Law Commons^™

The Eviction Caste System, Allison Freedman

Faculty Scholarship

The United States is facing a dire housing crisis, and most Americans agree that housing is a universal necessity. Yet under current Supreme Court jurisprudence, housing is not a fundamental right, and individuals facing housing insecurity from an eviction are generally not members of a suspect class. This is because eviction is often viewed as an individual problem and a symptom of poverty, which the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed is not a suspect classification. This Article disrupts the superficial narrative that eviction is an individualistic symptom of poverty, and instead views evictions from a systemic and historical perspective. It …

The Judiciary's Arbitrary And Capricious Problem, Jack D. Malich

West Virginia Law Review

The Supreme Court has not been shy in its efforts to change, and in some cases, overturn long-standing administrative law precedent. Yet in one area, arbitrary and capricious review under Motor Vehicles Manufacturers Ass’n v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Co., the Court has ostensibly not acted to modify any part of the doctrine. Recently, however, the federal judiciary has increasingly used arbitrary and capricious review to invalidate major agency actions over what seem to be somewhat minor procedural flaws. The increased stringency of such review has led to increasing conflict between the executive and judicial branch. Two Supreme Court decisions …

Asarco Delenda Est, John Greabe

West Virginia Law Review

ASARCO Inc. v. Kadish is the most important Supreme Court decision addressing the adjudication in state courts of federal claims that Article III’s case-or-controversy requirements would bar lower federal courts from hearing. But there are two serious problems with the reasoning of ASARCO: one involving an error of omission and the other an error of commission. ASARCO’s error of omission is its apparent assumption that a party barred from asserting a federal claim in federal court because of a lack of redressable Article III injury caused by the conduct complained of should face no barriers to obtaining relief on the …

Folder 52, William Johnson, Corrresondence And Photograph, James Nelson Frierson

Frierson, James Nelson (1920-1946)

No abstract provided.

Electing The Supreme Court, Dmitry Bam

Faculty Publications

There is a curious irony in how we select United States Supreme Court justices. According to basic constitutional theory, as well as the arguments made by many leading Framers at the time of the Founding, one of the Court’s primary roles is to serve as a check on the executive and legislative branches when they exceed the constitutional limits imposed by the American people. Yet, we ask those very branches to jointly select the justices responsible for enforcing these limits, leaving the American people with only an indirect (if any) role in the process. Not surprisingly, the justices nominated by …

Rethinking Structural Injunctions In State Constitutional Litigation, Jonathan L. Marshfield

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article’s core claim is that state courts should rethink how they approach remedies in structural injunction cases. Specifically, they should rely less on federal precedent and work to develop unique state doctrines that better reflect state constitutional structure and democratic design. This Article argues that the predominant federal rationales for limiting equitable relief neither sufficiently engage with state constitutional structure nor with the nature of state constitutional democracy. Instead, they tend to simply parrot ideas and arguments the United States Supreme Court developed under the federal Constitution that do not have the same relevance or salience when deciding remedies …

Securities Arbitration Case Law Update 2024–2025 (July 2025), Elissa Germaine, Anthony Rivera

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

This article summarizes recent cases regarding the constitutionality of FINRA and leading arbitration cases that are of particular relevance to securities arbitration practitioners.

Let Sleeping Dogs Lie: A Comparative Analysis Of The Dormant Commerce Clause And Internal Trade Barrier Mitigation, Naman Patel

Washington Law Review

The Dormant Commerce Clause jurisprudence of the United States has been one of the most widely criticized doctrines of American constitutional law. However, most of these criticisms fail to consider the economic implications of the Dormant Commerce Clause, namely the benefits this doctrine has provided in facilitating internal free trade amongst the states. This Comment argues that the Dormant Commerce Clause has given American courts an effective tool to promote interstate free trade by removing state regulations that create non-tariff barriers to trade. To support this assertion, this Comment utilizes a comparative constitutional analysis to examine how the constitutional systems …

Sotomayor Cites Maurer Faculty Member In Scotus’ Decline To Hear Alabama Bite Mark Case, James Owsley Boyd

Keep Up With the Latest News from the Law School (blog)

The case of an Alabama man convicted of murdering his wife in 1985 will not be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court, despite evidence that, nearly 40 years later, has been “wholly discredited.”

The Supreme Court denied certiorari in the case of McCrory v. Alabama, but Justice Sonia Sotomayor cited research from Indiana University Maurer School of Law Professor Valena Beety in her concurring agreement with the court’s decision.

Charles M. McCrory was convicted for the murder of his wife, Julie Bonds, based in large part on expert testimony from an odontologist who matched McCrory’s teeth to two bite marks …

Tort Liability For Physical Harm To Police Arising From Protest: Common-Law Principles For A Politicized World, Ellen M. Bublick, Jane R. Bambauer

UF Law Faculty Publications

When police officers bring tort suits for physical harms suffered during protest, courts must navigate two critically important sets of values—on the one hand, protesters’ rights to free speech and assembly, and on the other, the value of officers’ lives, health, and rights of redress. This year courts, including the United States Supreme Court, must decide who, if anyone, can be held accountable for severe physical harms suffered by police called upon to respond to protest. Two highly visible cases well illustrate the trend. In one, United States Capitol Police officers were injured on January 6, 2021, during organized attempts …

De-Facto-Life And The Rare Juvenile, Julie Burke

MC Law Review

We have all been young once. We all remember doing stupid things with our friends growing up. Now imagine if one of those decisions caused you to be thrown into prison for the rest of your life. Despite the United States Supreme Court[s decisions that sentencing juveniles to life in most cases is unconstitutional, lower courts are still giving juveniles de-facto-life sentences.

The United States Supreme Court has recognized that children are different from adults in several recent cases. In 2005, Roper v. Simmons, the Court held that it is unconstitutional to sentence a juvenile to death. More pertinent to …

Cherry-Picking History: Witchcraft, The Common Law, And The Weaponization Of Substantive Due Process, Sarah E. Bradley

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

In 2021, the Supreme Court sharply altered its substantive due process analysis in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, reversing the 49-year-old decision in Roe v. Wade to establish abortion access as a constitutional right. The Court reframed its substantive due process analysis as a two-step test, requiring a right to be narrowly framed and “deeply rooted in history and tradition” before it could be analyzed as “implicit in the concept of liberty,” instead of its previous balancing test that involved a broad description of the right. In the Dobbs majority opinion, the Court cherry-picked elements of common law …

The Twenty-First Century Death Penalty And Paths Forward, Jeffrey Omar Usman

MC Law Review

Today, states are moving closer to another moment of critical decision-making in charting the course of the death penalty in the United States. Unlike the sudden and dramatic immediacy of Furman, however, this moment is arriving through a slower and quieter progression, or perhaps more accurately a deceleration. While not abolished, in many states application of the death penalty is grinding or has ground to a halt. If the status quo holds, the vast majority of defendants who are sentenced to death by the states will instead live out their natural lives in prison for decades dying of old age …

Qualified Immunity: The Court's Brain Child & License To Kill, Laisha Harris

The Bridge: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Legal & Social Policy

Qualified immunity, a defense created by the imagination of the Supreme Court, prevents citizens of their right to hold law enforcement officers liable when they clearly violate a citizens constitutionally protected right. Throughout this paper, I will describe the historical context of Supreme Court decisions regarding qualified immunity, clarifying the errs in logic that perpetuate a system of racial violence, while using the doctrine of stare decisis to justify the overturning of the decisions that created the defense of qualified immunity.

Another Lochner Era?, Wilson Huhn

Duquesne Law Review

Many legal scholars have observed that the current Supreme Court is returning to the doctrines, values, and methods of reasoning that were employed between 1873 and 1937-the Lochner era and the era immediately preceding it.¹ As it did during the Lochner era, the current Supreme Court elevates property rights over personal rights;² strikes down major civil rights legislation;³ arrogates power to itself by ignoring legislative intent and administrative expertise;⁴ and relies on tradition instead evidence-based reasoning to interpret the law.⁵

Is The Business Of The Court (Still) Business?, Jonathan Adler

Faculty Publications

The Roberts Court has long been characterized as a pro-business court, perhaps the most pro-business court in a century. Insofar as this alleged pro-business orientation is due to the Court’s Republican-appointed majority, President Trump’s appointments to the Supreme Court should have magnified the Court’s pro-business orientation. Yet there are reasons to question the general characterization of the Court as “pro-business” as well as the assumption that an increase in the Court’s Republican-appointed majority has increased any pro-business orientation. Quantitative analyses often fail to account for the relative importance of individual decisions, the broader, legal context in which the Court’s decisions …

Against "The Huddleston Test", Dora Klein

Faculty Articles

Many courts—mostly federal, but also some state courts—are misapplying the United States Supreme Court's decision in the 1988 case United States v. Huddleston. These courts have used a single paragraph of dicta from the Huddleston opinion to craft multipart checklist-type "tests" that displace the single requirement of Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence (or corresponding state rules). This displacement risks the admission of other acts evidence without determining whether the evidence is relevant for a non-character purpose by means of inferences that do not involve character. These Huddleston tests thus undermine Rule 404(b)'s prohibition that other acts evidence …

Constitutional Interpretation And Zombie Provisions, Michael L. Smith

Faculty Articles

The United States Constitution and state constitutions contain numerous zombie provisions, including language restricting marriage to relationships between one man and one woman, voter literacy test requirements, disqualification of atheists from serving in office or testifying as witnesses, and pervasive gendered language restricting rights and offices to men alone. Though these provisions are unenforceable due to subsequent amendment, determinations of federal unconstitutionality, or preemption by federal laws, they live on in constitutional text.

This Article addresses the danger of these zombie provisions that has, thus far, been overlooked the prospect that zombie provisions may influence the interpretation of still-living constitutional …

The Innocence Standard: Supreme Court Nominees And Sexual Misconduct, Lisa Avalos

Journal Articles

Should the United States Senate allow judicial nominees who have been credibly accused of sexual misconduct to be seated on the Supreme Court? How should we handle these allegations when they arise during the vetting process? Despite the importance of these questions, lawmakers have failed to address them.

The contentious Clarence Thomas hearings in 1991 featured testimony from Professor Anita Hill and did much to raise Americans' awareness about the prevalence of sexual misconduct in the workplace. Although ProfessorHill subsequently calledfor the Senate to implement aprocess for addressing future sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court nominees, her calls have gone …

Benjamin N. Cardozo Papers, Dr. Lillian & Dr. Rebecca Chutick Law Library

Finding Aids

This finding aid describes the Benjamin N. Cardozo papers, which include handwritten notes, manuscripts, speeches, essays, and correspondence created by or related to Benjamin N. Cardozo. Materials document his legal thought, professional activities, and correspondence, particularly with his secretary Joseph M. Paley. The collection also includes notes on legal concepts and petitions before the United States Supreme Court.

Repository: Dr. Lillian & Dr. Rebecca Chutick Law Library, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University

Extent: 3 linear feet (6 boxes)

Arrangement: The collection is arranged in three series: Writings, Speeches, and Notes; Correspondence; and Other Papers. …

Texans Shortlisted For The U.S. Supreme Court: Why Did Lightning Only Strike Once?, The Honorable John G. Browning

St. Mary's Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Severity Under Scrutiny: The U.S. Supreme Court Battle Over The Fbar Penalty, Beckett Cantley, Geoffrey Dietrich

The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law

In recent years, Congress strengthened federal regulation of foreign bank accounts held by United States citizens. In 1970, Congress passed the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), requiring U.S. citizens to report their foreign bank accounts using a form called the Foreign Bank Account Report, or “FBAR.” However, the Treasury Department rarely enforced this requirement. After the Patriot Act’s passage came the Bank Secrecy Act 2004 amendment, allowing the Treasury Department to delegate enforcement of U.S. foreign bank account reporting to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) through the FBAR. The amendment’s major change to the law concerned new penalties for non-willful FBAR …

Ochoa, Big Ten Law Deans Pledge Support For Diversity Ahead Of Scotus Affirmative Action Ruling, The Indiana Lawyer

Christiana Ochoa (7/22-10/22 Acting; 11/2022-)

s the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hand down a decision that could fundamentally alter affirmative action, a group of law school deans — including Dean Christiana Ochoa of the Indiana University Maurer School of Law — has issued a statement affirming the deans’ commitment to diversity.

The group of 15 deans represent Big Ten law schools, including IU Maurer. In their statement — which IU Maurer posted to its official Facebook page — the deans say they are “joining together to affirm our commitment to advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion through legally permissible means, regardless of the outcome of …

Faux Advocacy In Amicus Practice, James G. Dwyer

Pepperdine Law Review

Amicus brief filing has reached “avalanche” volume. Supreme Court Justices and lower court judges look to these briefs particularly for non-case-specific factual information––“legislative facts”—relevant to a case. This Article calls attention to a recurrent yet unrecognized problem with amicus filings offering up legislative facts in the many cases centrally involving the most vulnerable members of society—namely, non-autonomous persons, including both adults incapacitated by mental illness, intellectual disability, or other condition, and children. Some amici present themselves as advocates for such persons but use the amicus platform to serve other constituencies and causes, making false or misleading factual presentations about the …

The Intersection Of Judicial Interpretive Methods And Politics In Supreme Court Justices’ Due Process Opinions, Julie Castle

The Compass

The Supreme Court, a nine seat bench of unelected and lifetime tenured Justices, determines the constitutionality of dozens of cases each year. In this thesis, I research to what extent the political affiliation of the Justices affects the judicial decision making process and, ultimately, case outcomes. Using pattern matching, I evaluate due process opinions from Justice Breyer, Justice O’Connor, and Justice Scalia, all of whom have established constitutional analysis methods, in order to determine if they reasonably adhere to their established method. Due to the highly political nature of due process cases, variance between the expected (adherence to the Justices’ …

The New Insular Cases, Willie Santana

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

The Insular Cases is a name given to a series of cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court dealing with the status of the territories the United States acquired at the turn of the twentieth century. The Insular Cases rely on outmoded assumptions about the peoples who live in those islands, ninety-eight percent of whom belong to racial and ethnic minorities, and extend the extraconstitutional doctrine of territorial incorporation, a Plessy-style doctrine of separate governance for these territories that is different than the territories that preceded them. These cases, and the doctrine they announced, have been universally decried as …

Foreword, Alexa Liverano

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

The Indian Child Welfare Act In The Multiverse (Review Of Adoptive Couple V. Baby Girl By Matthew L.M. Fletcher And Kathryn E. Fort, In Critical Race Judgements: Rewritten U.S. Court Opinions On Race And The Law)), M. Alexander Pearl

Other Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Memories, Jack M. Balkin

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Many arguments in constitutional law invoke collective memory. Collective memory is what a group—for example, a religion, a profession, a people, or a nation—remembers and forgets about its past. This combination of remembering and forgetting helps constitute the group’s identity and structures its values and its commitments. Precisely because memory is selective, it may or may not correspond to the best account of historical facts.

The use of collective memory in constitutional argument is constitutional memory. It shapes people’s views about what the law means and why people have authority. Lawyers and judges continually invoke and construct memory; judicial decisions …

A New Takings Clause? The Implications Of Cedar Point Nursery V. Hassid For Property Rights And Moratoria, Benjamin Alexander Mogren

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In part, the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution holds that “no person . . . shall [have their] private property . . . taken for public use, without just compensation.” In Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “a California regulation that permits union organizers to enter the property of agricultural business to talk with employees about supporting a union is unconstitutional.” The purpose of this Note is to discuss what Cedar Point Nursery means generally for the future of Takings Clause analysis and will argue that Cedar Point Nursery should be seen as a …