Law Commons^™

Originalism And Second-Order Ipse Dixit Reasoning In Chisholm V. Georgia, D.A. Jeremy Telman

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article presents a new perspective on the Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence during the Early Republic. It focuses on what I am calling second-order ipse dixit reasoning, which occurs when Justices have to decide between two incommensurable interpretive modalities. If first-order ipse dixit is unreasoned decision-making, second-order ipse dixit involves an unreasoned choice between or among two or more equally valid interpretive options. The early Court often had recourse to second-order ipse dixit because methodological eclecticism characterized its constitutional jurisprudence, and the early Court established no fixed hierarchy among interpretive modalities.

Chisholm, the pre-Marshall Court’s most important constitutional decision, illustrates …

The Foreign Emoluments Clause: Protecting Our National Security Interests, Deborah Samuel Sills

Journal of Law and Policy

Classical republican ideals played an important role in the formation of our country. Guided by these ideals, several provisions were included in the Constitution to protect the United States from these harms, including the Emoluments Clause. This Clause prohibits United States officials from accepting certain types of benefits from foreign nations, except with Congress's consent. It protects our national interests by ensuring that federal officials remain free from improper pressures from foreign states and act for the welfare of our country. This provision promotes transparency and accountability and helps guard against corrupt influences that could undermine, and even destroy, a …

Free Agency: The Constitutionality Of Methods That Influence A Presidential Elector’S Ability To Exercise Personal Judgment, Zachary J. Shapiro

Journal of Law and Policy

When the Constitution of the United States went into effect on March 4, 1789, it established a new, hybrid form of government. As such, it created a complex and multifaceted process of electing our nation’s chief executive. Most notably, it granted states the power to choose a slate of presidential electors to debate the qualifications of the candidates selected by the voters. In recent history, however, certain states have established laws that severely limit the ability of presidential electors to exercise their right to vote for the candidates that they believe to be the best choice to sit in the …

The Foreign Emoluments Clause: Protecting Our National Security Interests, Deborah Samuel Sills

Journal of Law and Policy

Classical republican ideals played an important role in the formation of our country. Guided by these ideals, several provisions were included in the Constitution to protect the United States from these harms, including the Emoluments Clause. This Clause prohibits United States officials from accepting certain types of benefits from foreign nations, except with Congress's consent. It protects our national interests by ensuring that federal officials remain free from improper pressures from foreign states and act for the welfare of our country. This provision promotes transparency and accountability and helps guard against corrupt influences that could undermine, and even destroy, a …

Free Agency: The Constitutionality Of Methods That Influence A Presidential Elector’S Ability To Exercise Personal Judgment, Zachary J. Shapiro

Journal of Law and Policy

When the Constitution of the United States went into effect on March 4, 1789, it established a new, hybrid form of government. As such, it created a complex and multifaceted process of electing our nation’s chief executive. Most notably, it granted states the power to choose a slate of presidential electors to debate the qualifications of the candidates selected by the voters. In recent history, however, certain states have established laws that severely limit the ability of presidential electors to exercise their right to vote for the candidates that they believe to be the best choice to sit in the …

The Fourth Amendment In The Hallway: Do Tenants Have A Constitutionally Protected Privacy Interest In The Locked Common Areas Of Their Apartment Buildings?, Sean M. Lewis

Michigan Law Review

One afternoon, a police officer spots a man driving a Cadillac through a run·down neighborhood. His interest piqued, the officer decides to follow the vehicle. The Cadillac soon comes to rest in front of an apartment building, and the driver, Jimmy Barrios-Moriera, removes a shopping bag from the trunk and enters the building. The moment Barrios-Moriera disappears within the doorway, the officer sprints after him because he knows that the door to the apartment building will automatically lock when it closes. He manages to catch the door just in time and rushes in. Barrios-Moriera is already halfway up a flight …

When Constitutional Worlds Colide: Resurrecting The Framers' Bill Of Rights And Criminal Procedure, George C. Thomas Iii

Michigan Law Review

For two hundred years, the Supreme Court has been interpreting the Bill of Rights. Imagine Chief Justice John Marshall sitting in the dim, narrow Supreme Court chambers, pondering the interpretation of the Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process in United States v. Burr. Aaron Burr was charged with treason for planning to invade the Louisiana Territory and create a separate government there. To help prepare his defense, Burr wanted to see a letter written by General James Wilkinson to President Jefferson. In ruling on Burr's motion to compel disclosure, Marshall departed from the literal language of the Sixth Amendment - …

Recovering The Original Fourth Amendment, Thomas Y. Davies

Michigan Law Review

Claims regarding the original or intended meaning of constitutional texts are commonplace in constitutional argument and analysis. All such claims are subject to an implicit validity criterion - only historically authentic assertions should matter. The rub is that the original meaning commonly attributed to a constitutional text may not be authentic. The historical Fourth Amendment is a case in point. If American judges, lawyers, or law teachers were asked what the Framers intended when they adopted the Fourth Amendment, they would likely answer that the Framers intended that all searches and seizures conducted by government officers must be reasonable given …

Advice And Consent: Ensuring Judicial Freedom, Patrick J. Leahy

University of Richmond Law Review

Throughout this nation's history, Americans have turned to the Supreme Court to protect their rights against excesses of the legislative and executive branches. To protect this crucial role of the Court, the Framers realized that neither the executive nor the legislature should have the power to cast the Court in its own image. To prevent this usurpation of one branch by another, the Framers wisely required the President to obtain the advice and consent of the Senate in making appointments to the Supreme Court.

"The Right To Bear Arms": Two Views, Lee Fisher, David C. Tryon

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

The authors provide varying opinions on the Second Amendment.