Law Commons^™

Balancing The Scales Between The Evolution Of Affirmative Action Policies And The Equal Protection Clause, Jesicca Patel

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

This article argues that the Supreme Court’s ruling ending affirmative action was correct. Affirmative action does not solve the underlying issues of racial inequality and systemic oppression. Instead, affirmative action undermines the success of minorities and inflames racial tensions. This article is divided into Five Parts. The first part examines U.S. Supreme Court precedent addressing the Court’s decisions in upholding affirmative action policies in educational settings before Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. The second part discusses Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and why the Supreme Court …

Constitutional Structures In Private Law And The Example Of Waste Law, Jill M. Fraley

Scholarly Articles

This Article proposes three criteria for when a private law mechanism performs a structural constitutional function: when it constrains present authority in the name of future stability, when it disperses enforcement to avoid centralized authority, and when it has structural entrenchment to avoid ordinary displacement. While many private law doctrines contain constitutional resonances or echo rights, the core of constitutional law is the power structure—a precondition for the protection of those rights. Constitutional structures have three key components: self-binding through time, separation and diffusion of power, and entrenchment beyond ordinary politics. For a private law doctrine to do more than …

History And Tradition In First Amendment Intellectual Property Cases: A Critique, Rebecca Tushnet

Marquette Intellectual Property & Innovation Law Review

This Article examines the increasing reliance on "history and tradition" as a method of constitutional analysis in First Amendment cases involving intellectual property. The author argues that, although the Supreme Court has recently embraced this methodology in other constitutional contexts, particularly Second Amendment jurisprudence, it has long relied on similar reasoning to uphold intellectual property rights against First Amendment challenges. Through an analysis of cases involving the right of publicity, copyright, and trademark law, the Article contends that the Court has used historical analogies to justify expanding intellectual property protections while giving insufficient consideration to their impact on free expression. …

Justifying The Fourth Amendment, Daniel Epps

Vanderbilt Law Review

Why does the Fourth Amendment belong in the Constitution? This question is not whether society should impose some legal restraints on government searches and seizures. Rather, why should such protections reside in our national charter, superior to other forms of law and insulated from change via ordinary majoritarian political processes? Despite major disputes about the Fourth Amendment's content, Fourth Amendment theorists rarely ask this question. Almost all agree that the Fourth Amendment's constitutional protections are critically important-even if no one can agree exactly what those protections are.
This Article seeks a justification for the Fourth Amendment-the reason why search-and-seizure protections …

S.F. 2200 (2025) - Permission To Change: Minnesota's Illusory Privilege Reform In A Post-Notorious Rbg Era, A.G. Summers

Mitchell Hamline Law Journal of Public Policy and Practice

No abstract provided.

Reclaiming The Constitution: "For There Is Always Light, If Only We're Brave Enough To See It", Palma Joy Strand, Gregory J. O'Meara S.J.

Marquette Law Review

As citizens—and as lawyers—we are schooled to view the U.S. Constitution as what—indeed—“constitutes” us as a nation and as a people. As lawyers— and as citizens—we are also schooled to understand that the Constitution is law and that its meaning is to be ascertained through the process of law and by lawyers and judges. This Article builds on a popular constitutionalism frame to describe the profound limitations of restricting constitutional meaning-making to a legal enterprise performed primarily by judges—especially in regard to positive rights written into the Constitution but under-protected in constitutional law. In addition, litigation’s either–or mindset has come …

The First Amendment Right To Privacy, Alex Chemerinsky

Marquette Law Review

The First Amendment is often considered to be in tension with privacy. This

Article is about the contexts in which it is not.

Although freedom of speech can pose challenges for privacy governance,

privacy is a core First Amendment value. Many important First Amendment decisions were motivated more by intuitions about privacy than any other interest. For each primary First Amendment liberty—the rights to speak, listen, associate, and practice religion—the Supreme Court has recognized not only a

substantive liberty but also the right to exercise it privately.

But although expressive privacy is an important First Amendment value, it

remains underrecognized, …

Re-Evaluating Deshany In An Era Of Gun Violence And Government Inaction, Bonnie Carlson

Marquette Law Review

In DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, the Supreme Court held that the State has no constitutional duty to protect individuals from violence committed by private third parties. An exception to this rule exists when the State has a special relationship to the plaintiff immediately preceding the harm. The DeShaney Court sharply proscribed the scope of the special relationship exception, holding that it only applies when the State has a plaintiff in custody. This effectively closes the door on relief for the vast majority of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 plaintiffs.

This Article proposes a new special relationship test …

Back To The Fourth Amendment, Shea Daley Burdette

Marquette Law Review

Does the Fourth Amendment protect against governmental seizures of an individual’s digital property? The answer depends on whether government action constitutes a meaningful interference with digital property. Back to the Fourth Amendment considers the Founders’ intentional choice to use two separate words, search and seizure, to protect against governmental overreach. The Article advances an approach to the seizure analysis that protects against governmental seizures of digital property—by encouraging the Court to look at whether the government access meaningfully interfered with an owner’s right

to exclude, historically recognized as a possessory interest.

The Fourth Amendment was adopted in response to “reviled …

Gerrymandering The Electoral College, Henry S. Noyes

Marquette Law Review

In Rucho v. Common Cause, the Supreme Court held that partisan gerrymandering is a nonjusticiable political question. The Court’s opinion admits that “[e]xcessive partisanship in districting leads to results that reasonably seem unjust.” The injustice is the ability of the majority party to use political gerrymandering to entrench itself as the governing party and to remain so, long after that party falls out of favor.

Although Rucho was an Elections Clause case, it is easily applicable to states’ exercise of their Electors Clause power. Republicans will wield this new, nonjusticiable power (and the concomitant political cover that it provides) …

Standalone Frisks, Elias Neibart, Bobby Levine

Marquette Law Review

We all think we understand Terry v. Ohio. But we don’t. In fact, for decades, we’ve taken the wrong doctrinal lesson from Terry and its progeny.

Even though Terry discussed the constitutional standards surrounding “stop-and-frisks,” many of us have interpreted Terry as only permitting a “stop-and-then-a-frisk”—that is, a police officer is permitted to stop an individual on the suspicion that he is about to engage in criminal activity, and then, and only then, can that officer frisk the individual if he believes the suspect is armed and dangerous. But that’s not right. The Terry Court never said that. And …

Decoding The Path Of Constitutional Exclusion In Wisconsin Digital Evidence Cases, Amelia Boruch

Marquette Law Review

Criminal cases involving novel digital evidence warrants often raise constitutional and suppression issues. As these constitutional issues become harder to resolve, resolution of the suppression issues becomes easier to predict. Where officers obtain warrants to use cutting-edge investigative techniques in the absence of any legal authority, it is unlikely that evidence obtained pursuant to those warrants will be suppressed under the exclusionary rule. Even if the exclusionary rule were “triggered,” the good faith exception would likely apply to preclude suppression. Either way, the outcome is clear: suppression is unlikely.

Confidence in the outcome of these suppression issues has seemingly taken …

Daniel Ezra Subotnik (1942-2024) Obituary

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Son Of Orwell, Chesterton, And Mill, Stephen B. Presser

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Kekuasaan Yudisial Dalam Sistem Demokrasi Konstitusional: Membangun Antitesis Dekonstitusionalisasi Dan Politisasi Peradilan, Tundjung Herning Sitabuana, Airlangga Surya Nagara, Dixon Sanjaya

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

Strengthening idea of constitutional democracy as a transitional phase towards a modern rule of law requires one of main characteristics of an independent judiciary. Current phenomena demonstrate how utopian these conditions are as the judiciary becomes increasingly politically pragmatic, transactional, interdependent, and demoralized. At the same time, phenomenon of constitutional defiance is growing stronger with efforts to deconstitutionalize and politicize the judiciary. This study aims to explore the existence and legitimacy of the judiciary in constitutional democracy era against that phenomenon. The research was conducted doctrinally with a historical, conceptual, and comparative approach that was analyzed qualitatively. The results indicate …

Is Bruen The New Usery?, Tonja Jacobi, Cory Conley

Faculty Articles

In 2022, in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court revolutionized the Second Amendment, achieving the long-held conservative goal of limiting gun restrictions by imposing an expansive, originalist view of the right to bear arms. However, within just three years, Bruen is showing cracks. Lower court judges are struggling mightily to apply it and are expressing their frustrations in exceptionally frank ways. And already the Supreme Court, in Rahimi v. United States, was forced to reconsider its approach. The Court has been here before, when it tried to revitalize the Tenth Amendment in …

Reclaiming Constitutional Authority Of Algorithmic Power, Yiyang Mei, Michael J. Broyde

Faculty Articles

Whether and how to govern AI is no longer a question of technical regulation. It is a question of constitutional authority. Across jurisdictions, algorithmic systems now perform functions once reserved to public institutions: allocating welfare, determining legal status, mediating access to housing, employment, and healthcare. These are not merely administrative operations. They are acts of rule. Yet the dominant models of AI governance fail to confront this reality. The European approach centers on rights-based oversight, presenting its regulatory framework as a principled defense of human dignity. The American model relies on decentralized experimentation, treating fragmentation as a proxy for democratic …

Constitutional Statutes Are “Always Speaking”, Andy Yu

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

In this article, I aim to vindicate the “living tree” approach to constitutional interpretation by proposing that constitutional statutes are “always speaking,” a proposal which I suggest clarifies the approach and explains its proper place in doctrine. After reviewing the “living tree” approach and recent criticism of it, I adopt a unified approach to constitutional and statutory interpretation, and I provide an account of the “always speaking” principle of statutory interpretation. I use the account to suggest that the “always speaking” principle of statutory interpretation manifests itself as the “living tree” approach in constitutional interpretation, and I explain how the …

Corporations’ First Amendment Rights And Algorithmic Cocoons, Sol Murgui Orsucci

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

This Note examines how corporate First Amendment doctrine applies to algorithmic systems that curate commercial information and public discourse across online platforms. Courts have increasingly treated ranking, recommendation, and moderation practices as exercises of protected editorial judgment. At the same time, the Court has justified protection for corporate speech in part by reference to listener-centered interests in access to information and competitive comparison. This Note argues that the interaction between these doctrinal strands and contemporary algorithmic intermediation reveals a structural tension. Data-driven optimization can generate individualized informational environments—what this Note terms “algorithmic cocoons”—in which users encounter content, offers, and prices …

Against Doctrinal Siloing: Harmonizing Fiscal Federalism And The U.S. Constitution, David Gamage, Darien Shanske

Faculty Publications

This Essay argues that constitutional law’s treatment of fiscal federalism has fractured into a bewildering collection of doctrinal silos. Federal spending that pressures states, federal preemption of state taxes, the Dormant Commerce Clause, sovereign immunity, Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the federal taxing power are all analyzed through distinct tests, even when they implicate the same basic conflict between federal authority and state fiscal autonomy. The result is not just theoretical confusion but inconsistent constitutional answers. Current doctrine can protect states from comparatively modest liabilities while leaving uncertain whether Congress may displace large swaths of state revenue authority. …

Private Rights Of Action For Election Litigation In The Federal Courts, Derek T. Muller

Journal Articles

Election litigation is surging. But just as litigants pursue more election claims in federal courts than ever before, federal courts are growing more skeptical about their authority to hear them. This Essay, a contribution to the 2025 Arnold Lecture at the University of Arkansas Little Rock, William H. Bowen School of Law, examines the narrowing landscape of private rights of action in election law with a particular focus on claims brought ahead of the 2024 election. It traces the Supreme Court's shift toward formalism, the heavy emphasis on remedies found in federal statutes, and the diminishing avenues for private enforcement …

Sacred Or Sham? Strengthening Judicial Review Of Religious Sincerity Under The Free Exercise Clause Article Title, Montana Martinez

Faculty Scholarship

While the Court has expanded the scope of Free Exercise protections, it has conspicuously failed to articulate how courts should separate sincere religious claims from fraudulent ones. The result is a doctrinal void: any claimant can recast political or philosophical objections as "religious" and demand constitutional protection. The risk is that the Free Exercise Clause, if stripped of any sincerity filter, will collapse into a generalized right to exemption from law. This Article argues that courts can assess religious sincerity without evaluating the truth or validity of the religious belief, and it proposes a framework grounded in the constitutional text, …

Constitutional Colonialism And Decolonization: Moving Toward A Decolonial African Constitutional Future, Luwam Dirar

Faculty Scholarship

This Article is an attempt at theorizing Africa's colonial constitutional legacies and post-colonial constitutionalism. The central argument of this Article is that constitutional law in Africa is a colonial tool that was used to legalize the subjugation of Africans and Africa, and a post-colonial necessity for the "self-determination and statehood" of newly-minted African states, while at the same time, it remains a decolonial battlefield of epistemic colonization. This Article adopts a broader conception of colonialism that extends beyond the 19th-century understanding of European colonialism and interrogates constitutional law as both a colonial tool and an act of self-determination in the …

Some Caution About Novel State Constitutional Rights, Nick Brod

Campbell Law Review

No abstract provided.

Apportioned Direct Taxes, Conor Clarke, Ari Glogower

Scholarship@WashULaw

The Constitution requires that Congress apportion any “direct” tax among the states by population. This once-dormant provision is now the most important constitutional limitation on Congress’s taxing power. Last year, in Moore v. United States, the Supreme Court seriously considered, for the first time in decades, whether to invalidate an Act of Congress as an unapportioned direct tax. While the law survived, Moore has opened a new era in which scholars and policymakers must again take apportionment seriously. Yet the apportionment requirement remains poorly understood.

This Article provides a new perspective on apportionment by examining how Congress and Treasury …

Taking Legality Seriously: What The Major Questions Doctrine Is — And Isn't, Andrea Scoseria Katz, Ofra Bloch

Scholarship@WashULaw

The Major Questions Doctrine (MQD), a controversial recent innovation of the Roberts Court that applies stricter scrutiny to “major” actions taken by federal agencies, has faced criticism for being atextual, unprincipled, and nakedly ideological. But this critique misses the fact that the doctrine has near-exact analogues in many other legal systems, where it is an established tool for reining in executive overreach. This Article argues that, while the MQD reflects valid rule-of-law concerns, as applied, it lacks theoretical clarity, consistency and limits. More importantly, the Court itself lacks a theory of what the MQD is. We provide an answer grounded …

Justifying The Fourth Amendment, Daniel Epps

Scholarship@WashULaw

Why does the Fourth Amendment belong in the Constitution? This question is not whether society should impose some legal restraints on government searches and seizures. Rather, why should such protections reside in our national charter, superior to other forms of law and insulated from change via ordinary majoritarian political processes? Despite major disputes about the Fourth Amendment’s content, Fourth Amendment theorists rarely ask this question. Almost all agree that the Fourth Amendment’s constitutional protections are critically important—even if no one can agree exactly what those protections are.

This Article seeks a justification for the Fourth Amendment—the reason why search-and-seizure protections …

Teaching Constitutional Law: Politics, Democracy And History, Andrea Scoseria Katz

Scholarship@WashULaw

Teaching Constitutional Law in the present era presents unique pedagogical challenges. My students arrive skeptical of the field, doubtful of the Supreme Court’s authority, questioning the relevance of legal methods in determining case outcomes, and perceiving constitutional adjudication as irreducibly political. Rather than dismiss these concerns, I argue that constitutional law professors must acknowledge them directly. Our task is not to restore naïve faith in judicial neutrality (an impossible ideal), but to present students with a vision of constitutional meaning-making—one grounded in politics, history, and democratic politics—in which they can recognize themselves as engaged participants in the future of our …

Tariffs And The Taxing Power: Historical Lessons For Major Questions And Nondelegation, Conor Clarke, Ari Glogower

Scholarship@WashULaw

American law is grappling with basic questions about the President’s power to impose tariffs—questions concerning whether Congress can delegate this authority, and the degree to which it has. But the ongoing tariff controversy emerges against a backdrop of conflicting and shifting historical practice. Early Congresses drafted tariff statutes in painstaking detail, while some of the broadest delegations in the early Republic involved internal taxes. In the modern era, by contrast, Congress has delegated more expansive tariff powers to the President, while retaining closer control over internal taxes. How should we understand this seemingly conflicting history of practice, and its relevance …

Foreword: The Constitution And Public Finance—Why Now And Why Ever?, Conor Clarke, Eric Kubo

Scholarship@WashULaw

This paper introduces the Washington University Law Review’s 2026 symposium issue on “Taxing, Spending, and the Constitution.” We situate the symposium’s ten papers within three interconnected developments in public finance law: the Supreme Court’s recent decision on the Sixteenth Amendment in Moore v. United States; the Trump Administration’s assertions of executive control over appropriated funds; and the use of emergency and trade statutes to justify sweeping tariff authority.

We also step back to ask why constitutional issues in public finance—long treated as a technical backwater—have become such a central site of doctrinal and political conflict. We offer several explanations beyond …