Law Commons^™

The Great American Gun Violence Lottery, Erin Ryan

Erin Ryan

Reflecting on the one-year anniversary of the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting, this very short essay compares the experience of gun violence in America to the dystopian game of chance in Shirley Jackson’s classic American short story, “The Lottery.” With references to the role of Constitutional law, media consumption, and cultural change, it urges an available, common-sense middle ground on gun policy. The essay was first published by the American Constitution Society (Dec. 17, 2013) and later appeared in the Huffington Post (Dec. 20, 2013).

Vol. 5 No. 1, Fall 2013; "Correcting" The Foreclosure Crisis?, Matthew Broucek

Northern Illinois Law Review Supplement

Mortgage Resolution Partners, a venture capitalist firm based out of San Francisco, has been visiting with state and local governments across the country. Mortgage Resolution Partners proposes that eminent domain can, and should, be used to seize mortgages and refinance them in an attempt to correct the United States' foreclosure crisis. This article identifies and analyzes the policy issues and constitutional concerns that are inherent in the plan. The most critical constitutional concerns with the plan implicate the Takings Clause, the Contracts Clause, and the Dormant Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.

The Limits Of Custom In Constitutional And International Law, Michael D. Ramsey

San Diego Law Review

This Article does not contend that arguments for extension of custom are illegitimate. Instead, it makes two more limited claims. First, there is an important difference between arguments from pure custom and arguments for the extension of custom, with the latter being more properly called common law arguments. Second, the legitimacy of common law arguments in some fields, especially constitutional law and international law, is substantially more problematic than the legitimacy of arguments from pure custom. The Article develops as follows. Part II sets out in greater detail the proposed distinction between arguments from pure custom and arguments for extension …

The Singapore Constitution: A Brief Introduction, Smu Apolitical

Student Publications

This primer seeks to provide an easy guide to those interested in finding out more about the Singapore Constitution. The Constitution provides for the structure of the government and the roles of the judiciary and the parliament. It also secures our fundamental liberties. Hence, some basic knowledge of the Constitution is useful for every citizen.

The primer starts by providing an introduction to the Singapore Constitution and explains the meaning of the concept of separation of powers among the executive, legislature and the judiciary. It also touches on the functions of the three entities, such as how laws are made …

Preferences Are Public Rights, Brook E. Gotberg

Faculty Publications

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Stern v. Marshall, there is widespread uncertainty as to what other proceedings may constitutionally fall within a bankruptcy court’s core jurisdiction. Supreme Court jurisprudence has been cryptic regarding the constitutional limitations of non-Article III courts, but the Court has identified a "public rights exception" to the general rule that the judicial power must be exercised only by judges with life tenure and salary protection. This public rights exception has not yet been explicitly extended to a bankruptcy proceeding, but the reasoning of the Court strongly suggests that a trustee’s motion to …

The Bin Laden Exception, Erik Luna

Erik Luna

Osama bin Laden's demise provides an opportune moment to reevaluate the extraordinary measures taken by the U.S. government in the "war on terror," with any reassessment incorporating the threat posed by al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Some modest analysis suggests that terrorism remains a miniscule risk for the average American, and it hardly poses an existential threat to the United States. Nonetheless, terrorism-related fears have distorted the people's risk perception and facilitated dubious public policies, exemplified here by a series of programs implemented by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Among other things, this agency has adopted costly technology and …

On Checking The Artifacts Of Canaan: A Comment On Levinson's "Confrontation", Thomas L. Shaffer

Thomas L. Shaffer

No abstract provided.

Incentives To Create Under A "Lifetime-Plus-Years" Copyright Duration: Lessons From A Behavioral Economic Analysis For Eldred V. Ashcroft, Avishalom Tor, Dotan Oliar

Avishalom Tor

In this Article, we highlight for the first time some of the significant but hitherto unrecognized behavioral effects of copyright law on individuals' incentives to create and then examine the implications of our findings for the constitutional analysis of Eldred v. Ashcroft. We show that behavioral biases - namely, individuals' optimistic bias regarding their future longevity and their subadditive judgments in circumstances resembling the extant rule of copyright duration - explain the otherwise puzzling lifetime-plus-years basis for copyright protection given to individual authors, and reveal how this regime provides superior incentives to create. Thus, insofar as the provision of increased …

Drug Exceptionalism, Erik Luna

Erik Luna

No abstract provided.

Holdings, Dicta, And The Paradigms Of Precedent, Randy J. Kozel

Randy J Kozel

In United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court invalidated a key provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. In doing so, it raised significant questions about the power of states to limit the institution of marriage to opposite-sex couples. That issue was not presented in Windsor itself, but Windsor’s reasoning and rhetoric have already begun to play a pivotal role in ensuing challenges to state laws. Determining the future effects of Windsor, or of any other Supreme Court decision, requires defining the scope of judicial precedent. One account of precedent is restrictive: Only a court’s holdings must …

Religion, Division, And The First Amendment, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

Nearly thirty-five years ago, in Lemon v. Kurtzman, Chief Justice Warren Burger declared that state programs or policies could excessive(ly) - and, therefore, unconstitutionally - entangle government and religion, not only by requiring or allowing intrusive public monitoring of religious institutions and activities, but also through what he called their divisive political potential. Chief Justice Burger asserted also, and more fundamentally, that political division along religious lines was one of the principal evils against which the First Amendment was intended to protect. And from this Hobbesian premise about the inten(t) animating the First Amendment, he proceeded on the assumption that …

Supreme Court Wrestles With Prayer At Public Meetings, Alan E. Garfield

Alan E Garfield

No abstract provided.

The Political (And Other) Safeguards Of Religious Freedom, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

This essay is a contribution to a symposium marking the 20th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s still-controversial decision in Employment Division v. Smith. That decision, it is suggested, should not be read as reflecting or requiring hostility or indifference towards claims for legislatively enacted accommodations of religion. Smith is not an endorsement of religion-blind neutrality in constitutional law; instead, it assigns to politically accountable actors the difficult, but crucially important, task of accommodating those whose religious exercise would otherwise be burdened by generally applicable laws. The essay goes on to suggest several things that must be true of our law …

Assimilation, Toleration, And The State's Interest In The Development Of Religious Doctrine, Richard Garnett

Richard W Garnett

Thirty-five years ago, in the context of a church-property dispute, Justice William Brennan observed that government interpretation of religious doctrine and judicial intervention in religious disputes are undesirable, because when civil courts undertake to resolve [doctrinal] controversies..., the hazards are ever present of inhibiting the free development of religious doctrine and of implicating secular interests in matters of purely ecclesiastical concern. This statement, at first, seems wise and fittingly cautious, even unremarkable and obvious. On examination, though, it turns out to be intriguing, elusive, and misleading. Indeed, Justice Brennan's warning presents hazards of its own, and its premises - if …

Judicial Review, Local Values, And Pluralism, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

At the Federalist Society's 2008 National Student Symposium, a panel of scholars was asked to consider the question, does pervasive judicial review threaten to destroy local identity by homogenizing community norms? The answer to this question is yes, pervasive judicial review certainly does threaten local identity, because such review can homogenize[e] community norms, either by dragging them into conformity with national, constitutional standards or (more controversially) by subordinating them to the reviewers' own commitments. It is important to recall, however, that while it is true that an important feature of our federalism is local variation in laws and values, it …

Formalism And Realism In Commerce Clause Jurisprudence, Barry Cushman

Barry Cushman

This Article attempts a reconceptualization of developments in Commerce Clause jurisprudence between the Civil War and World War II by identifying ways in which that jurisprudence was structurally related to and accordingly deeply influenced by the categories of substantive due process and dormant Commerce Clause doctrine. Antecedent dormant Commerce Clause jurisprudence set the terms within which Commerce Clause doctrine was worked out; coordinate developments in substantive due process doctrine set limits upon the scope of Commerce Clause formulations and thus played a critical and underappreciated role in maintaining the federal equilibrium. The subsequent erosion of those due process limitations vastly …

Direct Democracy And Hastily Enacted Statutes, John C. Nagle

John Copeland Nagle

No abstract provided.

The Inclusiveness Of The New Originalism, James E. Fleming

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Editors’ Foreword, Editors

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Gravitational Force Of Originalism, Randy E. Barnett

Fordham Law Review

In Part I of this Article, I describe four aspects of the New Originalism: First, New Originalism is about identifying the original public meaning of the Constitution rather than the original Framers’ intent. Second, the interpretive activity of identifying the original public meaning of the text is a purely descriptive empirical inquiry. Third, there is also a normative tenet of the New Originalism that contends that the original public meaning of the text should be followed. Finally, distinguishing between the activities of interpretation and construction identifies the limit of the New Originalism, which is only a theory of interpretation. In …

On What Distinguishes New Originalism From Old: A Jurisprudential Take, Mitchell N. Berman, Kevin Toh

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Meaning And Belief In Constitutional Interpretation, Andrei Marmor

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Deferentialism: A Post–Originalist Theory Of Legal Interpretation, Scott Soames

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Originalism, Vintage Or Nouveau: “He Said, She Said” Law, Tara Smith

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

The New Originalism And The Uses Of History, Jack M. Balkin

Fordham Law Review

Central to the new originalism is the distinction between constitutional interpretation and constitutional construction. Interpretation tries to determine the Constitution’s original communicative content, while construction builds out doctrines, institutions, and practices over time. Most of the work of constitutional lawyers and judges is constitutional construction.

The distinction between interpretation and construction has important consequences for constitutional theory. In particular, it has important consequences for longstanding debates about how lawyers use history and should use history.

First, construction, not interpretation, is the central case of constitutional argument, and most historical argument occurs in the construction zone.

Second, although people often associate …

Meaning And Understanding In The History Of Constitutional Ideas: The Intellectual History Alternative To Originalism, Saul Cornell

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Original Meaning, Precedent, And Popular Sovereignty?: Whittington Et Al. V. Lincoln Et Al., Leslie F. Goldstein

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Accepting Contested Meanings, Bernadette Meyler

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Observer Effect: National Security Litigation, Executive Policy Changes, And Judicial Deference, Ashley S. Deeks

Fordham Law Review

The national security deference debate has reached a stalemate. Those favoring extensive deference to executive branch national security decisions celebrate the limited role courts have played in reviewing those policies. The executive, they contend, is constitutionally charged with such decisions and structurally better suited than the judiciary to make them. Those who bemoan such deference fear for individual rights and an imbalance in the separation of powers. Yet both sides assume that the courts’ role is minimal. Both sides are wrong.

This Article shows why. While courts rarely intervene in national security disputes, the Article demonstrates that they nevertheless play …

Originalism: A Critical Introduction, Keith E. Whittington

Fordham Law Review

The theory of originalism is now well into its second wave. Originalism first came to prominence in the 1970s and 1980s as conservative critics reacted to the decisions of the Warren Court, and the Reagan Administration embraced originalism as a check on judicial activism. A second wave of originalism has emerged since the late 1990s, responding to earlier criticisms and reconsidering earlier assumptions and conclusions. This Article assesses where originalist theory currently stands. It outlines the points of agreement and disagreement within the recent originalist literature and highlights the primary areas of continuing separation between originalists and their critics.