Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- William & Mary Law School (481)
- University of Michigan Law School (479)
- University of Colorado Law School (258)
- Columbia Law School (94)
- Boston University School of Law (87)
-
- Roger Williams University (82)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (78)
- Duke Law (71)
- Emory University School of Law (65)
- New York Law School (63)
- Georgetown University Law Center (56)
- University of Baltimore Law (49)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (43)
- St. John's University School of Law (41)
- Cleveland State University (39)
- University of Georgia School of Law (38)
- Wayne State University (38)
- University of Richmond (36)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (36)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (32)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (32)
- University of Miami Law School (32)
- American University Washington College of Law (30)
- Notre Dame Law School (29)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (27)
- University of Dayton (25)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (25)
- Georgia State University College of Law (21)
- Brooklyn Law School (20)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (20)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (841)
- Supreme Court (390)
- Constitutional law (147)
- Congress (108)
- Constitution (95)
-
- First Amendment (92)
- Discrimination (87)
- SCOTUS (85)
- Judicial review (78)
- Federalism (76)
- Sixth Amendment (64)
- Supreme Court of the United States (64)
- Jurisprudence (60)
- History (56)
- Police (56)
- Abortion (55)
- Fifth Amendment (54)
- Civil rights (52)
- Due process (51)
- Supreme court (49)
- Constitutional Law (48)
- Admissibility (47)
- Statutory interpretation (47)
- Race (44)
- Equal protection (42)
- Judges (42)
- Separation of powers (42)
- Federal courts (41)
- Race and law (40)
- Constitutional interpretation (39)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Articles (473)
- Supreme Court Preview (281)
- Faculty Scholarship (275)
- Publications (262)
- Faculty Publications (209)
-
- All Faculty Scholarship (157)
- Faculty Articles (81)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (65)
- Scholarly Articles (64)
- Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar (54)
- Popular Media (48)
- Scholarly Works (48)
- Book Chapters (46)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (43)
- Journal Articles (41)
- Articles & Chapters (40)
- Law Faculty Research Publications (38)
- Other Publications (38)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (36)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (32)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (32)
- Law Faculty Publications (30)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (28)
- Educational Leadership Faculty Publications (22)
- Faculty Publications By Year (21)
- Life of the Law School (1993- ) (21)
- Scholarship@WashULaw (19)
- Reviews (18)
- Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters (17)
- UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship (16)
- File Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 2796
Full-Text Articles in Law
Transforming Constitutional Doctrine Through Mandatory Appeals From Three-Judge District Courts: The Warren And Burger Courts And Their Contemporary Lessons, Michael E. Solimine
Transforming Constitutional Doctrine Through Mandatory Appeals From Three-Judge District Courts: The Warren And Burger Courts And Their Contemporary Lessons, Michael E. Solimine
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
Judicial interpretations of the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment underwent significant change, both expanding and retrenching in various ways, in Supreme Court doctrine during the Warren and Burger Courts. An underappreciated influence on the change is the method by which those cases reached the Court’s docket. A significant number of the cases reached the Court’s docket not by discretionary grants of writs of certiorari, as occurred in most other cases, but by mandatory appeals directly from three-judge district courts. This article makes several contributions regarding the important changes in these doctrines during the Warren Court …
A New Reporter Confronts The Supreme Court’S Unpublished Decisions, Peter W. Martin
A New Reporter Confronts The Supreme Court’S Unpublished Decisions, Peter W. Martin
Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers
For over two hundred years, the United States Supreme Court has been served by an officially designated “Reporter” charged with overseeing the publication of its decisions. While the statutory framework within which the Court’s Reporter of Decisions must operate has been revised from time to time, it has always reflected the need for that publication to be timely. It has also been focused solely on the production of printed volumes, a growing anachronism in an era of linked and searchable law data. Because of the disconnect, delays in official publication of the Court’s decisions grew over the course of this …
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, …
Changemakers: Juris Doctorate: Saad Ahmad: Immigration Lawyer Saad Ahmad L'00 Shows That Appellate Practice Isn't Just For Large Firms, Roger Williams University School Of Law
Changemakers: Juris Doctorate: Saad Ahmad: Immigration Lawyer Saad Ahmad L'00 Shows That Appellate Practice Isn't Just For Large Firms, Roger Williams University School Of Law
Life of the Law School (1993- )
No abstract provided.
“We Do No Such Thing”: 303 Creative V. Elenis And The Future Of First Amendment Challenges To Public Accommodations Laws, David Cole
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In 303 Creative v. Elenis, the Supreme Court ruled that a business had a right to refuse to design a wedding website for a same-sex couple. But properly understood, the decision’s parameters are narrow, and the decision should have minimal effect on public accommodations laws.
The Worst Choice For School Choice: Tuition Tax Credits Are A Bad Idea And Direct Funding Is Wiser, Michael J. Broyde, Anna G. Gabianelli
The Worst Choice For School Choice: Tuition Tax Credits Are A Bad Idea And Direct Funding Is Wiser, Michael J. Broyde, Anna G. Gabianelli
Faculty Articles
School choice is on the rise, and states use various mechanisms to implement it. One prevalent mechanism is also a uniquely problematic one: the tax credit. Tax credits are deficient at equitably distributing a benefit like school choice; they are costly, and they invite fraud. Instead of using tax credits, states opting for school choice programs should use direct funding. Direct funding will more efficiently achieve the goals of school choice because it can be regulated like any other government benefit, even if it ends up subsidizing religious private schools.
Tax credits’ prevalence is not inexplicable, of course. It is …
Supreme Court Litigators In The Age Of Textualism, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Supreme Court Litigators In The Age Of Textualism, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Faculty Publications
The Supreme Court’s approach to statutory interpretation has moved in a textualist direction over the last several decades, but there is little systematic information on how litigators’ briefing practices have changed during this era of textualist ascendancy. This Article examines thirty-five years’ worth of party briefs (over 8,000 briefs total), explores the briefs’ use of interpretive tools (including differences across categories of attorneys), and compares the briefs to the Court’s opinions.
This examination yields several valuable findings. Although the briefs show a textualist shift, they differ from the Court’s opinions in a few ways. The magnitude of the textualist shift …
Institutional Design And The Predictability Of Judicial Interruptions At Oral Argument, Tonja Jacobi, Patrick Leslie, Zoë Robinson
Institutional Design And The Predictability Of Judicial Interruptions At Oral Argument, Tonja Jacobi, Patrick Leslie, Zoë Robinson
Faculty Articles
Examining oral argument in the Australian High Court and comparing to the U.S. Supreme Court, this article shows that institutional design drives judicial interruptive behavior. Many of the same individual- and case-level factors predict oral argument behavior. Notably, despite orthodoxy of the High Court as “apolitical,” ideology strongly predicts interruptions, just as in the United States. Yet, important divergent institutional design features between the two apex courts translate into meaningful behavioral differences, with the greater power of the Chief Justice resulting in differences in interruptions. Finally, gender effects are lower and only identifiable with new methodological techniques we develop and …
Fears, Faith, And Facts In Environmental Law, William W. Buzbee
Fears, Faith, And Facts In Environmental Law, William W. Buzbee
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Environmental law has long been shaped by both the particular nature of environmental harms and by the actors and institutions that cause such harms or can address them. This nation’s environmental statutes remain far from perfect, and a comprehensive law tailored to the challenges of climate change is still elusive. Nonetheless, America’s environmental laws provide lofty, express protective purposes and findings about reasons for their enactment. They also clearly state health and environmental goals, provide tailored criteria for action, and utilize procedures and diverse regulatory tools that reflect nuanced choices.
But the news is far from good. Despite the ambitious …
The Federal Question Jurisdiction Under Article Iii: “First In The Minds Of The Framers,” But Today, Perhaps, Falling Short Of The Framers’ Expectations, Arthur D. Hellman
The Federal Question Jurisdiction Under Article Iii: “First In The Minds Of The Framers,” But Today, Perhaps, Falling Short Of The Framers’ Expectations, Arthur D. Hellman
Articles
As Chief Justice Marshall explained, “the primary motive” for creating a “judicial department” for the new national government was “the desire of having a [national] tribunal for the decision of all national questions.” Thus, although Article III of the Constitution lists nine kinds of “Cases” and “Controversies” to which the “judicial Power” of the United States “shall extend,” “the objects which stood first in the minds of the framers” were the cases “arising under” the Constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States. Today we refer to this as the federal question jurisdiction.
Of all federal question cases, the Framers …
The Past As A Colonialist Resource, Deepa Das Acevedo
The Past As A Colonialist Resource, Deepa Das Acevedo
Faculty Articles
Originalism’s critics have failed to block its rise. For many jurists and legal scholars, the question is no longer whether to espouse originalism but how to espouse it. This Article argues that critics have ceded too much ground by focusing on discrediting originalism as either bad history or shoddy linguistics. To disrupt the cycle of endless “methodological” refinements and effectively address originalism’s continued popularity, critics must do two things: identify a better disciplinary analogue for originalist interpretation and advance an argument that moves beyond methods.
Anthropology can assist with both tasks. Both anthropological analysis and originalist interpretation are premised on …
Rethinking Eisner V. Macomber, And The Future Of Structural Tax Reform, Alex Zhang
Rethinking Eisner V. Macomber, And The Future Of Structural Tax Reform, Alex Zhang
Faculty Articles
In June 2023, the Supreme Court granted the petition for a writ of certiorari in Moore v. United States, ostensibly a challenge to an obscure provision of the 2017 tax legislation. Moore’s real target is the constitutionality of federal wealth and accrual taxation, which policymakers have proposed to combat record inequality and raise revenue for social-welfare reform. At the center of the doctrinal dispute in Moore is a century-old case, Eisner v. Macomber, on which the Moore petitioners and other commentators have relied to argue that Congress has no power to tax wealth or unrealized gains—e.g., appreciation …
The False Promise Of Jurisdiction Stripping, Daniel Epps, Alan M. Trammell
The False Promise Of Jurisdiction Stripping, Daniel Epps, Alan M. Trammell
Scholarship@WashULaw
Jurisdiction stripping is seen as a nuclear option. Its logic is simple: by depriving federal courts of jurisdiction over some set of cases, Congress ensures those courts cannot render bad decisions. In theory, it frees up the political branches and the states to act without fear of judicial second-guessing. To its proponents, it offers the ultimate check on unelected and unaccountable judges. To critics, it poses a grave threat to the separation of powers. Both sides agree, though, that jurisdiction stripping is a powerful weapon. On this understanding, politicians, activists, and scholars throughout American history have proposed jurisdiction stripping measures …
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 …
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 …
Laundering Police Lies, Adam Gershowitz, Caroline E. Lewis
Laundering Police Lies, Adam Gershowitz, Caroline E. Lewis
Faculty Publications
Police officers—like ordinary people—are regularly dishonest. Officers lie under oath (testilying), on police reports (reportilying), and in a myriad of other situations. Despite decades of evidence about police lies, the U.S. Supreme Court regularly believes police stories that are utterly implausible. Either because the Court is gullible, willfully blind, or complicit, the justices have simply rubber-stamped police lies in numerous high-profile cases. For instance, the Court has accepted police claims that a suspect had bags of cocaine displayed in his lap at the end of a police chase (Whren v. United States), that officers saw marijuana through a …
Social Costs Of Dobbs' Pro-Adoption Agenda, Malinda L. Seymore
Social Costs Of Dobbs' Pro-Adoption Agenda, Malinda L. Seymore
Faculty Scholarship
Abortion opponents have long claimed that women denied access to abortion can simply give their children up for adoption. Justice Alito repeated this argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. Of course, this claim assumes away the burdens of the pregnancy itself, which can result in economic strife, domestic violence, health risks, and potentially death in childbirth. But even on its own terms, the argument that adoption is an adequate substitute for abortion access makes normative assumptions about adoption as a social good in and of itself, ignoring the social costs of adoption for birth parents and adoptees. Idealizing adoption …
Reply Brief For Petitioner, Ferguson V. America, Brian Wolfman, Madeline H. Meth
Reply Brief For Petitioner, Ferguson V. America, Brian Wolfman, Madeline H. Meth
Faculty Scholarship
The Government concedes that the circuits are divided over whether 28 U.S.C. § 2255 limits a district court’s discretion in reviewing 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) motions. And because it cannot dispute that this issue is cleanly presented, unaffected by the Sentencing Commission’s policy statement, and exceptionally important, it instead rewrites the question presented. The Government’s effort to replace a question about the relationship (if any) between Section 3582(c)(1)(A) and Section 2255 with one about whether the district court abused its discretion should be rejected, and with it the Government’s attempt to gloss over the intractable circuit split, its misguided argument …
Second Amendment Exceptionalism: Public Expression And Public Carry, Timothy Zick
Second Amendment Exceptionalism: Public Expression And Public Carry, Timothy Zick
Faculty Publications
In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court recognized a right to carry firearms in public places. The scope of that right will depend on where, why, and how governments regulated public carry during the eighteenth and perhaps nineteenth centuries. The Court claimed that its turn to history for determining the scope of Second Amendment rights “accords with” and “comports with” how the Court has interpreted First Amendment rights. This Article examines and rejects that claim, both in general and specifically as it applies to the public exercise of Second Amendment rights. Although Bruen …
Originalism After Dobbs, Bruen, And Kennedy: The Role Of History And Tradition, Randy E. Barnett, Lawrence B. Solum
Originalism After Dobbs, Bruen, And Kennedy: The Role Of History And Tradition, Randy E. Barnett, Lawrence B. Solum
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In three recent cases, the constitutional concepts of history and tradition have played important roles in the reasoning of the Supreme Court. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization relied on history and tradition to overrule Roe v. Wade. New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen articulated a history and tradition test for the validity of laws regulating the right to bear arms recognized by the Second Amendment. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District looked to history and tradition in formulating the test for the consistency of state action with the Establishment Clause.
These cases raise important questions about …
Reply Brief For Petitioner, Muldrow V. City Of St. Louis, Madeline H. Meth, Brian Wolfman
Reply Brief For Petitioner, Muldrow V. City Of St. Louis, Madeline H. Meth, Brian Wolfman
Faculty Scholarship
Section 703(a)(1) is straightforward: It prohibits all discrimination against an employee “with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin[.]” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e2(a)(1). The Department does not dispute that job transfers concern “terms and conditions” of employment. See Resp. Br. 1, 35. So, if the statute’s words are honored, and Jatonya Muldrow can show that the Department’s transfer decisions were imposed “because of” her sex, the Department is liable.
Yet the Department maintains that some discriminatory job transfers escape Title VII’s reach. It relies nearly exclusively …
Roberts's Revisions: A Narratological Reading Of The Affirmative Action Cases, Angela Onwuachi-Willig
Roberts's Revisions: A Narratological Reading Of The Affirmative Action Cases, Angela Onwuachi-Willig
Faculty Scholarship
In a seminal article published nearly twenty years ago in the Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities, Professor Peter Brooks posed a critical yet underexplored question: "Does the [flaw [n]eed a [n]arratology?"5 In essence, he asked whether law as a field should have a framework for deconstructing and understanding how and why a legal opinion, including the events that the opinion is centered on, has been crafted and presented in a particular way.6 After highlighting that "how a story is told can make a difference in legal outcomes," Brooks encouraged legal actors to "talk narrative talk" …
Jurisdiction Beyond Our Borders: United States V. Alcoa And The Extraterritorial Reach Of American Antitrust, 1909–1945, Laura Phillips Sawyer
Jurisdiction Beyond Our Borders: United States V. Alcoa And The Extraterritorial Reach Of American Antitrust, 1909–1945, Laura Phillips Sawyer
Scholarly Works
Chapter in the book Antimonopoly and American Democracy by Daniel A. Crane and William J. Novak, eds., Oxford University Press, 2023.
In 1945, Judge Learned Hand wrote one of the most influential opinions in modern antitrust law. In declaring that the Aluminum Company of America (Alcoa) had illegally monopolized the industry for virgin aluminum and had participated in an illegal international cartel, Hand both revived and extended American antitrust law. The ruling is famous for several reasons: it narrowly defined the relevant market in favor of the government; it expanded the category of impermissible dominant firm conduct; it interpreted congressional …
What Would Happen To All Of The Prior Chevron Cases In A Non-Chevron World?, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
What Would Happen To All Of The Prior Chevron Cases In A Non-Chevron World?, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
2023 Supreme Court Preview Digital Notebook, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
2023 Supreme Court Preview Digital Notebook, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Legal Clutter: How Concurring Opinions Create Unnecessary Confusion And Encourage Litigation, Meg Penrose
Legal Clutter: How Concurring Opinions Create Unnecessary Confusion And Encourage Litigation, Meg Penrose
Faculty Scholarship
Good judges are clear writers. And clear writers avoid legal clutter. Legal clutter occurs when judges publish multiple individually written opinions that are neither useful nor necessary. This essay argues that concurring opinions are the worst form of legal clutter. Unlike majority opinions, concurring opinions are legal asides, musings of sorts—often by a single judge—that add length and confusion to an opinion often without adding meaningful value. Concurring opinions do not change the outcome of a case. Unlike dissenting opinions, they do not claim disagreement with the ultimate decision. Instead, concurring opinions merely offer an idea or viewpoint that failed …
Brief For Petitioner, Muldrow V. City Of St. Louis, Missouri, Madeline H. Meth, Brian Wolfman
Brief For Petitioner, Muldrow V. City Of St. Louis, Missouri, Madeline H. Meth, Brian Wolfman
Faculty Scholarship
Title VII prohibits an employer from discriminating against an employee because of her race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Its core antidiscrimination provision, Section 703(a)(1), protects individuals not only from discriminatory hiring, firing, or compensation but also from discrimination with respect to their “terms, conditions, or privileges” of employment. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e2(a)(1). Petitioner Jatonya Clayborn Muldrow maintains that her employer, the City of St. Louis Police Department, discriminated against her in the terms, conditions, or privileges of her employment when, because of her sex, it transferred her out of the Department’s Intelligence Division to an entirely different job, …
Law School News: Dean Bowman On The Scotus Admissions Decision 6-29-2023, Gregory W. Bowman
Law School News: Dean Bowman On The Scotus Admissions Decision 6-29-2023, Gregory W. Bowman
Life of the Law School (1993- )
No abstract provided.
Divided Court Finds Generic Redactions Sufficient To Admit Confessions Of Non-Testifying Codefendants, Jeffrey Bellin
Divided Court Finds Generic Redactions Sufficient To Admit Confessions Of Non-Testifying Codefendants, Jeffrey Bellin
Popular Media
No abstract provided.
Four Maurer School Of Law Students Selected As 2023 Stevens Fellows, James Owsley Boyd
Four Maurer School Of Law Students Selected As 2023 Stevens Fellows, James Owsley Boyd
Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)
Four Indiana Law students have been selected as Stevens Fellows, the John Paul Stevens Foundation accounced today (June 20). Selection as a Stevens Fellow allows students to receive critical financial support while participating in unpaid summer legal internships serving the public interest.
Named after the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice, the John Paul Stevens Foundation is dedicated to promoting public interest and social justice values in the next generation of American lawyers.