Law Commons^™

Amicus Brief Of Legal Scholars Lee Kovarsky Et Al. In Support Of Petitioner, Ira P. Robbins

Amicus Briefs & Court Filings

QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether a second-in-time habeas claim filed while an appeal from the judgment on an initial habeas claim is still pending counts as a second or successive habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)

INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE: Amici curiae are law professors and legal scholars who study federal post-conviction law and civil procedure. Amici curiae have no personal interest in the outcome of this case. They all share an interest in seeing habeas law applied in a way that ensures the just and timely adjudication of claims while preserving the traditional and intended operation of the Federal Rules …

What The Cluck? Backyard Chickens And Maine's Mysterious Right To Food, Lucy Weaver

Maine Law Review

When Maine voters approved the nation’s first “right to food” constitutional amendment, many were concerned about the amendment’s potential to conflict with animal welfare, food safety, and other regulations currently in place at the state and local level. Born from a decade of advocacy, the amendment represents a new era for Maine’s food sovereignty movement. However, the boundaries of the amendment remain unclear, and Maine’s municipalities lack sufficient guidance as they attempt to navigate how this amendment applies to them. This Comment explores one example of the many challenges that may arise from the enactment of the right to food …

Dobbs And Sterilization Decision-Making: Understanding The Coercive Spillover Effects In Reproductive Choice, Thomas Williams

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The Supreme Court majority in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization argued their decision would have limited impact beyond abortion rights. This Article examines how Dobbs and subsequent state abortion restrictions are likely to increase women’s reliance on permanent sterilization procedures, particularly among already marginalized populations. Drawing on emerging data and historical context, I argue that some post-Dobbs sterilizations should be understood as effectively coerced by state policies, implicating reproductive justice concerns and potentially undermining fundamental rights established in Skinner v. Oklahoma. Then, I demonstrate how interdisciplinary bioethics frameworks and methodologies can help courts better understand the full implications of …

Rules & Laws For Civil Actions: 2025 Ed., Stella Burch Elias, Derek T. Muller, Jason Rantanen, Caroline Sheerin, Maya Steinitz

Books

Rules and Laws for Civil Actions is an open-access resource for law students containing the U.S. Constitution, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and selected federal and state statutes. The book was created by a team of faculty members at the University of Iowa College of Law to supplement the study of Civil Procedure, Evidence, Constitutional Law, and other law school courses. In addition to containing the official text, each legal source found in Rules and Laws for Civil Actions is accompanied by an introductory section written by an Iowa Law professor …

The Penal Judgment Exception To Full Faith And Credit: How To Bind The Bounty Laws, Walker Mckusick

Washington Law Review

In the current moment of interstate friction over abortion, the penal judgment exception poses a barrier against interstate enforcement of bounty laws. A doctor who prescribes a medicated abortion to a Texas patient may be exposed to civil liability—even in faraway Washington State. A Washington court asked to enforce a Texas judgment against the doctor is subject to the Full Faith and Credit Clause. Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution mandates that each state give full faith and credit to judgments rendered in sister states. Under Texas Senate Bill 8 (S.B. 8), any member of the public …

Perspectives On The Constitution Of The War On Drugs: A Collection Of Posts From The Balkinization Blog, Douglas A. Berman, Rachel Barkow, Louis Michael Seidman, Kimani Paul-Emile, Jennifer D. Oliva, Shaun Ossei-Owusu, Katherine Shaw, Paul Butler, David E. Pozen

Faculty Scholarship

This collection of essays provides extended commentary from multiple law professors on David Pozen’s 2024 book, The Constitution of the War on Drugs. Pozen’s book provides a rich and astute perspective on a wide array of dynamic legal, political, and social stories at the intersection of constitutional jurisprudence and drug policy. The work is the first book in Oxford University Press’s Inalienable Rights series to be fully open access. Yale Law Professor Jack Balkin, recognizing the book engaged many historical and cutting-edge issues in the fields of constitutional law, criminal law and health law, invited professors in these fields …

The Long Shadow Of Food Lion, Knight First Amend. Inst. (May 31, 2024), Alan K. Chen

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

This essay discusses the continuing shadow of Food Lion, Inc. v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., which looms over the efforts of journalists and, increasingly of other citizens, to engage in undercover investigations to discover and disseminate truthful information on matters of profound public concern. At a time when many impediments to freedom of the press have emerged, legal barriers to undercover investigations suppress a key newsgathering tool that was once an important part of the news media ecosystem. After describing the extensive litigation battle in the case, the essay argues that the decision continues to cast a chilling effect over journalists …

Constitutional Rights And Retrenchment: The Elusive Promise Of Equal Citizenship, Deborah L. Brake

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

American Democracy And The State Constitutional Convention, Jonathan L. Marshfield

UF Law Faculty Publications

Fears about the health of American democracy are high. And with the Supreme Court loosening federal constraints and returning critical substantive issues to the states, there is new and particular interest in the democratic quality of state institutions. While some see opportunity in this decentralization, there is also good reason to believe that many states are failing to deliver on America’s democratic ideals. There are growing concerns, for example, that many state legislatures are enacting laws wildly misaligned with majority preferences on important issues like guns, abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, and healthcare. There are also deeper structural concerns regarding partisan gerrymandering, …

Convening For (Climate) Change: The Constitutional Case For A U.S. Climate Assembly, Will Mccabe

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Note argues that a national U.S. Citizens’ Assembly for Climate would not violate the non-delegation doctrine which prevents Congress from improperly delegating its constitutional legislative power to another body. A climate assembly could potentially be authorized in several ways; this Note explores that of Congress convening a climate assembly through statute, either as an independent body or as a body under the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency. Part I examines the current state of American climate policy and the political debate surrounding it, putting forward a case for a novel approach, and also examines the concept of climate …

The Private Litigation Impact Of New York’S Green Amendment, Evan Bianchi, Sean Di Luccio, Martin Lockman, Vincent Nolette

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law

The increasing urgency of climate change, combined with federal environmental inaction under the Trump Administration, inspired a wave of environmental action at the state and local level. Building on the environmental movement of the 1970s, activists have pushed to amend more than a dozen state constitutions to include “green amendments” — self-executing individual rights to a clean environment. In 2022, New York activists succeeded, and New York’s Green Amendment (the NYGA) now provides that “Each person shall have a right to clean air and water, and a healthful environment.”

However, the power of the NYGA and similar green amendments turns …

Constitutional Rights And Remedial Consistency, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Publications

When the Supreme Court declined definitively to block Texas’s S.B. 8, which effectively eliminated pre-enforcement federal remedies for what was then a plainly unconstitutional restriction on abortion rights, a prominent criticism was that the majority would have never tolerated the similar treatment of preferred legal protections—like gun rights. This refrain reemerged when California enacted a copycat regime for firearms regulation. This theme sounds in the deep-rooted idea that judge-made law should adhere to generality and neutrality values requiring doctrines to derive justification from controlling a meaningful class of cases ascertained by objective legal criteria.

This Article is about consistency, and …

Anti-Transgender Constitutional Law, Katie Eyer

Vanderbilt Law Review

Over the course of the last three decades, gender identity anti-discrimination protections and other transgender-supportive government policies have increased, as government entities have sought to protect and support the transgender community. But constitutional litigation by opponents of transgender equality has also proliferated, seeking to limit or eliminate such trans-protective measures. Such litigation has attacked as unconstitutional everything from laws prohibiting anti-transgender employment discrimination to the efforts of individual public school teachers to support transgender teens.

This Article provides the first systematic account of the phenomenon of anti-transgender constitutional litigation. As described herein, such litigation is surprisingly novel: while trans-protective measures …

An Originalist Approach To Puerto Rico: Arguments Against The Status Quo, Micah Allred

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Few originalists have grappled with a fundamental question about Puerto Rico: whether the Constitution permits the United States to hold the island indefinitely as nonstate territory. There are reasons to doubt that it does. The main purpose of the Constitution’s territorial provisions was to allow Congress to transition the then West-ern Territory into states. And, as a structural matter, Congress’s direct authority over Puerto Ricans conflicts with important constitutional principles such as federalism. But for originalists, arguments from purpose and structure are helpful only insofar as they elucidate the original meaning of the Constitution’s text. This Article lays out two …

Proportionalities, Youngjae Lee

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

“Proportionality” is ubiquitous. The idea that punishment should be proportional to crime is familiar in criminal law and has a lengthy history. But that is not the only place where one encounters the concept of proportionality in law and ethics. The idea of proportionality is important also in the self-defense context, where the right to defend oneself with force is limited by the principle of proportionality. Proportionality plays a role in the context of war, especially in the idea that the military advantage one side may draw from an attack must not be excessive in relation to the loss of …

Who Is A Minister? Originalist Deference Expands The Ministerial Exception, Jared C. Huber

Notre Dame Law Review

The ministerial exception is a doctrine born out of the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment that shields many religious institutions’ employment decisions from review. While the ministerial exception does not extend to all employment decisions by, or employees of, religious institutions, it does confer broad—and absolute—protection. While less controversy surrounds whether the Constitution shields religious institutions’ employment decisions to at least some extent, much more debate surrounds the exception’s scope, and perhaps most critically, which employees fall under it. In other words, who is a "minister" for purposes of the ministerial exception?

Meet The New Chief, Same As The Old Chief: A Coherent Solution To The Problem Of Prior Conviction Proof Procedures, Robert Barnhart

West Virginia Law Review

Conventional wisdom tells attorneys they can avoid having the jury learn about criminal defendants’ prior convictions if the client exercises their right to not testify at trial. Conventional wisdom is wrong. Myriad status crimes, sentence enhancing specifications, and substantive offenses make prior convictions an element of the offense, ensuring the prosecution can introduce them as a matter of course during the prosecution’s case-in-chief. The seminal Supreme Court Case, Old Chief v. United States, provided some relief to criminal defendants by allowing them to stipulate to their status as a felon prohibited from possessing weapons to avoid having the jury learn …

The Cartoon Physics Of The Court-Martial, John M. Bickers

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Slaughtering Slaughter-House: An Assessment Of 14th Amendment Privileges Or Immunities Jurisprudence, Caleb Webb

Senior Honors Theses

In 1872, the Supreme Court decided the Slaughter-House Cases, which applied a narrow interpretation of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14^th Amendment that effectually eroded the clause from the Constitution. Following Slaughter-House, the Supreme Court compensated by utilizing elastic interpretations of the Due Process Clause in its substantive due process jurisprudence to cover the rights that would have otherwise been protected by the Privileges or Immunities Clause. In more recent years, the Court has heard arguments favoring alternative interpretations of the Privileges or Immunities Clause but has yet to evaluate them thoroughly. By applying the …

How Far Have Standards Of Decency Evolved In Fifteen Years? An Update On Atkins Jurisprudence In Mississippi, Alexander Kassoff

MC Law Review

In 2002, the United States Supreme Court handed down Atkins v. Virginia, holding that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the execution of people with intellectual disability. In the years since that ruling, some change has occurred, but questions remain. This article will examine significant developments in Atkins jurisprudence during that time period. It will look at the two post-Atkins United States Supreme Court cases, and the development of the law - in Mississippi especially, but also to some extent in other jurisdictions that still have the death penalty.

The Ebb, Flow, And Twilight Of Presidential Removal, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

Just as the Roberts Court has been expanding presidential authority to its historic maximum, recent legal scholarship has shown that the Founders intended, to paraphrase Justice Jackson’s famous Youngstown concurrence, a much lower ebb or at least an ambiguous twilight about “executive power,” in contrast to originalists’ unsupported certainties.

The Story Of New York Times V. Sullivan: How Free Speech Rights Were Intertwined With The Civil Rights Movement, Samantha Barbas

ConLawNOW

This essay, delivered to the Law Library of Congress as the 2023 Constitution Day Lecture, tells the story of New York Times v. Sullivan, widely regarded as one the most important First Amendment decisions of all time. It is a decision that has profoundly affected the workings of the press and shaped the contours of public discourse in the United States. And it is a decision that continues to raise controversy because of the broad protections it gives to freedom of speech at the expense of other rights such as reputation and privacy. The essay summarizes the author’s work …

Brief Of Children’S Rights Advocates In Support Of Appellees: Held V. Montana, Asha Brundage-Moore, Wyatt Sassman, Catherine Smith

Scholarly Articles

Amici Curiae are members of the Consortium for the Advancement of Children’s Constitutional Rights and Healthy Mothers, Heathy Babies: The Montana Coalition who are children’s rights advocates and legal scholars. Amici submit this brief to: (1) highlight Montana’s Constitution as a leader in advancing children’s constitutional rights; (2) draw this Court’s attention to the Montana Constitution’s text and history recognizing children’s right to a clean and healthful environment; and (3) explain that a decision not to safeguard children’s right to a clean and healthful environment in reliance on adult-centric analytical missteps advanced by Appellants (and supporting Amici) would deny Montana’s …

Symposium: Gender, Health And The Constitution: The Misalignment Of Medical Capacity And Legal Competence For Perinatal People With Serious Mental Illness, Melisa Olgun, Carlos Larrauri, Sonja Castaneda-Cudney, Elyn Saks

ConLawNOW

This Article evaluates the misalignment of medical capacity and legal competence for perinatal people with serious medical illnesses (SMI), an issue that has had limited discourse in legal academia. It delineates the contours of these concepts, dissecting their theoretical underpinnings and practical applications. While medical capacity is often considered an iterative, context-specific determination, legal competence is typically treated as a rigid, binary legal categorization. It then illustrates how the disparate scope and aims of capacity and competence lead to a precarious misalignment for people with fluctuating mental states, particularly perinatal people with SMI. The Article proposes solutions to harmonize the …

Symposium: Gender, Health, And The Constitution: Gender-Affirming Care And Children's Liberty, Dara E. Purvis

ConLawNOW

This essay addresses the wave of statutes banning gender-affirming care for transgender and gender-diverse minors passed in states across the country over the last three years. It argues that an underdeveloped understanding of children’s rights makes it more difficult to explain how harmful gender-affirming care bans are and to challenge them in court. After explaining the nature of gender-affirming care, the essay discusses the grounds underlying existing challenges to gender-affirming care bans, highlighting the emphasis on equal protection and parental rights. It concludes by reframing the children’s liberty argument and exploring what the broader consequences of courts recognizing such a …

Beyond The Ban: One Major Challenge Facing The Ftc Non-Compete Rule, Brendan Mohan

ConLawNOW

This article analyzes the implications of President Biden's Executive Order 14036 and the subsequent notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to ban non-compete agreements. It examines the legal basis for the NPRM, including Sections 5 and 6(g) of the FTC Act, and anticipates potential challenges to its implementation, most notably under the major questions doctrine. It explores the broader ramifications of the NPRM for labor and employment law, emphasizing its potential to reshape administrative agency regulation and the regulatory landscape. It concludes by analyzing the rule under the major questions doctrine and the possible outcomes …

Symposium: Gender, Health And The Constitution: More Than Merely "Two-Legged Wombs": Lessons On Metaphor And Body Politics From Atwood's The Handmaiden's Tale (1985), Rachel Conrad Bracken

ConLawNOW

This essay explores the dehumanizing potential of metaphors used to describe women’s reproductive biology through literary analysis of Margaret Atwood’s canonical feminist novel The Handmaid’s Tale (1985). Attending to the rhetoric that both justifies and contests ritualized rape and forced surrogacy in Atwood’s novel, this essay begins by interrogating the ubiquitous cultural and biomedical metaphors that reduce women and pregnant people to their bodies’ reproductive potential. The first section draws from scholarship in medical anthropology, medical rhetoric, and literary studies to illuminate how gendered stereotypes pervade biomedical, cultural, and legal representations of reproduction, reifying the conflation of women and people …

Symposium; Gender, Health, And The Constitution: Hysteria Redux: Gaslighting In The Age Of Covid, Jane Campbell Moriarty

ConLawNOW

This article addresses the relationship among hysteria, gaslighting, and gender during the Covid pandemic in the political and public-health messaging about Covid. It analyzes the U.S. public health messaging in the age of Covid, explaining how individualism, gender, and gaslighting have shaped the public response to the virus and negatively affected public health. In explaining the poor U.S. public health outcomes during Covid, the article evaluates the role of disinformation about vaccines, the “feminization” of masking, and the “vax and relax” public mantra, which suggested that those who did not relax were perhaps a bit hysterical. Finally, the article considers …

Amazon, Spacex And Other Companies Are Arguing The Government Agency That Has Protected Labor Rights Since 1935 Is Actually Unconstitutional, Kate Andrias

Faculty Scholarship

Amazon, SpaceX, Starbucks and Trader Joe’s have all responded to allegations that they have violated labor laws with the same bold argument. The National Labor Relations Board, they assert in several ongoing legal proceedings, is unconstitutional.

SpaceX, for example, says that the NLRB is engaging in “an unlawful attempt … to subject Space X to an administrative proceeding whose structure violates Article II, the Fifth Amendment, and the Seventh Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.”

If these companies prevail, the entire process for holding union elections and for prosecuting employers who break labor laws – in place since …

From Gods To Google: How Religious Speech Cases May Fortify The Deregulatory First Amendment, Rebecca Aviel, Margot E. Kaminski, Toni M. Massaro, Andrew Keane Woods

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

The Court’s extraordinary solicitude for religious expression, manifested across a series of cases involving free exercise, free speech, and establishment clause principles, has been the subject of sustained scholarly attention. Much of that research has focused on evaluating whether the Court is drawing an appropriate balance between the rights of religious believers and government regulatory objectives. In this Article we observe that the Court’s most recent set of moves in this arena, which diverge considerably from decades of speech jurisprudence, will have ramifications that go well beyond the claims of conscience that have so animated the Court’s sympathies. The range …