Digital Commons Network^™

The Death Of The Evolving Standards Of Decency, Meghan J. Ryan

Florida State University Law Review

The Eighth Amendment Punishments Clause is in jeopardy. The con-stitutionality of punishments is usually judged according to the “evolv-ing standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing socie-ty.” And in evaluating these standards, the Court has traditionally looked to changing societal views on punishment. This is a living con-stitution approach to interpretation, and the Eighth Amendment is the only area of law in which the Court has consistently and explicitly ap-plied such an approach. But a living constitution approach is diamet-rically opposed to the current Court’s focus on originalism. This is the first originalist Court in history, and …

A Progressive Judiciary? Judicial Review And National Politics From Reconstruction To The Present, Joshua Braver, Gregory A. Elinson

College of Law Faculty Publications

Within legal academia, the conventional historical narrative is that the Supreme Court has regularly interfered with legislative and executive efforts to protect minority rights and remedy economic inequality. Citing this reactionary tendency, an influential and vocal group of progressive legal scholars have argued that progressives ought to stop defending judicial review and instead devote their energies to eliminating it, or at least aggressively curbing its use. These progressive critics of judicial review (our term) proffer two related historical claims. First, they assert, the Supreme Court has consistently been less progressive than congressional majorities and Presidents. Second, they suggest, even landmark …

State Sovereign Immunity And The New Purposivism, Anthony J. Bellia, Bradford R. Clark

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

Since the Constitution was first proposed, courts and commentators have debated the extent to which it alienated the States’ preexisting sovereign immunity from suit by individuals. During the ratification period, these debates focused on the language of the citizen-state diversity provisions of Article III. After the Supreme Court read these provisions to abrogate state sovereign immunity in Chisholm v. Georgia, Congress and the States adopted the Eleventh Amendment to prohibit this construction. The Court subsequently ruled that States enjoy sovereign immunity independent of the Eleventh Amendment, which neither conferred nor diminished it. In the late twentieth-century, Congress began enacting statutes …

The Pioneers, Waves, And Random Walks Of Securities Law In The Supreme Court, Elizabeth Pollman

Seattle University Law Review

After the pioneers, waves, and random walks that have animated the history of securities laws in the U.S. Supreme Court, we might now be on the precipice of a new chapter. Pritchard and Thompson’s superb book, A History of Securities Law in the Supreme Court, illuminates with rich archival detail how the Court’s view of the securities laws and the SEC have changed over time and how individuals have influenced this history. The book provides an invaluable resource for understanding nearly a century’s worth of Supreme Court jurisprudence in the area of securities law and much needed context for …

Three Stories: A Comment On Pritchard & Thompson’S A History Of Securities Laws In The Supreme Court, Harwell Wells

Seattle University Law Review

Adam Pritchard and Robert Thompson’s A History of Securities Laws in the Supreme Court should stand for decades as the definitive work on the Federal securities laws’ career in the Supreme Court across the twentieth century.1 Like all good histories, it both tells a story and makes an argument. The story recounts how the Court dealt with the major securities laws, as well the agency charged with enforcing them, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the rules it promulgated, from the 1930s into the twenty-first century. But the book does not just string together a series of events, “one …

Reconciling Riverside Bayview Homes, Sackett, And County Of Maui, Stephen Johnson

Articles

Near the end of the 2022 term, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Sackett v. EPA. The case has been described as "the most important Clean Water Act case the Court has ever decided, and ... probably ... one of the most impactful environmental decisions in the Court's history."  For the fourth time, the Court interpreted the meaning of the term "navigable waters" in the Clean Water Act (CWA), and the Sackett Court narrowed the interpretation of the term in a manner that critics claim will eliminate federal protection for more than 50% of the wetlands in the United …

Stolen By Wolves: A Critique On The Supreme Court’S Understanding Of Women’S Reservations In India, Rashmi Raghavan

National Law School of India Review

Women’s reservations were envisioned under Article 15(3) to fulfil the goal of substantive equality in the Constitution of India. This article tries to uncover the procedural missteps that have occurred by the Supreme Court while administering the policy of women’s reservations to various public positions in the country. I argue that the reservation procedure currently put in place by the apex Court by a cumulative reading of the decisions in Anil Kumar Gupta v State of UP and Ors and Rajesh Kumar Daria v Rajasthan Public Service Commision have created an enclosed ceiling on women candidates and is contrary to …

The Supreme Court’S 2022-23 Access To Court Decisions, Sarah Somers, Abigail Coursolle, Sarah L. Grusin, Jane Perkins

Saint Louis University Journal of Health Law & Policy

The Supreme Court’s 2022–23 Term yielded significant decisions bringing about goals long-sought by conservatives. This debut Term for the first Black woman Justice also included some results welcomed by progressives, including decisions on voting rights, Native American sovereignty, and individual enforcement of Spending Clause enactments. In this Article, we discuss significant decisions that have implications for access to court for civil litigants, focusing on those affecting access for low-income and marginalized litigants. We also look ahead to what the 2023–24 Term may bring for those seeking access to the courts.

The Supreme Court’S Access To Court Decisions In 2023-2024, Jane Perkins, Amanda Avery, Arielle Linsey, Sarah Somers

Saint Louis University Journal of Health Law & Policy

The Supreme Court’s 2023–24 Term produced a number of controversial decisions, affecting everything from where unhoused people can sleep to the president’s absolute immunity. In this Article, we discuss significant decisions that have implications for access to court for civil litigants, focusing on a trio of decisions that curtail the power of administrative agencies. Also highlighted are decisions that address jurisdiction, standing and mootness, sovereign immunity, statutory construction, due process, and equal protection. We close with a brief preview of cases before the Court during the 2024–2025 Term.

Anti-Liberal Rights Retrenchment As A Threat To The Rule Of Law, Paul Gowder

Emory Law Journal

The Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, overturning the half-century old constitutional right to reproductive choice, is only the most prominent example of a global series of attacks on rights of personal, sexual, and family autonomy. The attacks on LGBTQ+ rights by the Christian nationalist governments of Hungary and Poland are another important example. A cadre of anti-liberal scholars and public intellectuals such as Patrick Deneen, Sohrab Ahmari, and Adrian Vermeule serve as the intelligentsia within this global reactionary movement, advocating for the direct importation of far-right values into the law of western states …

Signaling Sexual Harassment, Emily Suski

Emory Law Journal

Following the Supreme Court’s decision to eliminate the right to abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Title IX stands as a potentially powerful statutory bulwark against further erosions of sex and gender equality rights. Title IX’s purpose is to protect against and eradicate sex discrimination of all forms, including sexual harassment, in education. Yet, it rarely fulfills this purpose. Although the Supreme Court has said that sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination proscribed by Title IX, it has failed to define sexual harassment or provide more than the barest of guidance on how severe it …

Abortion And Affirmative Action: The Fragility Of Supreme Court Political Decision-Making, William E. Nelson

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

This Article shows, on the basis of new evidence, that the canonical case of Marbury v. Madison has been grossly misinterpreted and that as a result of the misinterpretation we cannot understand what is wrong with contemporary cases such as Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College.

The Article will proceed as follows. Because Marbury cannot be properly understood without understanding the eighteenth-century background against which it was decided, Part I will examine legal practices in colonial and post-Revolutionary America, focusing on cases in which judicial review emerged …

The Supreme Court, Constitutional Development, And Evolution Theory: A Critique, Charles M. Lamb Ph.D., Jacob R. Neiheisel

Indiana Law Journal

This article spotlights how University of Chicago Professor David Strauss’s publications present the early stages of a descriptive theory of constitutional interpretation and evolution, and how his theoretical contributions might be strengthened. Specifically highlighted here are ten milestone Supreme Court rulings with the objective of determining which were “evolutionary” as opposed to “modernizing,” based on Strauss’s theoretical formulations. On various occasions these cases demonstrate how Strauss’s theory can be not only refined but broadened. The concluding section assesses Strauss’s contribution to the study of American constitutional development and how it might be revamped. There we argue that despite Strauss’s influence …

Protecting Minority Representation In An Era Of Political Polarization And The Hollowing Out Of Voting Rights Protections, Henry L. Chambers Jr.

Law Faculty Publications

The United States Supreme Court has hollowed out various voting rights protections, leaving all voters—minority and nonminority—less protected in a politically polarized America. Surprisingly, the Court has continued to protect representation for minority race voters who live in racially polarized areas. However, minority race voters risk losing that protection, typically provided through majority-minority districts authorized under the Voting Rights Act, if they build cross-racial coalitions with their neighbors. Under the Court’s interpretation of the VRA, cross-racial voting coalitions may be less protected than local majorities comprised of a single race of voters. The loss of such protection could leave their …

The Unconstitutional Conditions Vacuum In Criminal Procedure, Kay L. Levine, Jonathan R. Nash, Robert A. Schapiro

Faculty Articles

For more than a century, the Supreme Court has applied the unconstitutional conditions doctrine in many contexts, scrutinizing government efforts to condition the tradeoff of rights for benefits with regard to speech, funding, and takings, among others. The Court has declined, however, to invoke the doctrine in the area of criminal procedure, where people accused of crime are often asked to—and often do—surrender their constitutional rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments in return for some benefit. Despite its insistence that the unconstitutional conditions doctrine applies broadly across the Bill of Rights, the Court’s jurisprudence demonstrates that the doctrine …

Pyrrhic Victories: The Mirage Of Winning At The Supreme Court, Tonja Jacobi, Clare G. Willis

Faculty Articles

We conduct in-depth archival research of landmark constitutional criminal procedure cases and find two ways in which the declarations of the vindication of rights they contain are misleading. First, most defendants who successfully establish police violations of their constitutional rights before the highest court in the land nonetheless remain in prison for years or decades subsequently. The multitude of ways in which the state can convict the individual defendant even in the face of one or more constitutional violations means that the Supreme Court precedents that bear their names seldom translate to genuine wins for the defendants. Second, there are …

A New Great Awakening Of Religious Freedom In America, John Witte Jr.

Faculty Articles

While loud criticisms of religion continue to clatter in the media and the law reviews, the U.S. Supreme Court has led a great awakening of American religious freedom. In more than two dozen cases since 2011, the Court has used both the First Amendment and federal statutes to strengthen the rights of religious organizations to make their own internal decisions about employment and employee benefits. The Court has held that some forms of government aid to religion and religious education are not only permissible under the Establishment Clause, but also required under the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses. The …

Derailing Democracy, Shrinking Responsibility: The New Election Law Landscape, Cory Conley, Tonja Jacobi

Faculty Articles

In democracy jurisprudence, the Roberts Court wears two faces. Its most recent duo of cases illustrates the inconsistency. In Rucho v. Common Cause, the Court ruled that even grossly partisan gerrymanders are nonjusticiable in federal courts. Yet, in Moore v. Harper, the Court rejected granting unreviewable authority to state lawmakers to regulate federal elections—for now. This combination of rulings is not ideological moderation or judicial restraint, as the Court claims. These recent cases are emblematic of broader unpredictability and selectivity in election law. The assertions of judicial humility in Rucho stand in stark contrast to the bald activism …

The Worst Choice For School Choice: Tuition Tax Credits Are A Bad Idea And Direct Funding Is Wiser, Michael J. Broyde, Anna G. Gabianelli

Faculty Articles

School choice is on the rise, and states use various mechanisms to implement it. One prevalent mechanism is also a uniquely problematic one: the tax credit. Tax credits are deficient at equitably distributing a benefit like school choice; they are costly, and they invite fraud. Instead of using tax credits, states opting for school choice programs should use direct funding. Direct funding will more efficiently achieve the goals of school choice because it can be regulated like any other government benefit, even if it ends up subsidizing religious private schools.

Tax credits’ prevalence is not inexplicable, of course. It is …

The Past As A Colonialist Resource, Deepa Das Acevedo

Faculty Articles

Originalism’s critics have failed to block its rise. For many jurists and legal scholars, the question is no longer whether to espouse originalism but how to espouse it. This Article argues that critics have ceded too much ground by focusing on discrediting originalism as either bad history or shoddy linguistics. To disrupt the cycle of endless “methodological” refinements and effectively address originalism’s continued popularity, critics must do two things: identify a better disciplinary analogue for originalist interpretation and advance an argument that moves beyond methods.

Anthropology can assist with both tasks. Both anthropological analysis and originalist interpretation are premised on …

Public Justice: Analyzing The Interactions Of Supreme Court Justices With The American Public, Abbie Wood

Theses and Dissertations--Political Science

When and how do Supreme Court justices choose to interact with the public? What motivating factors spur a justice to make a public appearance? In the fields of political science, public law, and legal studies, research has overwhelmingly studied on-the-bench behavior. Scholars have analyzed judicial voting patterns, opinion writing, oral arguments, and more. Despite the prevalence and importance of non-decision making activities as well as the growing reporting by media outlets concerning justices' public appearances, there remains a lack of attention devoted to exploring how justices behave off-the-bench. In this dissertation, I seek to develop this neglected area within judicial …

The Establishment Of The American Judicial System Through Marbury Vs. Madison, Conner White

Tenor of Our Times

Marbury, Madison, Marshall, Supreme Court, Justice, Jefferson, America, Constitution, 1800, Democratic-Republican, Federalist, Judiciary

From Andy Warhol To Barbie: Copyright’S Fair Use Doctrine After Andy Warhol Foundation V. Goldsmith, Niki Kuckes

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Roads Not Taken On Affirmative Action, Robert L. Tsai

Faculty Scholarship

The law of affirmative action is a mess. In the short term, legal doctrine is constrained by path dependence, but its long-term future is murkier due to the many unforeseen contingencies. To regain a sense of the possible, this Article looks forward to the future of equality jurisprudence by looking backward. It recovers three roads not taken. First, the Supreme Court could have kept expectations minimal by hewing closely to the methods and rhetoric of fairness rather than ratifying a consumerist model of entitlement by deploying an individualistic vision of equality. Second, the justices might have endorsed a robust right …

The Mad Hatter’S Quip: Looking For Logic In The Independent State Legislature Theory, Nicholas Maggio, Foreword By Brendan Buschi

Touro Law Review

The Supreme Court is set to hear a case that threatens the bedrock of America’s democracy, and it is not clear how it will shake out. The cumbersomely named “Independent State Legislature Theory” is at the heart of the case Moore v. Harper, which is before the Supreme Court this term. The theory holds that state legislatures should be free from the ordinary bounds of state judicial review when engaged in matters that concern federal elections. Despite being defeated a myriad of times at the Supreme Court, the latest challenge stems from a legal battle over North Carolina’s redistricting maps. …

“It’S The End Of The World As We Know It” –Redrafting Amendment To Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 26 To Allow Remote Testimony, Alisson Sandoval

Touro Law Review

During the COVID-19 pandemic, when society fought an aggressive and deadly virus, our connection to the outside world became predominantly virtual. Videoconference technology became essential in state and federal civil judicial proceedings. In light of the unprecedented challenges presented by the pandemic and its long-lasting impact on the criminal justice system, this Article argues for amending Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 26 to permit remote witness testimony when a witness is unavailable.

“Improve Your Privileges While They Stay”: A Guide To Improve The Privileges Of U.S. Citizenship For Everybody, Joshua J. Schroeder

Touro Law Review

In 1767, the young Phillis Wheatley wrote from her position of slavery in the Wheatley home of Boston to “ye sons of Science” at Harvard College, telling them to “improve your privileges while they stay.” She beheld the startling privileges of learning and discovery bestowed upon an elite group of young, rich white men in Boston and celebrated their privileges. Neither did she scorn those whose luck had placed a bounty of privilege upon their laps, for she likely planned to share in that bounty herself, one day. When she was only 13 or 14, Wheatley sublimely encouraged grown men …

Felix Frankfurter: Liberal Lawyer, Conservative Justice, Jed S. Rakoff

Touro Law Review

The Hon. Jed S. Rakoff gave the first presentation at the conference, providing an introduction to Justice Felix Frankfurter by describing some of his accomplishments and situating his tenure on the Supreme Court in the context of the Court’s historically conservative orientation.

Lost In The Thicket, Brad Snyder

Touro Law Review

As part of a symposium on his biography of Felix Frankfurter, Democratic Justice, Brad Snyder revisits Baker v. Carr and explores the contrasts between Justice William Brennan’s judicially supremacist majority opinion and Frankfurter’s departmentalist dissent and unheeded warnings about empowering the judiciary. As Frankfurter wrote in his Baker dissent, he placed more faith in the U.S. Congress, as opposed to the judiciary, to protect democracy.

John Marshall And Felix Frankfurter: An Icon And A Disappointment?, William E. Nelson

Touro Law Review

This article shows how Chief Justice John Marshall first developed the doctrine of judicial restraint in Marbury v. Madison to assure the public that the Supreme Court would not engage in politically oriented judicial review as colonial courts had in holding Parliament’s 1765 Stamp Act unconstitutional. Justice Felix Frankfurter, in contrast, adopted judicial restraint differently—by reading the scholarship of James Bradley Thayer. This article also shows that Frankfurter did not abandon his commitment to judicial restraint when during his years on the bench it began to serve conservative purposes rather than the progressive purposes it had once served.