Law Commons^™

“I Wish I Knew How It Would Feel To Be Free”: A Lamentation On Dobbs V. Jackson’S Pernicious Impact On The Lives And Liberty Of Women, April L. Cherry

Cleveland State Law Review

On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned nearly fifty years of precedent when it declared in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that abortion was not a fundamental right, and therefore it was not protected by the Fourteenth Amendment and substantive due process. In law school corridors and legal scholar circles, discussion of the Court’s evisceration of abortion rights focused on the corresponding changes in Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence and the Court’s outright dismissal of stare decisis. But in homes, hospitals, community centers, and workplaces, different conversations were happening. Conversations, mostly had by women, concerned the real-life consequences of overturning …

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. …

Retaining A Constitutional Right To Terminate A Pregnancy By Reinterpreting Pregnancy As An Implied Contract, Esra Coskun-Crabtree

Golden Gate University Law Review

This Comment considers the question of abortion as a fundamental right by reframing pregnancy as a ground for implied contract. The recent decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 142 S. Ct. 2228 (2022) rejected the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause as a basis for asserting a fundamental right to abortion. However, other constitutional limits on state power may provide different avenues to such an assertion. Specifically, the Contracts Clause of Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the states from impairing the freedom to contract. This Comment argues that the key issue in the abortion …

Sounding The Legitimacy Alarm Bell: When Does The Media Discuss The U.S. Supreme Court’S Legitimacy?, Rachael Houston

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

These media outlets cover the Court in such ways because they openly promote a particular political ideology through endorsements, donations, ownership, or slant in coverage. They cater to audiences with similar political beliefs and tailor their coverage accordingly. For example, Fox News was created by Rupert Murdoch to appeal to a conservative audience. So, its content is purposefully conservative and assessed as right-leaning by media bias charts. As a result, polling data reveals that Republicans trust Fox News more than any other outlet. At the same time, Robert “Ted” Turner, the founder of CNN, is a donor to left-progressive causes …

A Country In Crisis: A Review Of How The Illegitimate Supreme Court Is Rendering Illegitimate Decisions And Doing Damage That Will Not Soon Be Undone., Regina L. Ramsey ,Esq

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

This article will discuss in detail exactly how the court is illegitimate and makes decisions that are illegitimate, using examples from the October 2021 term. It will also explain why action needs to be taken immediately to reign in this run-away Court to restore public trust. As discussed herein, we cannot sit by and patiently wait for the Court to right itself over time because there are important issues on the current docket, such as race-conscious admissions policies of colleges and universities to ensure student bodies are diverse as future leaders are prepared to live and work in a diverse …

The Never-Ending Struggle For Reproductive Rights, Stephanie Toti

Michigan Law Review

For me, the annual Book Review issue is a time for reflection. It provides an opportunity to take stock of scholarly trends, reassess conventional wisdom, and gather new insights to apply to the practice of law. The reviews contained in this year’s issue address a wide range of subjects, including the history of public defenders, the use of bigotry rhetoric in conflicts over marriage and civil rights law, the role of cost-benefit analysis in federal policymaking, and racial inequities in tax policy. This impressive commentary on an astute and varied collection of books about the law will inspire many of …

Overruling Roe V. Wade: Lessons From The Death Penalty, Paul Benjamin Linton

Pepperdine Law Review

In Furman v. Georgia (1972), the Supreme Court struck down the Georgia and Texas death penalty statutes, thereby calling into question the validity of every other state death penalty statute. In their concurring opinions, Justices Brennan and Marshall expressed the view that, given society’s gradual abandonment of the death penalty, capital punishment violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishments.” Justice Powell and three other justices dissented, arguing that the Court had misread the state of the law regarding society’s acceptance of the death penalty. Four years after Furman, in a quintet of cases, the Court held that …

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Wise Legal Giant, Thomas A. Schweitzer

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Above Politics: Congress And The Supreme Court In 2017, Jason Mazzone

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The Supreme Court figured prominently in the November 2016 elections because of the vacancy on the Court that resulted from the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. This Essay picks up the story by examining the place of the Supreme Court in national politics during 2017. It traces congressional efforts to respond to statutory and constitutional rulings by the Court as well as steps to regulate the operations of the Court and the work of the Justices. Although in 2017 Republicans and Democrats introduced numerous bills directed at the Court, these bills were generally modest in scope and, even so, did …

The Forgotten Issue? The Supreme Court And The 2016 Presidential Campaign, Christopher W. Schmidt

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This Article considers how presidential candidates use the Supreme Court as an issue in their election campaigns. I focus in particular on 2016, but I try to make sense of this extraordinary election by placing it in the context of presidential elections over the past century.

In the presidential election of 2016, circumstances seemed perfectly aligned to force the Supreme Court to the front of public debate, but neither Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton treated the Court as a central issue of their campaigns. Trump rarely went beyond a brief mention of the Court in his campaign speeches; Clinton basically …

Justice Blackmun And Individual Rights, Diane P. Wood

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Of the many contributions Justice Blackmun has made to American jurisprudence, surely his record in the area of individual rights stands out for its importance. Throughout his career on the Supreme Court, he has displayed concern for a wide variety of individual and civil rights. He has rendered decisions on matters ranging from the most personal interests in autonomy and freedom from interference from government in life’s private realms, to the increasingly complex problems posed by discrimination based upon race, sex, national origin, alienage, illegitimacy, sexual orientation, and other characteristics. As his views have become well known to the public, …

Scalia On Abortion: Originalism... But, Why?, Robert Cassidy

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Roe As We Know It, Cary Franklin

Michigan Law Review

The petitioners in last year’s historic same-sex marriage case cited most of the Supreme Court’s canonical substantive due process precedents. They argued that the right of same-sex couples to marry, like the right to use birth control and the right to guide the upbringing of one’s children, was among the liberties protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court in Obergefell v. Hodges agreed, citing many of the same cases. Not once, however, did the petitioners or the majority in Obergefell cite the Court’s most famous substantive due process decision. It was the dissenters in Obergefell who invoked Roe v. Wade.

The Scarlet Letter: The Supreme Court And The Language Of Abortion Stigma, Paula Abrams

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

Why does the Supreme Court refer to the woman who is seeking an abortion as "mother"? Surely the definition has not escaped the attention of a Court that frequently relies on the dictionary to define important terms or principles. And why does the Court choose to describe the fetus as a child? What message does this language send about abortion and the woman who seeks an abortion? The Court's abortion decisions embody an ongoing debate on the legitimacy of constitutional protection of the right to choose. This debate unfolds most obviously as a discourse on constitutional interpretation; disagreements within the …

Constitutional Law: Beyond The Bounds Of Roe: Does Stenberg V. Carhart Invalidate The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act Of 2003, Scott A. Hodges

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Some Effects Of Identity-Based Social Movements On Constitutional Law In The Twentieth Century, William N. Eskridge Jr.

Michigan Law Review

What motivated big changes in constitutional law doctrine during the twentieth century? Rarely did important constitutional doctrine or theory change because of formal amendments to the document's text, and rarer still because scholars or judges "discovered" new information about the Constitution's original meaning. Precedent and common law reasoning were the mechanisms by which changes occurred rather than their driving force. My thesis is that most twentieth century changes in the constitutional protection of individual rights were driven by or in response to the great identity-based social movements ("IBSMs") of the twentieth century. Race, sex, and sexual orientation were markers of …

Change And Continuity On The Supreme Court: Conversations With Justice Harry A. Blackmun, Philippa Strum

University of Richmond Law Review

Justice Harry A. Blackmun used to enjoy telling a story about Supreme Court conferences during the Court's 1970 term, his first on the Court. Warren Burger was ChiefJustice; Hugo Black was the most senior Justice. Court protocol, of course, is that the Chief Justice begins the discussion of each case, the most senior Justice speaks second, and the floor goes in turn to each of the other Justices according to descending seniority. Chief Justice Burger would present a case by laying out the issues involved as he saw them and the decision he believed the Court should reach. Then he …

Rights Against Rules: The Moral Structure Of American Constitutional Law, Matthew D. Adler

Michigan Law Review

The Bill of Rights, by means of open-ended terms such as "freedom of speech," "equal protection," or "due process," refers to moral criteria, which take on constitutional status by virtue of being thus referenced. We can disagree about whether the proper methodology for judicial application of these criteria is originalist or nonoriginalist. The originalist looks, not to the true content of the moral criteria named by the Constitution, but to the framers' beliefs about that content; the nonoriginalist tries to determine what the criteria truly require, and ignores or gives less weight to the framers' views. Bracketing this disagreement, however, …

Leaving The Door Ajar: The Supreme Court And Assisted Suicide, Melvin I. Urofsky

University of Richmond Law Review

In June, 1997, the Supreme Court ruled that a constitutional right to assisted suicide exists in neither the Due Process nor the Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. But while a federal right does not exist, the Court made it quite clear that the states had ample leeway in which to fashion law on this issue; moreover, the concurring opinions of five Justices strongly implied that, should the states enact legislation that would severely limit end-of-life choices, the Supreme Court would revisit the issue. Far from slamming the door shut on assisted suicide, the Court left it more than …

The Casey Standard For Evaluating Facial Attacks On Abortion Statutes, John Christopher Ford

Michigan Law Review

Since the Supreme Court declared in 1973 that the Constitution grants women a limited right to an abortion, the Justices have decided abortion cases with reference to such weighty matters as religious freedom, the disadvantaged position of women in society, and the proper role of the judiciary. Understandably, the Supreme Court's writings on abortion deal extensively with these large themes. The Court, and certainly others, view abortion cases as rivaling Brown v. Board of Education in their importance to the nation. While the Court has focused on the big issues, however, it has neglected an equally important, if less emotionally …

Slavery Rhetoric And The Abortion Debate, Debora Threedy

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

There are many things that could be, and have been, said about the question of abortion. This article focuses on the rhetoric of the abortion debate. Specifically, I discuss how both sides of the abortion debate have appropriated the image of the slave and used that image as a rhetorical tool, a metaphor, in making legal arguments. Further, I examine the effectiveness of this metaphor as a rhetorical tool. Finally, I question the purposes behind this appropriation, and whether it reflects a lack of sensitivity to the racial content of the appropriated image.

Judiciary: Know Thy Place, Thomas L. Jipping

University of Richmond Law Review

Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist No.78 that the judiciary "has no influence over ... the purse."' Yet in Missouri v. Jenkins, the Supreme Court approved indirect judicial taxation. Hamilton wrote that the judiciary "will always be the least dangerous" and "beyond comparison the weakest" branch of government. Yet in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court created out of nothing a right to choose abortion, invalidated the abortion laws of all fifty states developed over more than a century, and shut millions of Americans out of the process of developing public policy on this important political issue. Hamilton wrote that …

In Defense Of A Principled Judiciary, Edward E. Mcateer

University of Richmond Law Review

For decades, the justices themselves undermined the honor which ought to be afforded the third branch of the federal government as they regularly exceeded the proper, limited but vitally important role they ought to play. October term after October term, the justices acted as a permanent constitutional convention, disrupting legislative accommodations and settled precedent with regularity.

Conservative Supreme Court: Its Impact On Traditional Values, Donald E. Wildman, Benjamin W. Bull

University of Richmond Law Review

Most court watchers agree that the changing composition of the Supreme Court will ineluctably favor the interests of traditional values organizations like the American Family Association. The next decade will surely see the Court return to a more balanced approach in line with the preservation of family values. Certainly some will characterize the new Court as more conservative. To the extent that it will emphasize core principles in the Constitution as the bedrock from which it must proceed, it will be conservative. Yet this is simply a return of the Court to its intended function: interpretation and application of law …

Balancing The Federal Judiciary, Anne Bryant

University of Richmond Law Review

Since the American Association of University Women first published the associational brief "Balancing the Federal Judiciary" in 1988, two new Associate Justices (David Souter and Clarence Thomas) have joined the Supreme Court. The Court has continued to chip away at the rights of women and minorities, with damaging decisions in areas such as reproductive rights (e.g., Webster v. Reproductive Health Services) and employment discrimination(e.g., Wards Cove Packing Company v. Atonio). With a conservative majority in place on the Supreme Court until well into the next century and Reagan and Bush appointees comprising more than half of the nation's federal judges, …

A Social-Conservative Comment On The New Supreme Court, Gary L. Bauer

University of Richmond Law Review

I recall seeing a column, not long ago, which referred to the Supreme Court as increasingly "a right-wing playground." Liberal groups may be able to raise funds off this impression, but if conservatives rely on it, they are in for a rude awakening when the gavel falls.

The Right Of Privacy And The New York State Constitution: An Analytical Framework, Edward R. Alexander

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Abortion Rights, Eileen Kaufman

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Progressive And Conservative Constitutionalism, Robin West

Michigan Law Review

The article's central thesis is that the understandings of the constitutional tradition most central to both paradigms are determined by sometimes implicit, but more often explicit, political dispositions toward various forms of social and private power, and the normative authority to which social and private power gives rise. Very broadly, conservative constitutionalists view private or social normative authority as the legitimate and best source of guidance for state action; accordingly, they view both the Constitution and constitutional adjudication as means of preserving and protecting that authority and the power that undergirds it against either legislative or judicial encroachment. Progressive constitutionalists, …

Roe V. Wade And The Lesson Of The Pre-Roe Case Law, Richard Gregory Morgan

Michigan Law Review

The politically unsettled and judicially confused law of abortion in 1971 and 1972, when the Court twice heard arguments and deliberated Roe, should have warned it not to decide the case. By doing so; the Court thrust itself into a political debate and stunted the development of a thoughtful lower-court case law. If the Court did perceive the warnings but continued toward a decision anyway, perhaps trusting that its own considerable wits would devise an answer the lower courts had not, the result suggests that the judicial system's axioms deserve more respect than they received. This Article, by showing …