Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- U.S. Supreme Court (2)
- Abortion (1)
- Abortion rights (1)
- Administrative law (1)
- Antidiscrimination law (1)
-
- Artistic expression (1)
- Carceral system (1)
- Chevron (1)
- Circuit court (1)
- Columbia Law Review (1)
- Culture wars (1)
- Delegation (1)
- Discretion (1)
- Dobbs (1)
- Emergency ruling (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Health care (1)
- Judicial power (1)
- LGBTQ+ rights (1)
- Law of the future (1)
- Legislative power (1)
- Lower court (1)
- Major questions doctrine (1)
- Marketplace of ideas (1)
- Orthodoxy (1)
- Pledge of Allegiance (1)
- Prosecution (1)
- Prosecutors (1)
- Public accommodations laws (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Perennial Eclipse: Race, Immigration, And How Latinx Count In American Politics, Rachel F. Moran
The Perennial Eclipse: Race, Immigration, And How Latinx Count In American Politics, Rachel F. Moran
Faculty Scholarship
In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Evenwel v. Abbott, a case challenging the use of total population in state legislative apportionment as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The plaintiffs sued Texas, alleging that the State impermissibly diluted their voting power because they lived in areas with a high proportion of voting-age citizens. When total population was used to draw district lines, the plaintiffs had to compete with more voters to get their desired electoral outcomes than was true for voters in districts with low proportions of voting-age citizens. The Court rejected the argument, finding that states enjoy …
Charging Abortion, Milan Markovic
Charging Abortion, Milan Markovic
Faculty Scholarship
As long as Roe v. Wade remained good law, prosecutors could largely avoid the question of abortion. The Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has now placed prosecutors at the forefront of the abortion wars. Some chief prosecutors in antiabortion states have pledged to not enforce antiabortion laws, whereas others are targeting even out-of-state providers. This post-Dobbs reality, wherein the ability to obtain an abortion depends not only on the politics of one’s state but also the policies of one’s local district attorney, has received minimal scrutiny from legal scholars.
Prosecutors have broad charging discretion, …
Do Public Accommodations Laws Compel “What Shall Be Orthodox”?: The Role Of Barnette In 303 Creative Llc V. Eleni, Linda C. Mcclain
Do Public Accommodations Laws Compel “What Shall Be Orthodox”?: The Role Of Barnette In 303 Creative Llc V. Eleni, Linda C. Mcclain
Faculty Scholarship
This article addresses the U.S. Supreme Court’s embrace, in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, of a First Amendment objection to state public accommodations laws that the Court avoided in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission: such laws compel governmental orthodoxy. These objections invoke West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette’s celebrated language: “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.” They also …
The Foreshadow Docket, Bert I. Huang
The Foreshadow Docket, Bert I. Huang
Faculty Scholarship
Imagine the Supreme Court issuing an emergency order that signals interest in departing from precedent, as if foreshadowing a change in the law. Seeing this, should the lower courts start ruling in ways that also anticipate the law of the future? They need not do so in their merits rulings. That much is clear. Such a signal does not create new binding precedent. Rather, it reflects the Justices’ guess about the future of the law — and what if that guess is wrong?
Yet for a lower court ruling on a temporary stay or injunction, the task seems to call …
The Major Questions Doctrine At The Boundaries Of Interpretive Law, Daniel E. Walters
The Major Questions Doctrine At The Boundaries Of Interpretive Law, Daniel E. Walters
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court’s apparent transformation of the major questions doctrine into a clear statement rule demanding clear congressional authorization for “major” agency actions has already had, and will continue to have, wide-ranging impacts on American public law. Not the least of these is the impact it will have on the enterprise of statutory interpretation. Indeed, while it is easy to focus on the policy repercussions of a newly constrained Congress and newly hamstrung administrative state, this Article argues that equally important is the novel precedent that is set in this particular formulation of a clear statement rule, which stands almost …