Law Commons^™

New Light On The History Of Free Exercise Exemptions: The Debates In Two Eighteenth-Century State Legislatures, Stanton D. Krauss

Catholic University Law Review

As Justice Gorsuch pointed out in his concurring opinion in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 138 S. Ct. 1719, 1734 (2018), there is an ongoing debate about whether the First Amendment ever requires the recognition of religion-based exemptions to neutral and generally applicable laws. The leading proponent of such exemptions has argued that the original understanding of the Free Exercise Clause supports his claim, and that the existence of such exemptions in preconstitutional American statutes – which he believed to have been granted because legislators thought them mandated by “the free exercise principle” – is one factor …

Should The Dead Bind The Living? Perhaps Ask The People: An Examination Of The Debates Over Constitutional Convention Referendums In State Constitutional Conventions, John J. Liolos

Akron Law Review

Should the United States of America have a constitutional convention? Thomas Jefferson would maintain that one is long overdue; James Madison would argue the contrary. These two luminaries of American constitutional thought took sides in a stirring debate on a fundamental question in constitutionalism: should the dead bind the living? Jefferson advocated for recurrent recourse to the people by holding constitutional conventions in each generation. James Madison disagreed, arguing that stability and constitutional veneration, among other factors, were paramount. Most recall Madison as having won the debate. But at least 18 states throughout American history have adopted a Jeffersonian model …

The Independent State Legislature Doctrine, Federal Elections, And State Constitutions, Michael T. Morley

Georgia Law Review

The U.S. Constitution does not confer authority to regulate
federal elections on states as entities. Rather, it grants that
authority specifically to the “Legislature” of each state. The
“independent state legislature doctrine” teaches that a state
constitution is legally incapable of imposing substantive
restrictions on the authority over federal elections that the U.S.
Constitution confers directly upon a state’s legislature. Over the
past 130 years, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly adopted
conflicting positions on this doctrine without recognizing its
deep historical roots or normative justifications.
The independent state legislature doctrine reflects the
prevailing understanding of states, Congress, and other …

God And State Preambles, Peter J. Smith, Robert W. Tuttle

Marquette Law Review

Those who question the permissibility of official acknowledgements of God might be surprised to learn that the preambles of forty-five of the fifty state constitutions expressly invoke God. The practice is common in both liberal and conservative states and is equally prevalent in all regions of the country. Virtually all of those preambles give thanks to God, and many also seek God's blessing n the state's endeavors. Yet there has been no detailed assessment of the preambles' history or significance. This paper seeks to remedy that gap.

The preambles complicate the claim that official acknowledgements of God are incompatible with …

Marriage Equality In State And Nation, Anthony Michael Kreis

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Intermittent State Constitutionalism, Justin Long

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

St. George Tucker And The Limits Of States' Rights Constitutionalism: Understanding The Federal Compact In The Early Republic, David Thomas Konig

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

In A Federal Case, Is The State Constitution Something Important Or Just Another Piece Of Paper?, Randall T. Shepard

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Whose Constitution Is It? Why Federalism And Constitutional Positivism Don't Mix, James A. Gardner

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Courts As Agents Of Federalism: Power And Interpretation In State Constitutional Law, James A. Gardner

William & Mary Law Review

In the American constitutional tradition, federalism is commonly understood as a mechanism designed to institutionalize a kind of permanent struggle between state and national power. The same American constitutional tradition also holds that courts are basically passive institutions whose mission is to apply the law impartially while avoiding inherently political power struggles. These two commonplace understandings conflict on their face. The conflict may be dissolved for federal courts by conceiving their resistance to state authority as the impartial consequence of limitations on state power imposed by the United States Constitution. This reconciliation, however, is unavailable for state courts, which, by …

Litigating State Constitutional Rights To Happiness And Safety: A Strategy For Ensuring The Provision Of Basic Needs To The Poor, Bert B. Lockwood, R. Collins Owens, Grace A. Severyn

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Challenging Sodomy Statutes: State Constitutional Protections For Sexual Privacy, Julie A. Morris

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

"No Pass, No Play": Equal Protection Analysis Under The Federal And State Constitutions, David J. Shannon

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

State Constitutional Law Processes, Robert F. Williams

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Right To Arms: Does The Constitution Or The Predilection Of Judges Reign, Robert Dowlut

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Elementary And Secondary Education Act Of 1965 And The First Amendment

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Indiana, 1851, Alaska, 1956: A Century Of Difference In State Constitutions, P. Allan Dionisopoulos

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Interstate Compacts-State Constitutions As Limitations On States' Power To Ratify Federally Approved Compacts

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.