Digital Commons Network^™

We Are All Cafeteria Originalists Now (And We Always Have Been), Jack M. Balkin

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In Memory and Authority, I argue that Americans, both in politics and in constitutional culture, are "‘cafeteria originalists.’ They pick and choose when to follow the views of the founders, framers, or adopters (as they understand them) and often artfully recharacterize these principles to support contemporary political and legal arguments.” Like customers in a cafeteria who take the chocolate cake and leave the boiled kale, Americans pick the features of the framers they like to support their arguments, and leave other, less savory, features behind.

[...]

My central claim is that cafeteria originalism is not a pathology or a …

The Griffin's Case Phenomenon And The Problem Of Historical Knowledge In Legal Arguments, Rachel A. Shelden

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The sudden relevance of a formerly little-known historic case is surely not new; much of legal history is necessarily about discovery and rediscovery of the past. Still, I think the clarity with which we can outline the development of the Griffin’s Case phenomenon offers an opportunity to think carefully about the role of history in constitutional conversation. What follows, then, is a short exploration of the case’s recent (re)entry into our historical consciousness. Tracing this phenomenon highlights (at least for me) some potential difficulties embedded in the interaction between legal advocacy and what we know about the past.

This abstract …

Memory, Resistance, And Doubt, Richard Primus

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Burroughs Court did not identify any enumerated power that warranted the Corrupt Practices Act, I suggest, because the Burroughs Court did not subscribe to the enumeration principle. The Justices did not believe—or at least, did not consistently believe— that every federal law must be grounded in some enumerated power. As I have explained at length elsewhere, the text of the Constitution does not actually prescribe the enumeration principle: it can be read to support that idea, but it need not be. And at various moments in American constitutional history, judges and other people have taken the view that Congress …

Shared Memories And Constitutional Foundations, Sanford Levinson

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

It is significant that the first word in the title of Jack Balkin’s new book [Memory and Authority] is “memory.” A repeated theme of the book is that what binds a nation—or a constitutional order—together is shared memories around which diverse individuals can gather together and therefore establish themselves as a community. Balkin refers to an impressive array of sources with regard to the topic of “public memory,” but I want to concentrate on one of them, which is cited but not extensively discussed. That is Ernest Renan’s famous speech, delivered at the Sorbonne in Paris on March …

Invocations Of Memory In State Constitutional Law, Fred O. Smith Jr.

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Symposium Essay discusses the roles of history and memory within the realm of state constitutional law. Building on Professor Balkin’s observations, I offer two claims. The initial argument, delineated in Part I, is descriptive. While the practice of state constitutional law often mirrors that of federal constitutional interpretation, the use of history in state constitutional interpretation has unique characteristics, both with respect to text and ethos. Regarding textual analysis, understanding the language of a state constitution often involves engaging with a concept referred to by some scholars as “interconstitutionalism.” This phenomenon occurs when a single governmental body has operated …

Not-So-Special Solicitude, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Scholarship

In a high-profile case last term about state standing to sue in federal court, Justice Gorsuch deemed it “hard not to wonder why” the majority said “nothing about ‘special solicitude.’” The silence was indeed surprising, for in a landmark decision several years earlier, the Supreme Court had declared that states were “entitled to special solicitude”—presumably meaning some sort of preferential treatment—“in [the] standing analysis.” And since then, commentators had depicted the concept as permitting opportunistic states to wage ideological crusades in courts across the country, especially through administrative-law attacks on federal-government defendants.

But what if “special solicitude” is not so …

Framing Indian Federalism, Madhav Khosla

Faculty Scholarship

This article focuses on a set of historical and contemporary developments in Indian constitutionalism that implicate the question of democracy and the question of federalism. Its goal is to connect the design and application of federal powers with what many regard as an important telos of federalism, namely, the promotion of democracy. Towards this end, it holds up for consideration India’s federal model, which, it is suggested, focuses on the presence of a subnational demos rather than the political identity of subnational units. Such an understanding of federalism de-emphasizes the territorial aspect of federalism and allows federal design to accommodate …

Nil Enforcement Preemption, Josh Lens

Utah Law Review

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), which serves as the multibillion-dollar college athletics industry’s primary governing body, has faced several recent legal challenges to its operations. One particularly prominent challenge projects to result in litigation that will significantly impact college athletics’s future. This article explores the circumstances that led to this precarious position: (1) the NCAA’s recent changes to its longstanding rules prohibiting student-athlete compensation for use of their names, images, and likenesses; (2) several state legislatures’ attempts to provide universities in their states with a competitive advantage by legislating restrictions on the NCAA’s ability to enforce its rules; and …

The Constitutional Meaning Of Financial Terms, Tomer Stein, Shelby Ponton

Utah Law Review

The Constitution has sixty-three financial terms. These financial terms include, for instance, “compensation,” “expenditures,” “debt,” “coin,” “revenue,” “securities,” and “bankruptcies”—all of which determine the elementary building blocks of our governmental makeup. When the Supreme Court interprets the meaning of these financial terms, it does so in isolation and without a consistent framework. This Article proposes a unified framework for the interpretation of financial terms in the Constitution which comprises two fundamental canons of construction.

First, this Article proposes that all financial terms in the Constitution should be interpreted with fiscal and monetary neutrality—interpreting financial terms in a way that does …

Textualism In Practice, Anita S. Krishnakumar

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

It is by now axiomatic to note that textualism has won the statutory interpretation wars. But contrary to what textualists long have promised, the widespread embrace of textualism as an interpretive methodology has not resulted in any real clarity or predictability about the interpretive path—or even the specific interpretive tools—that courts will invoke in a particular case. Part of the reason for this lack of predictability is that textualism-in-practice often differs significantly from the approach that textualism-in-theory advertises; and part of the reason is that textualism-in-theory is sometimes in tension with itself. In light of textualism’s ascendance—and now dominance—on the …

Regulating Social Media Through Family Law, Katharine B. Silbaugh, Adi Caplan-Bricker

Faculty Scholarship

Social media afflicts minors with depression, anxiety, sleeplessness, addiction, suicidality, and eating disorders. States are legislating at a breakneck pace to protect children. Courts strike down every attempt to intervene on First Amendment grounds. This Article clears a path through this stalemate by leveraging two underappreciated frameworks: the latent regulatory power of parental authority arising out of family law, and a hidden family law within First Amendment jurisprudence. These two projects yield novel insights. First, the recent cases offer a dangerous understanding of the First Amendment, one that should not survive the family law reasoning we provide. First Amendment jurisprudence …

Colonizing By Contract, Emmanuel Hiram Arnaud

Faculty Scholarship

Since 1898, Puerto Rico has been a territory of the United States, meaning that Congress wields plenary power over the Island. Although scholars have highlighted the history and some modern manifestations of this power, conversations about how plenary power affects the territories have largely ignored constitutional criminal procedure.

This Article is the first to center the territory’s criminal legal system within the broader debate over the exercise of plenary power. In doing so, it fills significant gaps in the constitutional and criminal law literature on the territories by uncovering how the federal government’s plenary power affects local criminal adjudication. This …

Abortion Costs And The Language Of Torture, William J. Aceves

Faculty Scholarship

Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Org., several states imposed significant restrictions on abortion. Some of these states established medical exceptions that would allow a pregnant person to receive an abortion only if they face "a life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy that places the female at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced." This language highlights the extreme pain and suffering that pregnant people must experience to qualify for an abortion …

Free Exercise Challenges To Entheogen Prohibitions: Precedents, Principles, And Issues, Kevin Chamow

Pace Law Review

This paper examines the conditions for the possibility of future

challenges to prohibitions against the cultivation, distribution, and use of entheogens—substances which reliably induce religious experiences in their users—based on the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Smith no longer applies to federal prohibitions against entheogens, because of Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Under the current Gonzalez framework, the Court is given the difficult task of evaluating the cost of the claimant’s exemption against the state’s interest in the general ban; including how the exemption would impact enforcement of the general ban. This is essentially predictive systems-theory and policymaking, …

Samuel Alito's Dobbs Opinion And The Resurrection Of Second-Class Citizenship, Sue Mcgrath

Pace Law Review

This article examines Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion in the landmark Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case, analyzing its implications for women’s rights and reproductive freedom in the United States. By contextualizing Alito’s arguments within a historical framework, the piece argues that his decision represents a significant regression in civil rights, effectively resurrecting a form of second-class citizenship for women. The analysis delves into the legal reasoning employed, the socio-political ramifications of the ruling, and the broader implications for gender equality. Ultimately, the article calls for a critical reevaluation of judicial interpretations that prioritize certain rights over others, highlighting the …

Genealogy In Constitutional Law, Charles W. Tyler

Vanderbilt Law Review

Genealogy is a form of argument that seeks to discredit social phenomena by exposing their pernicious ancestry. In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has used genealogy to undermine key provisions of written law, doctrinal rules, longstanding practices, and private conduct in cases involving a wide range of constitutional issues.

After comprehensively documenting this development, this Article contends that genealogy can advance conclusions within several widely recognized modalities of constitutional interpretation. More specifically, genealogy can be used to undermine assertions of authority implicit in arguments from precedent, tradition, and ethos. And it can be used to reveal its object’s function …

Constitutional Federalism And The Nature Of The Union, Anthony J. Bellia Jr., Bradford R. Clark

William & Mary Law Review

Federalism is an essential feature of the Constitution’s design and structure, but the Constitution does not spell out every respective authority of the federal government and the States in precise detail. This omission has led some observers to embrace broad—if not unlimited—federal power and reject certain longstanding federalism doctrines—such as state sovereign immunity, the anti-commandeering doctrine, and the equal sovereignty of the States. The objection to such doctrines is that the Constitution does not affirmatively grant States these sovereign rights and powers. This charge overlooks long-forgotten background context essential to faithful interpretation of the Constitution. The former British Colonies in …

The Power Of All: Tort In The Age Of Constitution, Cristina Carmody Tilley

Faculty Publications

Life in a multicultural nation can be fraught. The United States is a case in point, with hostile tension between members of competing identity groups playing out today on streets, in offices, and across the media. Modern Americans assume that bridging race, gender, and class inequity is the stuff of public—constitutional—law. This assumption follows the lead of modern American lawyers, who migrated to this body of law just as historians, sociologists, and economists began to insist that the private law of tort was exclusively concerned with the accidental physical harms inevitable in a modern economy. According to this econostory, tort …

Fighting For Abortion Access In Canada: A Constitutional Analysis, Jordana Borzellino

Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies

Access to abortion is a controversial matter that creates a labyrinth of polarizing issues. Perspectives on abortion range from anathema to overzealous support, with stakeholders occasionally resorting to legal avenues to control access one way or another. This paper will explore the possibility of protecting and expanding access to abortion through constitutional mechanisms in the Canadian legal landscape. By analyzing Canada's current degree of access, this paper will explain that abortion services for those in need are inadequate. In order to advocate for greater access, this paper examines a multitude of legal tools and doctrines to constitutionally protect access to …

The Potential Impact Of Charter Section 28 On Quebec's Controversial Secularism Law And The Pursuit Of Gender-Equality In Canadian Courts, Nywani Albert

Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies

The Western liberal democratic order, anchored in respect for individual rights and constitutional norms, faces a critical challenge as Quebec follows the pattern of several European nations in enacting laws restricting religious attire. While the Quebec Law 21, “An Act Respecting the Laicity of the State,” is ostensibly neutral, it particularly restricts Muslim women's rights. This paper explores an ongoing, novel legal strategy challenging Quebec's secularism law, focusing on Section 28 of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. While Section 28 mandates gender equality in Charter implementation, its potential remains largely unexplored in the decades since Charter enactment. Drawing …

Rethinking The History Of The Seventeenth-Century Colonial Ordinance: A Reinterpretation Of An Ancient Statute, Mark Cheung

Maine Law Review

In 1648, the Massachusetts colonial government ordered into print The Book of the General Laws and Libertyes that included an ordinance, commonly known as the Colonial Ordinance. The Ordinance extended private seashore property rights to the low water mark but to no more than one hundred rods beyond the high-water mark. The 1648 Ordinance replaced an earlier version enacted in the Body of Liberties of 1641. While both versions of the Ordinance enumerated public rights of fishing, fowling, and navigation in the foreshore, the 1648 Ordinance provided the critical language extending the private boundary to the low water mark. Prior …

Expanding Public Access By Codifying The Public Trust Doctrine: The Massachusetts Experience, William L. Lahey, Lauren Sandler Zurier, Kenneth W. Salinger

Maine Law Review

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts is dramatically expanding public access to the coast through statutory and regulatory codification of the public trust doctrine. Is this legislative and administrative experiment relevant to other states, particularly to Maine? The initial answer to this question may depend on the meaning of the Bell v. Town of Wells decision. For better or for worse, Massachusetts jurisprudence set the course followed by the majority of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court in Bell. To some, including several of the authors in this symposium, the bearing of the Massachusetts courts leads to a civic wasteland where the public's …

Intellectual Indifference—Intellectual Dishonesty: The Colonial Ordinance, The Equal Footing Doctrine, And The Maine Law Court, Orlando E. Delogu

Maine Law Review

Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of the recent Bell decision was the fact that it was 4-3, that significant public interests were lost because a bare majority refused to examine, in the detail necessary, the Colonial Ordinance, old and new United States Supreme Court cases, Maine law, or the reasoning of their own colleagues who filed a compelling dissenting opinion in the case. A mere recitation of the dissenting opinion would serve no useful purpose—it is a part of the public record; its rationale speaks for itself. Had the rationale of the dissent been adopted by the majority it would …

Public Trust, Public Use, And Just Compensation, Alison Rieser

Maine Law Review

In its recent decision, Bell v. Town of Wells, the Maine Law Court declined to grapple with one of the major legal conceptual problems presented by the case. The court failed entirely to reckon with the intersection of two competing, dynamic principles of American property law; these principles are increasingly significant in an era of growing conflict between public and private interests in land and natural resources. The first principle protects particular expectations of private owners of property through application of the just compensation (or "takings") clause of the fifth amendment. The second principle recognizes that certain property is held …

Judicial Preferences And Aggrandizement Effects, Jason Marisam

ConLawNOW

Scholars increasingly portray the Supreme Court as power hungry and self-aggrandizing. This aggrandizement literature, though, lacks a robust causal theory. This essay argues that judicial aggrandizement is not the product of a power-maximizing agenda but a function of judicial preferences and legal background conditions. Aggrandizement occurs in cases where legal background conditions do not align with judicial policy preferences and the justices assert power to create their preferred policy outcomes. This theory has significant prescriptive and normative implications. For example, counterintuitively, this essay shows that more judicial aggrandizement could be a sign of a healthier institution under some conditions.

Section Three Of The Fourteenth Amendment: Insurrection, Mark A. Graber

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The public, scholarly, and legal debate over whether former president Donald Trump is eligible to hold office under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment has focused far more on technical legal questions than on whether Trump engaged in an insurrection. Scholarly and public commentary rarely examines the constitutional/ common law of insurrection, preferring instead to examine whether Trump is exempt from Section Three because Section Three either exempts presidents or the presidency from disqualification or because Section Three is not self-executing. Trump v. Anderson (2024) focused on state incapacity to disqualify “oathbreaking insurrectionists” rather than on whether Trump was an …

Contempt: The Original Judicial Cheat Code, Ryan L. Scott

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The judicial contempt power challenges the fundamental rights enshrined in America’s Constitution. Imagine spending eight years in federal prison with no right to a jury trial or a court appointed attorney. Your only reprieve is the discretion of the judge who is imprisoning you. Meaningful appeals and even habeas corpus actions are generally not available remedies. Instead, what was originally justified as an inherent power of the court, necessary to maintain order and decorum, is increasingly used for trivial offenses or to incarcerate individuals for far longer than their possible crimes would otherwise warrant.

Despite widespread instances of abuse of …

Emergency Powers For Good, Elena Chachko, Katerina Linos

William & Mary Law Review

Emergency powers are widely, and justly, criticized as threats to the rule of law. In the United States, forty-three declared emergencies give the executive vast authority to exercise power unencumbered by standard legal and procedural requirements. A long tradition of executive use of emergency powers to erode civil liberties amplifies fears of executive overreach.

Yet this, we argue, is only part of the picture. We examine how emergency powers can be used for good. We argue that under certain limited conditions, political actors can legitimately invoke emergency powers to transform public policy. In addition to widely accepted requirements of crisis …

Book Review: John Paul Stevens, The Making Of A Justice: Reflections On My First 94 Years, New York, Little, Brown And Co., 2019, Pp. 549, $35.00 (Hardback), Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The autobiography of Justice John Paul Stevens, published just a few months before he died, is an enticing travelogue for Supreme Court nerds. Other travelers may want to pick a different landscape.

The Takings Blunderbuss: From Pennsylvania Coal To Dobbs, Michael Allan Wolf

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article explores three problems with the excess use of the Takings Clause (the "takings blunderbuss") that should cause concern not to left-wing judges and scholars who endorse seemingly unfettered activism from the bench and champion an organic view of the Constitution, but instead, and somewhat surprisingly, to conservatives who claim to eschew those practices. The first problem is that the text and original understanding, as far as we can discern, indicate that the Takings Clause was designed to ensure that owners receive payment when they are forced to sacrifice ownership of their tangible property for public use, most commonly …