Digital Commons Network^™

The Constitutional Fight Over The Nlra And The Nlrb: A 90 Year Reprise, Kate Andrias

Faculty Scholarship

This article traces renewed constitutional challenges to the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), placing them in historical and doctrinal context. Contemporary attacks — advanced by major corporations and the Trump Administration — revive the constitutional conflicts of the 1930s. Drawing on arguments rooted in the unitary executive theory, as well as Article III and the Seventh Amendment, the current challenges threaten not only the NLRB’s independence but the broader administrative state and the system of labor rights it sustains. At stake is more than institutional design: the dispute reflects a deeper contest over …

Child-Taking Justice And The Federal Indian Boarding School Initiative, Diane Marie Amann

Scholarly Works

The focus of this article is the 2022–2024 Federal Indian Boarding School Initiative undertaken the U.S. Executive Branch. The article chronicles this three-year process, which included sessions with survivors and their descendants, and which resulted in a two-volume report, in an apology by President Joe Biden, and in designation of a national memorial at one of the most notorious school sites. This article examines the initiative as an example of “child-taking justice”; that is, as a process of what is called “transitional justice”, done in an effort to redress the takings of children from their community, followed by efforts to …

Stare Decisis After The Rejection Of Lockstepping In State Constitutional Law: An Ohio Perspective, Jonathan L. Entin

ConLawNOW

State constitutions contain numerous rights-protecting provisions that are analogous to provisions of the United States Constitution. But lawyers and courts often ignored state constitutions. Even when courts interpreted state constitutions, they often followed an approach known as lockstepping: state constitutional rights were viewed as having the same meaning as analogous federal provisions, even when the state provisions had different wording and were adopted for different purposes at different times than their federal analogues. In recent decades, however, commentators and judges have claimed that state constitutions might afford greater protection to individual rights than the U.S. Constitution. The growth of the …

Take In Case Of Emergency: Reconciling Necessity Takings With The Original Meaning Of The Takings Clause, Tony Smith

Northwestern University Law Review

Does the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause permit the state to destroy property without compensation whenever it declares an emergency? The long-standing doctrine of necessity empowers the state to do exactly that.

Courts dating back to common law England have permitted governments to claim a privilege of necessity to avoid paying for private property they destroy in times of crisis. The privilege rests on the principle that the public good sometimes outweighs the harm the individual suffers. Today’s courts and academics stretch this principle to its limits, arguing necessity should be used as a vehicle for combating all manner of social …

Original Public Meaning And The Rule Of Recognition, Andrew Jensen Kerr

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Framer intent no longer possesses the same cachet it once held. But Framer influence still matters for public meaning originalism, particularly for communications like The Federalist Papers, in which Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison marketed the work of the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention to state ratifying conventions and the constituencies they represented. Contemporary originalists posit that what the Constitution meant to this public audience at the time of ratification is cemented in time forever (the fixation thesis). The starting point for my analysis is the prosaic observation that our Framers occasionally changed their minds about the meaning of …

Animus, Again, William D. Araiza

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In the first week of his second term, President Donald Trump issued multiple executive orders targeting immigrants and transgender people. Additional actions targeting these and other vulnerable groups have already followed. Others may come; more generally, such orders will likely remain a part of the President’s policy agenda and governing style. These actions call for analysis of the legal tools litigants can deploy to challenge them. That call is urgent, as a response not just to the orders already issued, but to others the Administration might promulgate in the future.

One of those tools is equal protection animus. This Article …

The Jurisprudence Of Constitutional Entitlement, David Schraub

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Lawyers are accustomed to thinking of constitutional law as a familiar binary: Either a given governmental policy or practice is constitutional and therefore permitted, or unconstitutional and forbidden. But not all constitutional laws are created equal. A state practice which may be constitutional in concept (such as the death penalty) may, in some or many applications, violate specific constitutional rules and become impermissible. When a policy which has been affirmed to be constitutional in general repeatedly runs up against problems as-applied, a legal tension emerges: can the state implement the policy or not? This dilemma illuminates a third constitutional category: …

Criminal Court's Disability, Zohra Ahmed

Faculty Scholarship

Do criminal courts meaningfully accommodate psychiatric disability? A review of competency proceedings across the United States suggests not. In competency to stand trial proceedings, criminal court actors offer a narrow vision of psychiatric disability that excludes many defendants. Ultimately, the institutional context of criminal court undermines even the meagre accommodations that the competency framework provides.

Competency proceedings are the constitutional accommodations available to disabled defendants if they can establish that they are unable to consult with their lawyers or if they do not have a rational or factual understanding of the proceedings against them. After a finding of incompetency, the …

The Endorsement Test’S Early Years, 1983–1985: Notes From The O’Connor Files, Jay Wexler

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

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. …

Amicus In Trump V. Cook: The Fed, Offices As Property, And The Meaning Of “Cause”, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

The Federal Reserve Act states that “each member shall hold office for a term of fourteen years from the expiration of the term of his predecessor, unless sooner removed for cause by the President.” 12 U.S.C. § 242. Based on the historical record, when Congress creates an office with a fixed term of years and protects against removal without “cause,” Congress has both granted “a constitutionally protected property interest” under the Fifth Amendment (that cannot be taken away without “due process”) and extended a statutory entitlement to receive fair notice and a meaningful opportunity to respond before any removal may …

Bank Supervision And Article Ii, Kathryn Judge

Faculty Scholarship

The administrative state is again at a cross roads. The Supreme Court seems poised to continue its march toward trying to fit all of government neatly into one of the three constitutionally enumerated branches. An important front of this shift has been a flattening of the mechanisms through which officers of the United States may be held appropriately accountable for their actions. Waning are the days when Congress had the flexibility to create the institutions it believed were “necessary and proper” for carrying into execution important policy aims and to determine the appropriate mechanisms for accountability in conjunction with considering …

Stand-In Standing, Matthew I. Hall

Scholarly Works

When the interests of a state, or of the federal government, are at issue in a lawsuit, those interests are typically represented by the Executive branch. But not always: The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that states, and the federal government, may delegate their claims to non-governmental litigants in some circumstances. But the Court has never defined the exact boundaries of when stand-in standing is permitted. And states have recently begun to exploit this doctrinal uncertainty, by enacting laws that are arguably, and in some cases flagrantly, unconstitutional, but outsourcing the enforcement of those laws to private individuals. The avowed …

Personal Jurisdiction And The Fifth Amendment, Scott Dodson

ConLawNOW

The Supreme Court has avoided clarifying the relationship between federal-court personal jurisdiction, congressional statutes, and the Fifth Amendment. Until now, that is. In June 2025, the Court decided two important cases involving constraints on a federal court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction outside of Rule 4(k)(1)(A), which typically ties federal-court personal jurisdiction to state-court personal jurisdiction. This brief essay explains and analyzes those cases, situating them in the Court’s larger agenda for personal jurisdiction. It also discusses some open questions raised by the decisions and the role that personal jurisdiction in the United States may now play on the global stage.

The Reverse Onus At Bail For Intimate Partner Violence: An Unconstitutional And Ineffective Measure, Ella Peterson

Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies

The recently adopted reverse onus at bail for repeat intimate partner violence is a piece of performative legislation that is ineffectual and may harm those it seeks to protect. Part I of this paper provides an overview of intimate partner violence in Canada in order to contextualize s. 515(6)(b.1) of the Criminal Code. Part II is a Charter assessment of the reverse onus provision at issue, focusing on sections 7 and 11(e). Part III concludes with a critique of the effectiveness of the reverse onus, which fails to address the root causes of intimate partner violence.

Something Concrete: How Labor Advocates Can Best Respond To The Ambiguity Of Glacier Northwest, Ateş Serifsoy

Seattle University Law Review

The Supreme Court’s much-anticipated decision in Glacier North-west, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local No. 174 (Glacier) marked a critical moment for workers’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the longstanding practice of Garmon preemption. Yet, initial fears of a significant rollback of workers’ rights, driven by sensational headlines, were met with an unexpectedly narrow Court opinion. This Comment examines Glacier’s implications for Gar-mon preemption and the right to strike. It offers the historical background of the doctrine of labor law preemption before Glacier; presents a detailed analysis of Glacier itself, including its …

Don't Make Waves: Community Involvement In Offshore Wind Energy Development, Theresa Norman

Ocean and Coastal Law Journal

The federal government has started the process of ramping up U.S. offshore wind energy production by orders of magnitude for the next decade. In the past, affected communities have shown the ability to delay and even halt offshore wind development, and some stakeholders believe that the environmental impacts of these projects are too uncertain to risk undertaking them. Currently, the regulatory road to a fully commissioned offshore wind farm is lengthy, expensive, and full of hurdles, which include grappling with local community pushback. This Article will explore the regulatory process and its relationship with stakeholder pushback and litigation. The Article …

From Petrostate To Precedent: The Impact Of Held V. Montana On Future Climate Litigation And The Urgent Need For Federal Climate Action, Hailey Rizzo

Ocean and Coastal Law Journal

In 1972, Montana, a prominent petrostate, amended its constitution to enshrine the inalienable right to a clean and healthful environment. After decades of fossil fuel production and consumption, which led to high levels of greenhouse gas emissions, this green amendment became the foundation of Held v. Montana--the first youth-led constitutional climate case to prevail against a petrostate. This Article illustrates the importance of Held for the plaintiffs in the case, for current and future residents of the state, and for plaintiffs in future climate change litigation. This Article also urges the federal government to provide an avenue for redress for …

A Lockean Theory Of Coastal Climate Adaptation, Lingxi Chenyang

Ocean and Coastal Law Journal

What rights do coastal residents have as the seas swallow their homes and livelihoods while the government fails to act? Many legal and policy reforms have been proposed to help people better respond to climate-induced coastal erosion. Little has been said about the underlying theories of climate governance. This Symposium Article identifies three theories of climate adaptation in the context of disappearing coastlines: scientific realism; economic realism; and liberal rights. According to scientific realism and economic realism, the key obstacle to effective climate adaptation is an uninformed government facing a scientifically and economically complex climate future. To the extent that …

Is It Time To Revive The Privileges Or Immunities Clause?, Hwi Won Kim

Maurer Theses and Dissertations

Is it time to revive the privileges or immunities clause?

I argue it is. But in a distinct way from what other legal scholars have suggested. Today, two ideas dominate discussion of the Privileges or Immunities clause of the 14th Amendment. First, the Supreme Court rendered it a nullity in the Slaughter-House Cases (1873). Second, any attempt to revive it, most prominently Justice Thomas's recent concurrence in McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), necessarily means an abandonment of modern rights now protected by Due Process or Equal Protection. The first, in essence, argues the Clause is already dead, while the …

The Wages Of Constitutional Interpretation, Francesca L. Procaccini

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The future of constitutional interpretation is a dynamic amalgam of knowns and unknowns. This article explores three. First, an unknown known: the Court's embrace of formal equality methodologies, more than originalist methodologies, is driving current conservative changes in constitutional law and ushering in a stale and acontextual bent to constitutional rights. Second, another unknown known: both the Court's equality and originalist methodologies serve to jettison the longstanding and widespread use of intermediate scrutiny and thereby push the level of protection for rights to the extremes. Finally, a known unknown: the Court's embrace of hyper-formal equality and originalist rules transfers hegemonic …

"What Shall Be Orthodox" In Polarized Times: Overview And Response To Commentators, Linda C. Mcclain, James E. Fleming

Faculty Scholarship

“If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.” Justice Robert Jackson wrote this celebrated passage in his majority opinion in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), which protected the First Amendment right of Jehovah’s Witness children not to participate in a compulsory flag salute in public schools. In recent years, protests against imposed orthodoxy—usually invoking Barnette—have occurred in …

An Originalist Case For Birthright Citizenship Of Unlawful Immigrants' Children: Anti-Gypsy And Anti-Chinese Restrictions As Context, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

The Trump administration and other opponents of birthright citizenship for the children of “unlawful immigrants” make the following originalist claim about the Fourteenth Amendment: Even if the clause meant birthright citizenship, it applies today only to “lawful immigrants,” because the category of “unlawful immigrant” or “illegal immigrant” did not exist in the 1860s, when the clause was written and ratified. Opponents also argue that the Fourteenth Amendment’s citizenship clause originally implied a “loyalty” or “allegiance” requirement.

These assertions are historically inaccurate.

To the contrary, the concept of “unlawful immigrants” existed in the 1850s-60s, and Americans ratified birthright citizenship without indicating …

The Indian Pharmacopoeia: Enabling Open Access And Crafting A ‘Sovereign Function Exception’ For Government Works, Aparajita Lath

National Law School Journal

Standardisation of drugs and access to such standards are important levers for effective drug regulation. The Indian Pharmacopoeia, the official book of standards for drugs in the country prescribed by the Union government under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940, are legally binding and enforceable. Not only do the standards have the force of law but are also government-created. The Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission (IPC), a division of the Union Department of Health and Family Welfare, has a legal monopoly over creating and publishing this compendium. Though it is legally binding, the Indian Pharmacopoeia is neither in the public domain …

Misreading The Federal Child Pornography Statutes, Owen Senders

Georgia Criminal Law Review

For the past 40 years, federal courts have committed two grievous textual errors in interpreting the federal child-pornography statutes and sentencing guidelines. These errors have caused hundreds of wrongful convictions—many the bases for decades-long sentences—and have produced a body of caselaw that is profoundly incoherent and in direct conflict with basic tenets of First Amendment doctrine. They have also likely endangered children. This article identifies these errors, surveys their consequences, and suggests legal arguments for people charged or convicted under the child-pornography statutes.

The first error impacts the application of all of the federal child-pornography statutes and sentencing guidelines. These …

Directing Unconstitutional Verdicts: When Judges Become Jurors On Self-Defense, Anjali Pathmanathan

Georgia Criminal Law Review

The right to self-defense is one of the oldest and most universal concepts in Anglo-American criminal law and criminal procedure. Under this defense, an accused person, who honestly believed that using force was necessary to protect themself from imminent danger, did nothing criminal even if another person was harmed as a result. To assert self-defense at trial, however, the accused must admit to intentionally committing the forceful acts alleged to explain how they only used such force to save themself from immediate harm. Once an accused has made such a grave admission, the jury must consider whether the force was …

Criminalization Of Immigration Through State Enforcement: Lessons From Texas’S Latest Efforts To Criminalize Immigration Through Senate Bill 4, A. Regenold Bright

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Facial Recognition Ai, Margaret Hu

Faculty Publications

The integration of algorithmic decisionmaking and artificial intelligence (“AI”) into facial recognition technology poses new, unprecedented risks to privacy and individual autonomy rights, particularly in urban settings. The murder of Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare, in New York City on December 4, 2024, provides a timely case study to examine the deployment of facial recognition systems by the New York Police Department and other law enforcement agencies to identify the suspect. New York City deploys some of the most sophisticated surveillance architecture in the nation, put into place following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This Article explores the …

A Reflective Case Study Of Leadership Models In The Fight For Abortion Access, Jamie R. Abrams

ConLawNOW

This Essay presents a reflective case study on divergent leadership models in the fight for abortion access. Just as scholars study what is happening regarding abortion access, it is equally important to study how people advocate for supportive laws and policies, where they advocate, and who they center in the advocacy, so that tactics remain effective in a rapidly evolving legal, political, and social landscape. This Essay analyzes the “I Stand with Planned Parenthood” advocacy campaign of the 2000s as an example of a centralized and individual leadership model, and it identifies strategic strengths and weaknesses of that approach. This …

It's Not About Children: How Gender Resentment Shapes Public Opinion On Abortion In The United States, Nicole Kalaf-Hughes, Debra Leiter

ConLawNOW

The debate around women’s reproductive health care, and particularly restrictions on abortion, remains a hotly contested area of American politics. Increasingly, restrictions on abortion access have become politically salient and increasingly common. While traditional justification from anti-abortion forces often rests on arguments about the reverence for life, increasingly we have seen an emphasis on the argument that anti-abortion policy protect women and children. Yet if those preferences truly drive abortion attitudes, then the same attitudes that predict abortion restrictions should also predict preferences for policies that materially support women and children. However, if instead attitudes towards women’s place in society …

Comparative Lessons For Enhancing Representation In The U.S. Judiciary - And Countering Democratic Decline, Shruti Rana

ConLawNOW

This Essay draws upon efforts to build more representative judiciaries in other countries and in international fora to identify promising strategies for enhancing representation in the U.S. judiciary, particularly with respect to gender and parity. It argues that efforts to enhance judicial representation and parity in the United States could benefit from incorporating and building upon international legal principles and the practices of international courts, institutions, and organizations with respect to parity and representation. Crucially, at the same time, efforts to ensure greater representation and parity in U.S. courts could further support the rule of law and counter democratic decline …