Law Commons^™

Three Observations About Justice Alito's Draft Opinion In Dobbs - Commentary, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "There is much to say about Justice Samuel Alito's draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which was leaked from the United States Supreme Court on May 2 [2022].

Obviously, the most significant direct consequence of the proposed decision, which overrules Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) while upholding the constitutionality of a Mississippi law that outlaws most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, would be the restriction or elimination of abortion services throughout much of the nation. This will have all sorts of attendant consequences, large and smaller, many of which …

Commentary: The Workplace Vaccine Decision And Its Implications For Federal Regulatory Power, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "In a recent commentary, I contrasted the pragmatic consequentialism of retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer – and, more generally, the other two members of the court’s liberal bloc (Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan) – with the structural formalism of the court’s six-justice conservative supermajority. I also suggested that this framework may provide a more useful way to understand many of the court’s recent and upcoming blockbuster decisions than the partisan angle that court watchers so frequently use."

Commentary: The Pragmatic Consequentialism Of Justice Breyer, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "Justice Stephen Breyer’s announcement of his intention to retire at the end of the Supreme Court’s current term provides occasion to contrast his approach to judging with the very different approach of the court majority he leaves behind. The contrast is frequently explained in partisan terms: Justice Breyer is a “liberal” who was appointed by a Democratic president (Bill Clinton), whereas the majority is “conservative,” having been appointed by three different Republican presidents (George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, and Donald Trump).

The use of partisan labels to describe the different approaches to judging employed by the court’s two …

Commentary: Divisive Concepts And Regulation By Threat Of Baseless Lawsuit, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "At the State House, attention has returned to New Hampshire's so-called 'divisive concepts' law. The law, enacted in 2021, bars public K-12 teachers from engaging in certain forms of instruction on issues of race, gender, and other forms of discrimination. The Legislature is presently considering bills both to repeal the law and to extend it to the higher education context.

Those who support repeal tend to emphasize the vital need for classroom conversations on topics near the periphery of the restraints on speech imposed by law. And rightly so. The law's purpose and effect are to deter teachers and …

Separate But Free, Joshua E. Weishart

Law Faculty Scholarship

“Separate but equal” legally sanctioned segregation in public schools until Brown. Ever since, separate but free has been the prevailing dogma excusing segregation. From “freedom of choice” plans that facilitated massive resistance to desegregation to current school choice plans exacerbating racial, socioeconomic, and disability segregation, proponents have venerated parental freedom as the overriding principle.

This Article contends that, in the field of public education, the dogma of separate but free has no place; separate is inherently unfree. As this Article uniquely clarifies, segregation deprives schoolchildren of freedom to become equal citizens and freedom to learn in democratic, integrated, …

'Divisive Concepts' Law And The Big Chill, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "Much Critical commentary concerning the so-called "divisive concepts" provisions in this year's budget legislation has focused on their restrictions on speech. These restrictions, among other things, forbid public K-12 teachers from instructing that some persons are "inherently superior or inferior to [others]", "inherently racist or sexist," "should be discriminated against," or "should not attempt to treat others equally" because of their "age, sex gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, color, marital status, mental or physical disability, religion, or national origin."

New Hampshire's 'Divisive Concepts' Law And The Big Chill, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "

Much critical commentary on the so-called “divisive concepts” provisions in this year’s budget legislation – the label comes from language in an earlier version of the bill – has focused on their content- and viewpoint-based restraints on speech. These speech restrictions prohibit state public employers, including public K-12 school teachers, from (among other things) instructing that persons are “inherently superior or inferior to [others]” “inherently racist or sexist,” “should be discriminated against,” or “should not attempt to treat others equally” because of their “age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, color, marital status, familial status, mental or …

Is This A Christian Nation? An Introduction, Carl T. Bogus

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Constitution And Democracy In Troubled Times, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

Does textualism and originalism approach positively impact democracy?

What Constitution Says About Peaceful Transfer Of Power, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[excerpt] I recently was asked whether the Constitution requires a peaceful transfer of power following an election. Sadly, the questions is not merely theoretical. President Trump has stated that, if he loses the upcoming election, it will be through fraud. And he has made it clear that he will be unrestrained in his response to any efforts to oust him from office through an election he pronounces fraudulent.

The question of whether the Constitution requires a peaceful transfer of power prompts consideration of how we should conceptualize our Constitution. Is the Constitution merely the document that was written in 1787, …

Five Takeaways From High Court's Term, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] Last month, the Supreme Court wrapped up it 2019-2020 term with a flurry of significant rulings.

The court confirmed that Congress and state attorneys general may subpoena third parties for evidence when legitimately investigating a sitting president; held that the executive branch must engage in reasoned decision-making when rescinding administrative protections for a vulnerable population (i.e., beneficiaries of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program); and defined the scope of the president's power to remove officials from high office.

The court also clarified that federal anti-discrimination employment protections extend to LGBTQ workers; held that states may punish members …

Unsettled Questions In Student Speech Law, David L. Hudson Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

More than fifty years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court famously proclaimed in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” In subsequent decades, the Supreme Court reduced the level of free-speech protections for public school students, but Tinker is still the lodestar decision.

There remain several areas of uncertainty regarding the scope of student (K–12) First Amendment rights. This Article addresses three of those main areas: (1) whether a student’s speech can be limited by the unruly behavior …

Judicial Review And Governmental Bad Faith, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] This column is the third and final installment of a series considering some potential implications of June Medical Services v. Russo, a case involving a constitutional challenge to a Louisiana law regulating access to abortion services. The United States Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on March 4. A decision is expected shortly.

The first column sought to place June Medical Services in context by describing the history of constitutional abortion-rights litigation at the Supreme Court. The second explained what the case is likely to tell us about the respect the court will show to prior constitutional …

Essay: Understanding First Amendment Freedoms Through The Remarkable Life Of "The Greatest" --Muhammad Ali, David L. Hudson Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

Muhammad Ali represents much more than a great sports figure and one of the greatest fighters of all time.He is also the epitome of the citizen protected by the First Amendment– a man who paid dearly for his religious convictions and provocative speech, but found a defense in the amendment’s forty-five words. An examination of First Amendment freedoms through the prism of Ali can teach us much about the fragility of the amendment but also the strength that we all can find in it. The First Amendment provides: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting …

The Supreme Court And Constitutional Stare Decisis, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] This column is the second in a series of three considering some potential implications of June Medical Services v. Russo, a case involving a constitutional challenge to a Louisiana law regulating access to abortion services. The United States Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on March 4, 2020. A decision is expected by the end of June. More on the case below.

Is The Right To Abortion Still Specially Protected?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[excerpt] Last week, in June Medical Services v. Russo, the Supreme Court heard arguments in a case that once again raises questions about the extent to which the Constitution protects a woman's right to end a pregnancy. But the way in which the court resolves the case is likely to reveal more than just its views on abortion rights.

This column, the first in a series of three, describes the legal and historical path that led to June Medical Services. The next two will explore what the case suggests about, respectively, how the current court will treat constitutional …

Do We Intend To Keep Our Republic?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] Commentators recently have reminded us of a famous statement Benjamin Franklin allegedly made upon exiting Independence Hall on the final day of the 1787 Constitutional Convention. When asked whether the proposed Constitution would establish a monarchy or a republic, Franklin supposedly answered: "A republic, if you can keep it."

The anecdote, which both inspired the title of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch's recent book and was recounted by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi when she announced the impeachment inquiry into the conduct of the president, reminds us that our republican form of government is not to be taken …

Separation Of Powers, Partisanship And Impeachment: How Can We Overcome The Partisan Propaganda?, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[excerpt] "Our Constitutional system divides power horizontally, among the three branches of the federal government, and vertically, between the federal government and the states. We refer to the former division as our "separation of powers" and the latter as our "federalism."

United States Supreme Court Survey: 2018 Term: Iancu V. Brunetti: Free Speech Meets "Immoral And Scandalous" Trademarks In The Supreme Court, Niki Kuckes

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Fixed Stars: Famous First Amendment Phrases And Their Indelible Impact, David L. Hudson Jr., Jacob David Glenn

Law Faculty Scholarship

Some passages in First Amendment law have taken on a life and legend of their own, entering our cultural lexicon for their particular power, precision or passion. Some phrases are just so beautifully written that they cannot escape notice. Others aptly capture the essence of a key concept in a memorable way. Still others seemingly have grown in importance simply by the frequency for which they are cited in later court decisions. This article analyzes ten phrases from U.S. Supreme Court First Amendment decisions that qualify as some of the most enduring passages in First Amendment jurisprudence.

Review Of Ian Kerr And Jane Bailey, The Implications Of Digital Rights Management For Privacy And Freedom Of Expression, 2 Journal Of Information, Communication & Ethics In Society 87 (2004), Ann Bartow

Law Faculty Scholarship

Ian Kerr, who passed away far too young in 2019, was an incisive scholar and a much treasured colleague. The wit that sparkled in his papers was matched only by his warmth toward his friends, of whom there were many. He and his many co-authors wrote with deep insight and an equally deep humanity about copyright, artificial intelligence, privacy, torts, and much much more.

Ian was also a valued contributor to the Jotwell Technology Law section. His reviews here display the same playful generosity that characterized everything else he did. In tribute to his memory, we are publishing a memorial …

Will Conservative Justices Sound The Death Knell Of State Action? Be Careful For What You Wish, Anne M. Lofaso

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Role Of Deference In Adjudicating The Military Transgender Policy, Daca And The Census, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Hard, Simple Truth About Gun Control, Carl Bogus

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Abortion Rights And The Kavanaugh Nomination, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] "Last week, President Trump nominated federal appeals court judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill the Supreme Court seat opened by the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy. Immediately, coverage of the nomination focused on abortion and whether Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation would spell the end of the constitutional right recognized in Roe v. Wade. Let's explore why."

Aligning Education Rights And Remedies, Joshua Weishart

Law Faculty Scholarship

Over the course of five decades and three waves of litigation, courts have approved remedies under the state constitutional right to education that demand more equitable and adequate funding of public schools. Scholars have urgently called for a 'fourth wave" of litigation seeking remedies beyond money: racial and socioeconomic integration, school choice, universal preschool, and teacher tenure reform, just to name a few. Desperate for progress and to escape the incessant rut of school funding battles, advocates have, in turn, initiated lawsuits seeking a broader range of remedies. If this strategy induces a fourth wave, advocates will encounter a beleaguered …

Sports Betting, Federalism And The Constitution, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has described federalism - how the Constitution divides powers between the federal government and the states - as "perhaps our oldest question of constitutional law."

This past week, the United States Supreme Court returned to this oldest of constitutional questions to strike down a federal law that had prohibited stats from authorizing betting on competitive sporting events.

The Travel Ban And Presidential Power, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Use Of Military Force And The Constitution, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Excerpt] Last week, for the second time since becoming president, President Donald Trump ordered a military strike on Syria without seeking or obtaining authorization from Congress. Both strikes were responsive to chemical-weapons attacks that, American intelligence analysts say, the Syrian government launched against its own people.

Many believe that these forceful responses to horrific war crimes involving banned weapons were morally justified. But were they constitutional?

The Death Penalty And The Constitution, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

[excerpt] The death penalty is back in the news. Last week, President Donald Trump argued that capital punishment should be available to punish drug dealers who have contributed to the opioid crisis. Earlier this month, the New Hampshire Senate voted to prospectively repeal the state's death penalty. These developments provide occasion to review the constitutional issues raised when the federal government or a state seeks to put a convict to death.