American history, but also to demonstrate the deep political and philosophical connections between the United States and the larger English legal and societal context from which it emerged. Dr. Ishler argues that it is an unfortunate reality that many …

On Guido Calabresi, Roger K. Newman

Touro Law Review

Few individuals have had as long and as influential a career in law as Guido Calabresi. Cofounder of the field of law and economics, teacher, dean, and judge, he has inspired (and infuriated) multitudes. On the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, where he has served for thirty years (while continuing to teach until recently), his creativity and doctrinal innovations continue apace. He has urged the academy, legislature, and bench alike to engage in continuing conversation to improve the law and its effect upon those to whom it acts. One of these areas is certification—the practice of …

The Abuses Of History In Constitutional Interpretation, Sherif Girgis

Journal Articles

From the Article

Jack Balkin’s Memory and Authority powerfully describes the kaleidoscopic quality of historical arguments in constitutional law. The book also moves easily between description and prescription. This Essay explores whether it moves too easily from one to the other. I consider whether the book’s analysis is so keen to capture our actual practices that it leaves itself too few resources for evaluating them—whether its account of history’s uses, made expansive by a zeal to fit how lawyers actually reason, crowds out any robust account of how they ought not to reason. While I am inclined to think so, …

You Had One Job: The Supreme Court's New Chance To Fix The Constitutional Law Of Sentencing Factfinding, Benjamin J. Priester

Faculty Articles

Four decades after the enactment of the federal Sentencing Reform Act, one might expect a settled consensus to have emerged addressing the constitutional constraints on implementing norms such as predictability, consistency, and uniformity in the imposition of criminal punishment in the United States. In reality, the United States Supreme Court has failed to provide stability or clarity in the doctrinal principles implicated in millions of criminal cases nationwide. Spanning a quarter century, the Apprendi v. New Jersey line of cases has featured narrow or fragmented majorities, significant concurring opinions, and multiple instances of individual justices either overtly admitting to changing …

Historical Tradition, The Second Amendment, And Marrying Gun Rights And Regulation: Examining The Proposals In Gavin Newsom's Twenty-Eighth Amendment And Their Place In Second Amendment Jurisprudence, Guy Cheatham

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

In September 2017, Stephen Paddock checked into rooms 32-134 and 32- 135 at the Mandalay Bay Hotel in Las Vegas. Both rooms looked over the Route 91 Festival in Las Vegas Village. Over the course of five days, Paddock brought twenty-two suitcases into his room: five on September 25th, seven on the 26th, two on the 28th, six on the 30th, and two on October 1st. On September 30th, Paddock placed “Do Not Disturb” signs on the doors of rooms 32-134 and 32-135. Paddock considered booking the high level suites for weeks; Google searches from May to September 2017 reveal …

Breaking Kayfabe, Thomas B. Bennett

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The membership of the Supreme Court affects how it decides cases. This maxim is well accepted among the public. But it is exceedingly rare for Supreme Court opinions to acknowledge this fact, even when it provides the best explanation for the Court’s behavior. And in the unusual instance in which Supreme Court opinions do refer to changes in the Court’s membership, it is jarring. This Article explores two questions that flow from these uncontroversial facts. First, why does it happen so rarely? Second, why does it happen at all?

To answer these questions, the Article looks to an unusual source: …

The Endorsement Test's Early Years, 1983-1985: Notes From The O'Connor Files, Jay D. Wexler

Faculty Scholarship

One of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s signature contributions to U.S. constitutional law was the endorsement test, a subtle but critically important reformulation of the Court’s then prevailing approach to applying the Establishment Clause that focused on the message sent by government action supporting religion and the potentially harmful effects of that message on religious minorities and the political community. Now that the current Court has discarded the endorsement test, leaving the government freer than ever to support religion in a variety of ways, we should expect to see the harms that Justice O’Connor cared about become increasingly widespread and prevalent. …

Is Originalism Bullshit?, Michael L. Smith

Lewis & Clark Law Review

It’s finally time to answer the big question. This Article draws on the surprisingly robust literature examining the definition, essence, and significance of bullshit and evaluates whether originalist constitutional interpretation fits the bill. I begin with Harry Frankfurt’s definition of bullshit as utterances made in pursuit of the speaker’s goals without regard for their truth value. I also rely on alternate formulations, including bullshit as unclarifiable nonsense as well as contextual and audience-centric variations of bullshit.

While not all instances of originalism are bullshit, I identify those instances which are, and go on to demonstrate that originalism is uniquely prone …

Survival Of The Social Interest: Redefining The Bruen Standard To Protect Women From Violence Through United States V. Rahimi, Katelyn M. Sundstrom

Lewis & Clark Law Review

This Note explores the intersection of gun rights and gender-based violence within the U.S. legal system. It delves into the pervasive issue of domestic violence and explores the 2022 Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which rejected the use of “interest balancing” in evaluating gun regulations in favor of a purely historical and traditional approach. This shift placed significant legal scrutiny on existing firearm restrictions, including 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which prohibits individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms.

The analysis centers on the 2023 case United States v. Rahimi, …

The Tenth Anniversary Of Marriage Equality: How Traditional Marriage Law Led To Constitutional Protection For Same-Sex Marriage, Joanna L. Grossman

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This essay explores how the history of interstate marriage recognition law was central to the Supreme Court’s recognition of constitutional protection for the right of same-sex couples to marry. Prior to the 1990s, there were essentially no laws on same-sex marriage in the United States. That changed in the 1990s, when the Hawaii Supreme Court issued a ruling in Baehr v. Lewin that made authorization of same-sex marriage seem inevitable in that state. The threat fueled the adoption first of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996 and then mini-DOMAs in most states. Those laws were broad and …

Who Decides: The Role Of Parental Rights In Abortion And Gender-Affirming-Care Decisions For Minors, Joanna L. Grossman

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The American legal system presumes that children’s interests are best protected by their parents and, secondarily, by the state’s parens patriae authority. Yet this structure falters when parental authority and state power are infused with political and ideological agendas. This Essay examines how these dynamics have distorted decision-making authority in two contexts—minors’ access to abortion and gender-affirming medical care—and allowed children’s welfare and autonomy to be sacrificed to partisan aims. The law is inconsistent on the role of parental rights—typically empowering parents to grant or withhold consent to a minor’s abortion but categorically stripping them of the power to consent …

Resisting Federal Preemption, Desiree Leclercq

Scholarly Works

One of the most pressing issues in constitutional law is how states may—and should—resist federal preempting laws and policies with which they disagree. It’s a problem faced by red and blue states alike in an age of extreme political polarization. Despite having legitimate reasons to resist the federal government on matters that affect local citizens and interests, states seem to have few options. Conventional wisdom is that they engage in either direct resistance through litigation that challenges the constitutionality of preempting laws, or evasion by quietly enacting arguably non-compliant laws hoping to avoid enforcement. Both strategies adopt a belligerent stance …

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 …

The Warrant Exception That Isn't Fisa Section 702, "Defensive" Searches, And The Fourth Amendment, Noah C. Chauvin

American University Law Review

Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act allows the government to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance of non-Americans who are located overseas. Although the surveillance targets foreigners, Americans’ communications are “incidentally” collected, too. Once the government has acquired Americans’ communications, court-approved rules allow it to conduct warrantless searches for and through them in its Section 702 databases. Intelligence agencies have used these rules to turn this foreign intelligence program into a domestic spying tool, conducting tens of thousands of warrantless “backdoor” searches for Americans’ private communications obtained under Section 702 every year.

Section 702 periodically sunsets; Congress most recently reauthorized …

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 …

The Civil Jury Trial Clause Of The Seventh Amendment, Renée Lettow Lerner

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This essay discusses the Civil Jury Trial Clause—also known as the Preservation Clause—of the Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I provide background on English civil jury practice in common-law courts in the late eighteenth century and distinguish it from equity practice in the Court of Chancery. The essay describes Blackstone’s praise for the civil jury as well as the role the civil jury played in the events leading up to the American Revolution. The question of a federal constitutional right to civil jury trial provoked heated disputes in the Philadelphia Convention and the ratification debates. The ratification debates featured …

The Re-Examination Clause Of The Seventh Amendment, Renée Lettow Lerner

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This essay discusses the origins, history, and current interpretation of the Re-examination Clause of the Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. As Justice Joseph Story declared, the Re-examination Clause is separate from the right to civil jury trial in the Amendment’s Preservation Clause. The Re-examination Clause states that no fact tried by a jury shall be “re-examined” in federal court except by the rules of “the common law.” This provision had no counterpart in the state constitutions. The essay explains the methods of review of jury verdicts in English common-law courts in the late eighteenth century, focusing on the remedy …

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 …

Manifesting A Shift In The "Overton Window": The Threat Of Project 2025 On The Lgbtq+ Community In Higher Education, Athena M. King, Sara Sanatkar

Political Science & Geography Faculty Publications

Since the first Trump administration, historically marginalized groups in the United States have been subjected to greater instances of bigotry and discrimination due to conservative influence on sociopolitical institutions. These actions suggest a shift in the "Overton Window," whereby policy preferences previously deemed "unacceptable" are given consideration in the mainstream, especially by conservative policy actors. "Project 2025" is a comprehensive plan to restructure the federal government according to conservative dictates in the second Trump administration. This article is an examination of how higher education may be impacted by this plan, especially as it relates to LGBTQ+ faculty, administration, staff, and …

The Miserly Message Of Grants Pass, Meghan J. Ryan

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Grants Pass v. Johnson condoned states’ attempts to police homeless encampments. This was a significant blow to unhoused individuals and their allies. But the Court’s opinion also continued its march away from the longstanding evolving-standards-of-decency approach in Eighth Amendment cases. Grants Pass was something of an odd case in which to grant certiorari, but it served as an opportunity for the Court to send a quiet message that it would continue narrowing the Eighth Amendment’s scope. As in other recent cases, the Court applied a more historical approach than the one traditionally used in …

“In Defiance Of Gifts”: The Dutch Origins Of The Foreign Emoluments Clause, Liam E. Cronan

Touro Law Review

Starting in 2017, a series of lawsuits against President Donald Trump grounded their arguments on a long-overlooked portion of the Constitution: the Foreign Emoluments Clause, which in its most basic form bans government officials from accepting gifts, or “emoluments,” from foreign entities. Until 2017, few courts or scholars had ever scrutinized this provision. But with Trump’s presidency and enduring reports of his foreign business dealings, this oft-shunned area of the law suddenly garnered the attention of courts and scholars alike. Because of a clear “lack of precedent” on this matter, federal judges soon parsed historical records to determine the Clause’s …

Pozen And The Puzzle Of Counterfactuals, Louis Michael Seidman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Constitution and the War on Drugs, David Pozen’s carefully researched and brilliantly argued book, is both illuminating and disturbing: illuminating because it unearths forgotten moments when judicially formulated constitutional doctrine that could have ended or sharply restricted the War on Drugs were well within the Overton Window, and disturbing because it surfaces hard questions about historical contingency and the scope of the change that might have occurred in a counterfactual world. In this review, the author argues that the failure to specify both the nature of the counterfactual and the breadth of the alternative possibility have confused discussions …

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

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

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

Faculty Scholarship

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. …

Cost–Benefit Analysis, Matthew D. Adler

Faculty Scholarship

This chapter will address the place of cost–benefit analysis (CBA) in constitutional law, by way of a case study. I’ll describe, and puzzle over, CBA’s absence from most U.S. constitutional doctrines, notwithstanding its major role in U.S. administrative law. The general questions that I seek to illuminate are by no means limited to the U.S. How might CBA figure within the tests that constitutional courts use to adjudicate alleged violations of constitutional rights? How might it serve to determine the structure of constitutional institutions? Would it be justified for CBA to play these doctrinal roles? But these general questions are …

Brief Of Professors Julian Arato, Rachel Brewster, Harlan Grant Cohen, David Singh Grewal, J. Benton Heath, Timothy Meyer, Gregory Shaffer, And Chantal Thomas As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners In No. 24-1287 And Respondents In No. 25-250, Julian Arato, Rachel Brewster, Harlan Grant Cohen, David Singh Grewal, J. Benton Heath, Timothy Meyer, Gregory Shaffer, Chantal Thomas

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

History And Tradition As Heightened Scrutiny, Andrew Willinger

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court is turning to methodologies privileging text, history, and tradition, or THT, to interpret and implement various constitutional provisions. The Court has recently endorsed historically-focused approaches to determine how the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and carry a firearm, how the First Amendment protects the rights to free speech and freedom of religion, and whether the Due Process Clause protects reproductive autonomy, among other questions.

Much scholarship and popular commentary surrounding THT portrays the methodology as sui generis: presenting unique analytical challenges and impervious to direct comparison to existing doctrinal approaches. However, the jurist most …

Pluralism In State Constitutional Law, Michael L. Smith

Georgia Law Review

Debates over constitutional interpretation rage on—with most parties staking out preferred theories, their justifications, and assertions of their utility in predicting, explaining, and critiquing court opinions. The United States Constitution and the Supreme Court take center stage, despite a rich set of cases and constitutions at the state level. At the same time, state constitutional discussions tend to steer clear of federal interpretive theorizing.

This article seeks to bridge the gap between these literatures, arguing that state constitutional interpretation practices demonstrate a pluralist approach that may inform broader theoretical debates. State courts frequently employ different methods—sometimes explicitly, sometimes implicitly—both across …