Law Commons^™

Reversing Incorporation, Ilan Wurman

Notre Dame Law Review

It is originalist gospel that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause was intended, at a minimum, to incorporate the Bill of Rights against the states. This Article revisits forty years of scholarship and concludes that this modern consensus is likely mistaken. Reconstructing antebellum discourse on fundamental rights reveals that the historical players assumed that every state must, as all free governments had to, guarantee and secure natural rights to their citizens. But that did not mean the states regulated these rights in the same way, nor did that dictate what the federal government’s role would be in guaranteeing and …

Disfavoring Statutory Parentheses (Except In Certain Circumstances), Zachary A. Damir

Notre Dame Law Review

Parentheses in statutes have been at issue in an increasing number of court cases, even at the Supreme Court. Parentheses have a slightly different story from other punctuation marks and they have been used consistently throughout legal history. The Federal Constitution, early statutes, and a large part of our modern state and federal law separate words from their sentences using parentheses. But if a parenthetical conflicts with the material outside of the parentheses, it is the current practice to discard the interior text as surplus-age, even though the legislature may have had a reason to include that text in a …

The "Nonministerial" Exception, Athanasius G. Sirilla

Notre Dame Law Review

In 2014, Charlotte Catholic High School declined to continue Lonnie Billard’s employment as a substitute drama teacher after he publicly announced, via Facebook, that he and his same-sex partner were getting civilly married. Billard sued the school in the Western District of North Carolina for unlawful employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act due to his sexual orientation. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Billard. The court first held that the high school’s actions could constitute unlawful sex discrimination in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County. The district court …

Preemption Exemption: Fda-Approved Abortion Drugs After Dobbs, Jared C. Huber

Notre Dame Law Review

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization held that no constitutional right to abortion exists, overruling Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. After Dobbs, states are free to regulate abortion as they see fit. Under Roe and Casey’s old regime, a state could not regulate abortion in a way that presented an “undue burden on a woman’s ability” to decide to abort. The Court handed down many cases which attempted to bring clarity to the murky standard. But the conglomeration of interpretation is now wiped away.

In Dobbs’s wake, states and the …

The Administrative Procedure Act: Failures, Successes, And Danger Ahead, Emily S. Bremer

Notre Dame Law Review

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) is a profoundly important statute, operating as the superstatute backbone for the modern administrative state. This Essay argues that, although the APA deserves to be held in high regard, its procedural provisions have had more mixed success than is commonly acknowledged. These procedural provisions govern agency adjudication and rulemaking and, in both contexts, were designed to establish minimum procedural requirements that would apply uniformly across administrative agencies. Drawing on the extensive research that informed the APA's drafting, this Essay argues that the APA has failed to achieve its goal in adjudication, but has succeeded spectacularly …

Movement Administrative Procedure, Evan D. Bernick

Notre Dame Law Review

On April 4, 1946, The Potters Herald, a Thursday weekly dedicated to labor and union news, published an editorial warning readers of pending legislation “which may seriously affect labor” despite not containing a “single word about labor” in its text. This legislation would empower “anti-labor judges” to overturn decisions by the National Labor Relations Board. Despite its neutral appearance, it was in reality designed to “kick [labor and the NLRB] in the teeth” and would result in “a field day for the corporation lawyers.”

The complained-of legislation was the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA). From today’s vantage point, …

Vacatur, Nationwide Injunctions, And The Evolving Apa, Ronald M. Levin

Notre Dame Law Review

The courts’ growing use of universal or nationwide injunctions to invalidate agency rules that they find to be unlawful has given rise to concern that such injunctions circumvent dialogue among the circuits, promote forum shopping, and leave too much power in the hands of individual judges. Some scholars, joined by the Department of Justice, have argued that such judicial decisions should be limited through restrictive interpretations of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

This Article takes issue with these authorities. It argues that the courts’ use of the APA to vacate a rule as a whole—as opposed to merely enjoining application …

Making Sense Of Absence: Interpreting The Apa’S Failure To Provide For Court Review Of Presidential Administration, Noah A. Rosenblum

Notre Dame Law Review

Federal governance is increasingly characterized by presidential direction of administration. Yet the main statute that governs court review of administrative action, the Administrative Procedure Act, has strikingly little to say about the President.

This Essay seeks to make sense of this absence. It uses a brief survey of historical materials from the new Bremer-Kovacs Collection to sound the depths of the Administrative Procedure Act’s silence on the President. It then seeks to explain this omission by reference to contemporaneous discussions of the place of the president in the administrative state. The Essay hypothesizes that, at the time, the presidency was …

A Lack Of Uniformity, Compounded, In Immigration Law, Jill E. Family

Notre Dame Law Review

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) is known for bringing standardization to federal agency behavior. The APA’s framework for adjudication, however, is lax and incomplete. It provides standards, but only meaningfully for formal adjudication, and Congress rarely requires agencies to follow the APA’s formal adjudication procedures. The APA, therefore, expressly allows for nonuniform adjudication in that it requires little of the informal adjudication category that makes up the lion’s share of agency adjudication.

This lack of uniformity in adjudication is prominent in immigration law. When federal agencies adjudicate whether to remove (deport) an individual from the United States, those agencies act …

The “Catch-22” Of Rule 23(B)(2): Past Purchaser’S Standing To Pursue Injunctive Relief, Margarete Tompkins

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note argues that past purchasers of a product have standing to pursue injunctive relief under Rule 23(b)(2). Part I discusses class actions and the current state of caselaw on false-labeling cases. I.A discusses the history of class actions generally, as well as the differing views on the purpose of Rule 23 throughout its history. I.B then provides background on standing, both generally and in the class action context. I.C explains the existing caselaw on standing for past purchasers, illustrating the looming circuit split on the issue. Part II then begins the argument portion of this Note. II.A argues that …

Remarks At Notre Dame Law School, Brett M. Kavanaugh

Notre Dame Law Review

During the Notre Dame Law Review’s 2023 Federal Courts Symposium, students and faculty gathered in the McCartan Courtroom in Eck Hall for a conversation with Justice Kavanaugh. Dean G. Marcus Cole moderated and fielded questions from attendees. Highlights from the event, adapted for print, are reproduced below. Questions and responses have been lightly edited for readability and clarity.

The Apa As A Super-Statute: Deep Compromise And Judicial Review Of Notice-And-Comment Rulemaking, William N. Eskridge Jr., John Ferejohn

Notre Dame Law Review

The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA) is a “super-statute,” creating a robust, enduring governance structure for the modern regulatory state. An emerging literature on “APA originalism” maintains that some of the judge-created rules of administrative law are inconsistent with the APA’s original public meaning and therefore illegitimate. In the context of notice-and-comment rulemaking, some academics and judges wield APA originalism as a reason to abrogate the presumption of judicial review, hard-look review of agency factual conclusions, and judicial deference to agency interpretations of law. Some of the judges who would apply original public meaning to those issues have asserted …

Interpreting The Administrative Procedure Act: A Literature Review, Christopher J. Walker, Scott T. Macguidwin

Notre Dame Law Review

The modern administrative state has changed substantially since Congress enacted the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in 1946. Yet Congress has done little to modernize the APA in those intervening seventy-seven years. That does not mean the APA has remained unchanged. Federal courts have substantially refashioned the APA’s requirements for administrative procedure and judicial review of agency action. Perhaps unsurprisingly, calls to return to either the statutory text or the original meaning (or both) have intensified in recent years. “APA originalism” projects abound.

As part of the Notre Dame Law Review’s Symposium on the History of the Administrative Procedure Act …

The Path Of Administrative Law Remedies, Aditya Bamzai

Notre Dame Law Review

The question whether the term “set aside” in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) authorizes a federal court to vacate a rule universally—as opposed to setting aside the rule solely as to the plaintiffs—is a significant and contested one. This Essay traces the history of the statutory term “set aside” from its origins in the 1906 passage of the Hepburn Act to its 1946 placement in the APA. During this era, Congress repeatedly used the term “set aside” in agency review statutes. This Essay argues that, in doing so, Congress did not intend to depart from the underlying remedial framework created …

Textualism And The Administrative Procedure Act, Kristin E. Hickman, Mark R. Thomson

Notre Dame Law Review

In recent years, the Supreme Court occasionally has applied a more limited approach to textualist reasoning that, if applied to the APA, could expand the perceived gulf between textualism and existing administrative law doctrine. Our purpose with this Essay is to explore the implications of this trend for APA interpretation, particularly as it might apply to agency rulemaking. We do not purport to address critics of textualism as an interpretive methodology; we speak primarily to those who are persuaded of textualism’s merits. We also will not try to resolve all the many disagreements about textualism’s variations or the APA’s meaning. …

The Emerging Possibility Of Religious Charter Schools: A Case Study Of Arizona And Massachusetts, Kathleen C. Ryan

Notre Dame Law Review

In July 2022, Arizona became the first state to create a universal school-choice program by passing the Empowerment Scholarship Account Program, an education savings account (ESA) for all students outside the public school system. Over the past thirty years, Arizona has expanded its school choice offerings, which includes one of the largest charter school systems in the nation. Today, students in Arizona have many choices for school, including traditional public schools, charter schools, magnet schools, secular private schools, and religious private schools. In the future, could one of those options be a religious charter school?

Justice Breyer’s dissent in Espinoza …

Due Deference: Kisor, Stinson, And The United States Sentencing Commission, Tim Steininger

Notre Dame Law Review

Under Kisor v. Wilkie, courts must defer to agencies’ interpretations of regulations when certain conditions are met. Lower courts continue to diverge, however, when it comes to the deference due the United States Sentencing Commission’s commentary. The Supreme Court has declined to come to the circuits’ aid. Commission commentary interprets its Guidelines. Guidelines are necessarily subject to the Administrative Procedure Act’s notice-and-comment requirements and congressional control; commentary is not. Given the heightened stakes inherent in sentencing, some argue that the rule of lenity should apply when a court considers deferring to commentary. This Note argues that such an approach …

Tender And Taint: Money And Complicity In Entanglement Jurisprudence, Amy J. Sepinwall

Notre Dame Law Review

Because liberalism is concerned with individual freedom, it finds that one person is responsible for the conduct of another only under very narrow circumstances. To a large extent, the law reflects this narrow conception of complicity. There is however one glaring exception to the law’s general resistance to complicity claims: where one actor becomes connected to another’s act through a pecuniary contribution, the law’s liberalism falls away. Money forges a cognizable association no matter how tenuous the causal connection and no matter the subsidizer’s attitudes toward the subsidized act. For example, in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the Supreme Court recognized …

Religious Political Arguments, Accessibility, And Democratic Deliberation, Paul Billingham

Notre Dame Law Review

Christian critics of liberalism, and especially of contemporary public-reason liberalism, often argue that it objectionably excludes religious voices form the public square, by requiring citizens to bracket their religious convictions when they engage in democratic deliberation. In response, liberals often deny that their views have this implication. Many public-reason liberal theorists are “inclusivists,” who permit religious contributions to deliberation.

Yet even inclusivists provide little reason to think that religious political arguments can be persuasive or fruitful. After all, they tend to see religious reasons as inaccessible to others, due to relying on beliefs, values, and methods of reasoning that others …

Christians And/As Liberals?, Steven D. Smith

Notre Dame Law Review

Christianity and liberalism were made to fit each other, like hand and glove. According to some interpretations, anyway. Liberal constitutionalism, with its commitments to freedom and equal human dignity, is the political system that reflects and embodies Christian commitments; and the constitutional legal order that accompanies liberalism, centrally including legally enforced rights of religious freedom, is the mode of government that best permits Christians to live in accordance with their faith in a fallen and deviant world. Thus, a couple of decades ago, Robert Kraynak reported that “[a]lmost all churches and theologians now believe that the form of government most …

Whose Liberalism, Which Christianity?, Jonathan Chaplin

Notre Dame Law Review

The papers in this intriguing Symposium all face the perplexing challenge of negotiating a way through the thicket of divergent definitions of both “liberalism” and “Christianity.” At a time when “Christianity” is thought to be, for some, fundamentally at odds with “liberalism,” or for others, liberalism’s enthusiastic cheerleader, we cannot avoid delving into the finer grain of these complex traditions. The clarificatory challenge in regard to “liberalism” has been lent greater urgency of late because of the comprehensive nature of assaults on “liberalism” by, especially, Catholic integralism. Christians who seek at least partially to defend liberalism against such assaults (as …

"The Arc Of The Moral Universe": Christian Eschatology And U.S. Constitutionalism, Nathan S. Chapman

Notre Dame Law Review

This Essay first attempts to understand how a contested Christian doctrine found its way into constitutional law. It does so through a reverse genealogy of ideas—an archaeology, perhaps. The Essay begins by sketching how U.S. constitutionalism, in both theory and doctrine, reflects the belief that the “arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” It then suggests that underlying this constitutional theme is a merger of two features of American civil religion: the tradition of treating the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as the central texts of a sacred canon and the belief that America …

Procedure At The Intersection Of Law And Equity: Veil Piercing And The Seventh Amendment, Samuel Haward

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note addresses the multicircuit split that veil piercing’s “vexing” nature has created. The First, Second and Fifth Circuits, on varying theories, have found that there exists a federal right to a jury trial on veil-piercing issues. Conversely, the Sixth and Seventh Circuits have disagreed, holding that veil piercing is an action sounding primarily in equity outside the scope of the Seventh Amendment. Part I will briefly discuss the Supreme Court’s Seventh Amendment jurisprudence and explain how veil piercing falls into the Court’s awkward demarcation of law and equity. Part II will explore the legal and equitable history of veil-piercing …

Catholic Liberalism And The Liberal Tradition, Kathleen A. Brady

Notre Dame Law Review

Criticisms of liberalism are nothing new. All political traditions have their detractors, and as in the past, today’s critics of liberalism include those on the left and right as well as religious believers and those without religious affiliations. However, in very recent years, far-reaching and deepening critiques have been emerging from an unlikely source. Throughout American history, the nation’s religious communities have been among the strongest defenders of religious freedom as well as other fundamental liberal values such as limited government, democratic institutions, civic equality, and other civil freedoms. Conservative Christians have been no exception. With other Americans, they have …

Contingency And Contestation In Christianity And Liberalism, Michael P. Moreland

Notre Dame Law Review

What is the relationship of Christianity to liberalism? Answers include: Liberalism is a product of the moral legacy of Christianity, such as the dignity of individual human persons, equality, rights, perhaps even some forms of democratic institutionalism. Or liberalism is a hostile reaction against Christianity by way of an autonomous individualism set against divinely ordained creatureliness and dependence, democracy against authority, egalitarianism against hierarchy. Or liberalism is in a modus vivendi relationship with Christianity and vice versa. Or perhaps there is something true about each of these answers.

Critiques of liberalism in law and politics come in waves. The liberal-communitarian …

A Third Category For Rideshare Drivers: Untying Employment Statutes From Agency Law, Nathaniel Reyes

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note does not take a stance on the issue of whether rideshare drivers should be classified as “employees” under either employment statutes or the doctrine of respondeat superior. It argues, rather, that if the protection of employment statutes is to be extended to rideshare drivers, this should be done by Congress’s creation of new worker categories in the statutes, rather than by squeezing rideshare drivers into the existing “employee” category. The use of the same binary distinction between employee and independent contractor in both employment statutes and respondeat-superior cases is a practice which should ultimately be abandoned, and recognizing …

"It Is Tash Whom He Serves": Deneen And Vermeule On Liberalism, Andrew Koppelman

Notre Dame Law Review

I worry that some recent Christian criticisms of liberalism are the kind of fantasy that Murdoch warned about, caricaturing what they purport to oppose. They are also ominously vague about what would replace it. Both writers echo earlier Christian flirtations with Marxism: philosophical errors lead idealists to gullibly embrace authoritarian kleptocrats who do not give a damn about the people the idealists are trying to help.

I will focus on the work of Patrick Deneen, with some reference to the more abbreviated but similar critiques of liberalism by Adrian Vermeule. Both claim that liberalism’s relentless logic tends to destroy communities …

Natural Law, Parental Rights, And The Defense Of "Liberal" Limits On Government: An Analysis Of The Mortara Case And Its Contemporary Parallels, Melissa Moschella

Notre Dame Law Review

This Article explores parallels between integralists’ defense of the Mortara case (in which Pius IX removed a child from his parents’ care in order to provide him with a Catholic education) and contemporary progressive arguments for overriding the authority of parents who do not want their gender-dysphoric children to undergo social or medical gender transition. In Part I, I offer an overview of the natural law case for limited government, then in Part II I turn more specifically to a natural law defense of parental rights as an essential aspect of limited government. In the following Part, I return to …

Liberalism And Orthodoxy: A Search For Mutual Apprehension, Brandon Paradise, Fr. Sergey Trostyanskiy

Notre Dame Law Review

This Article seeks to evaluate and contextualize recently intensifying Christian critiques of liberalism’s intellectual and moral claims. Much of this recent critique has been from Catholic and Protestant quarters. Christianity’s third major branch—Orthodox Christianity—has not played a prominent role in current critiques of liberalism. This Article seeks to help fill this void in the literature. In helping to fill this void, it contributes to understanding how liberalism fits with one of the world’s most ancient Christian traditions.

The Article begins by disambiguating the terms Orthodoxy and liberalism. After identifying each body of thought’s foundational commitments, it notes that Orthodoxy endorses …

Severability And Standing Puzzles In The Law Of Removal Power, Jack Ferguson

Notre Dame Law Review

One of the “oldest and most venerable debates in U.S. constitutional law” concerns the President’s ability to fire executive branch officers. That debate shows little sign of subsiding. In recent years, the Supreme Court has decided a number of removal power cases that reflect an increasingly formalist turn. These cases have endorsed a version of the unitary executive theory and blessed the President’s ability to remove nominally independent officials. When it comes to questions of severability and remedy, however, the formalist majorities have fractured. Collins v. Yellen, decided in 2021, provides the most illuminating example. Justices Thomas and Gorsuch concurred …