Law Commons^™

Let Locked-Up People Vote: Prisoners Are Still Citizens And Should Be Able To Exert Their Civic Rights, Rachel Landy

Online Publications

The Constitution does not guarantee all citizens the right to vote. Rather, the right to vote is implied through a patchwork of amendments that restrict how voting rights may be limited. For example, the 15th Amendment reads “[t]he right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged...on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” Subsequent amendments added gender, failure to pay poll taxes, literacy, and age over 18 to the list of characteristics for which denying the right to vote may not be based.

About Those Constitutional Norms, Mr. Attorney General, Deborah Pearlstein

Online Publications

Among the many jaw-dropping moments in Attorney General Bill Barr’s address to the Federalist Society last Friday was the assertion that he had been unable to glean from his “friends on the other side” any clear answer as to what constitutional norms President Donald Trump was really breaching.

Brief Of Douglas Laycock, James E. Pfander, Alexander A. Reinert And Joanna C. Schwartz As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Alexander A. Reinert

Amicus Briefs

Amici are legal scholars whose focus includes remedies, federal courts, the separation of powers, and constitutional law. They have a strong professional interest in the proper development of the law, which includes accounting for the best available empirical evidence and structural legal principles bearing on the questions here at issue.

Amici are Douglas Laycock, Robert E. Scott, Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law; James E. Pfander, Owen L. Coon Professor of Law at the Pritzker School of Law at Northwestern University; Alexander A. Reinert, Max Freund Professor of Litigation and Advocacy at the Benjamin …

Symposium: In “Gundy Ii,” Auer Survives By A Vote Of 4.6 To 4.4, Michael Herz

Online Publications

Under the “Auer doctrine,” named for the 1997 decision Auer v. Robbins, courts accept an agency’s interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation unless that interpretation is clearly erroneous, or flatly inconsistent with the text of the regulation, or unreasonable, or something like that. Auer is a principle of long standing. Just how long is one of the sources of disagreement in Kisor v. Wilkie, but however you count, it is a doctrine universally understood as well-settled until relatively recently. But a revolt has been brewing.

Executive Privilege And Congressional Oversight, Katherine A. Shaw

Testimony

Professor Kate Shaw testified at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on May 15 titled "Executive Privilege and Congressional Oversight."

She told the House Judiciary Committee, "My view as a scholar and a former White House lawyer, is that blanket invocations of executive privilege of the sort the White House has made here are without substantial support in either case law or executive branch practice."

The White House And Congress Are Heading For A Collision. Who Will Win?, Katherine A. Shaw

Online Publications

With the 116th Congress up and running, President Trump is facing meaningful congressional oversight for the first time. On Monday, the House Judiciary Committee embarked on a major investigative mission, sending letters to 81 witnesses seeking documents and testimony relating to possible “obstruction of justice, public corruption and other abuses of power” by Mr. Trump and his administration.

But the White House shows no signs of rolling over. It has indicated for months that it is prepared to assert the president’s executive privilege to keep congressional investigators from gathering information about Mr. Trump — including his conversations with high-level advisers. …

Custodial Compulsion, Kyron J. Huigens

Articles

In cases that fall under Miranda v Arizona, police interrogators not only give a suspect reasons to confess; they also suggest that the suspect ought to confess. In doing so, interrogators effectively invoke the Wigmorean duty of a citizen to produce any evidence he has in his possession, including his own confession. That is, they invoke the duty against which the Self Incrimination Clause stands, so that the clause is applicable to police interrogations, and is violated where it is not waived. This means that “a Miranda violation” is a violation of the Self Incrimination Clause in the field, just …

Asymmetric Normalcy, Deborah Pearlstein

Online Publications

Say what you will about sports metaphors in legal writing, but Professor Mark Tushnet’s “constitutional hardball” descriptor has proven remarkably useful in capturing one of the most vexing political dynamics of our time: the political parties’ resort to “claims and practice…that are without much question within the bounds of existing constitutional doctrine and practice but that are nonetheless in some tension with…the ‘go without saying’ assumptions that underpin working systems of constitutional government.”

Comparing Wayfair And Wynne: Lessons For The Future Of The Dormant Commerce Clause, Edward A. Zelinsky

Articles

A comparison of South Dakota v. Wayfair with Comptroller of the Treasury of Maryland v. Wynne indicates that the prospect of the Supreme Court jettisoning the dormant Commerce Clause altogether is unlikely. However, the justices who would abandon the dormant Commerce Clause can exercise decisive influence in particular cases as they did in Wayfair. The current Court’s dormant Commerce Clause skeptics – Justices Thomas and Gorsuch –provided the crucial fourth and fifth votes in Wayfair to overturn Quill.

It will continue to be rare for the Court to reverse its own dormant Commerce Clause decisions. Far from opening …

Taking Data, Michael C. Pollack

Articles

Technological development has created new forms of information, altered expectations of privacy, and given law enforcement more tools to examine that information and intrude on that privacy. One crucial facet of these changes involves internet service providers (ISPs): as people expose more of their lives to their ISPs—all the websites they visit, people they communicate with, emails they send, files they store, and more—law enforcement efforts to access that data become more and more common. But scholars and policymakers alike recognize that the existing statutory frameworks governing those efforts are based on obsolete technology and strike balances that are difficult …

Getting Past The Imperial Presidency, Deborah Pearlstein

Articles

In an age in which the “imperial presidency” seems to have reached its apex, perhaps most alarmingly surrounding the use of military force, conventional wisdom remains fixed that constitutional and international law play a negligible role in constraining executive branch decision-making in this realm. Yet as this Article explains, the factual case that supports the conventional view, based largely on highly selected incidents of presidential behavior, is meaningless in any standard empirical sense. Indeed, the canonical listing of presidential decisions to use force without prior authorization feeds a compliance-centered focus on the study of legal constraint rooted in long-since abandoned …