Constitutional Law Commons^™

Inequality, Collective Power, And Democratic Renewal, Kate Andrias

Faculty Scholarship

With each passing week since this essay series commenced, American democracy has come under greater threat. Leading political scientists have concluded that the U.S. is now better described as a competitive autocracy rather than a democracy. President Trump’s recent attacks on core institutions and violations of the rule of law — from the use of violent force by ICE to the investigation of the Federal Reserve Chair and the threats involving Greenland — were unimaginable even a few months ago.

The Health Status Of U.S. Democracy, Philip C. Bobbitt

Faculty Scholarship

In 1776, Thomas Paine wrote Common Sense, a pamphlet that galvanized American public opinion in the aftermath of the colonial confrontations at Lexington and Concord. The disorganized revolt against British authority was largely undecided on next steps, public opinion having failed to coalesce around capitulation to London or revolution against the British government. Paine’s argument for American independence was uncompromising. Prefiguring the Declaration of Independence that put King George III front and center in the emerging conflict, Paine wrote: “In the monarchies, the King is the Law but in America, Law is King.”

Classical Liberalism And Property, Thomas W. Merrill

Faculty Scholarship

Classical liberalism is characterized by several key attributes. Its central normative criterion is the well‑being of the individual, not some aggregate like society or the nation‑state. Individuals are presumptively regarded as responsible actors, capable of judging their own best interests and accountable for their actions that interfere with the well‑being of others. Because individuals are presumptively regarded as responsible actors, there is a strong preference for imposing only minimal obligations on them through the power of the state, and these usually involve general negative duties that are universal in character, chiefly to forbear from using force or fraud to interfere …

Presidential Immunity: Before And After Trump, Thomas P. Schmidt

Faculty Scholarship

“All the officers of government,” the Supreme Court said long ago, “from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law, and are bound to obey it.” Despite that ringing and categorical language, however, the Court has held that the President — the “highest” and most powerful of all government officers — is “immune” from judicial oversight in several respects. Indeed, when the Court held last Term that former presidents are presumptively immune from criminal prosecution for officials acts, the dissenters warned: “In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.”

This Article …

The Contested Contingent Constitution: Plutocrats, Right-Wing Populists, And Labor Rights In The U.S., Kate Andrias

Faculty Scholarship

Constitutional labor rights have long been negligible in the United States. Now, with the ascendance of Donald Trump’s right-wing authoritarianism, even statutory labor rights are under threat. Yet there is an apparent paradox: While the Trump Administration seeks to declare the NLRB unconstitutional and has decimated federal workers’ rights, Trump’s “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) movement rose to power in part by invoking the plight of the American worker. The more populist wing of the American Right does not expressly challenge the constitutionality of labor law. Indeed, some right-wing populists urge an expansion of labor rights, emphasizing such goals as …

Some Realism About Constitutional Remedies, Thomas P. Schmidt, Gillian E. Metzger

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court has wavered between two approaches to questions of executive power, which are often labeled institutional formalism and realism. Formalism treats an institution like the presidency as a “black box” to which the Constitution assigns certain powers. In Trump v. Hawaii,  for example, the Supreme Court upheld President Trump’s infamous travel ban by focusing not on the “particular President” and his past call for a “complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” but rather on “the authority of the Presidency itself.” That is the language of institutional formalism.

Realism, on the other hand, peers into the “black …

The Unitary Executive And The Federal Reserve, Lev Menand

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court may soon embrace an interpretation of the U.S. Constitution that would significantly expand the power of the president over federal administrators and invalidate key provisions in dozens of federal statutes. A critical question is whether this interpretation — known as the unitary executive theory (UET) — would also render unconstitutional central bank independence (CBI), an arrangement where a country’s monetary policy is formulated by a semiautonomous body of experts insulated from partisan political pressure. Several justices have suggested that it would not, and a growing scholarly literature has proposed ways for the Court to distinguish the …

Drug War Repairs Guarantees, Amber Baylor

Faculty Scholarship

Drug legalization, especially cannabis legalization, is a critical step forward in states’ willingness to address systemic disparities, privacy intrusions, violence, and other harms of the drug war. Yet, reforms center on legalization and repair through a narrow lens, focused on changes to the penal code. The public has found that narrow forms of legalization cannot serve their purported reparative purpose. Narrowly drawn legalization is illusory. Drug war harms and punishment for legalized substance use continue. Legalization reforms are vulnerable to political trends, resulting in rollback and retrenchment of drug war operations.

Legalization cannot deliver on its reparative terms without guarantees. …

Supreme Court And Presidentialism: When Judges Stand In The President’S Way, Michael Procopio Avelar

LL.M. Essays & Theses

This article examines the conditions under which constitutional courts are able to resist executive attempts at institutional capture during periods of democratic erosion. Instead of concentrating on the mechanisms through which courts are attacked, it focuses on how courts effectively behave in the long term when operating under sustained political pressure. The central claim is that judicial resistance cannot be explained solely by formal institutional design or by a general commitment to constitutional principles. It depends on the interaction of three variables: judicial replaceability, external support, and enforcement capacity.

The article develops a typology of judicial responses to executive aggrandizement, …

False Conflict: Colorblindness And Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act, W. Kerrel Murray

Faculty Scholarship

If friends and foes of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 agree on one thing, it is the irrepressible conflict between section 2’s attention to race and constitutional colorblindness.  They’re wrong.  Rightly understood, section 2’s design is remarkably compatible with colorblind constitutionalism’s letter and spirit.

To show how, this Article first returns to section 2’s origins and the preexisting approach its text codifies.  That approach had an underappreciated ethos:  When intentional discrimination’s effects sufficiently distort a political system, an electoral rule’s results might impugn its unconstitutionality, even if the rule had been adopted without discriminatory purpose.  Drawing …

Agenda Control And Precedent, Thomas P. Schmidt

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court now has vast control over its agenda: It has the power to pick and choose not only what cases it will hear through writs of certiorari, but also what specific legal questions within those cases it will consider. As a result, the Court never revisits a precedent unless it has made a prior, discretionary choice to put the viability of a precedent on its agenda. For that reason, the Court’s powers of agenda control play a significant and underappreciated role in maintaining the continuity of the legal order. Indeed, it is no surprise that the formal …

Selective Service And The Separation Of Powers, Jeremy K. Kessler

Faculty Scholarship

The legal history of the U.S. military draft is a case study in creative statutory interpretation. Throughout the twentieth century, this interpretive creativity tended both to expand draft registrants’ substantive and procedural rights, and to recalibrate the roles played by Congress, the courts, and various executive branch factions in the governance of tens of millions of young men. Today’s Military Selective Service Act (“MSSA”) reads much like the law that governed the land when the country last went to war with conscripts during the 1950s and 1960s. But between U.S. entry into the Korean War and its withdrawal from Vietnam, …

Comparative Authoritarian Law, Madhav Khosla, Benjamin L. Liebman

Faculty Scholarship

In recent years, comparative constitutional lawyers have turned their attention to the study of democratic backsliding. However, such scholarship is yet to draw on the now extensive literature on traditional authoritarian systems. The bifurcation of regime type that has structured comparative legal research for decades — for comparative constitutional lawyers and for scholars of specific authoritarian regions — is now under strain. With the global rise of authoritarianism and the growing use of law by authoritarian states, the world is harder to neatly separate into two camps than it once might have been. This Article reflects on how we might …

Drug Scheduling As Institutional Design, Matthew B. Lawrence, David E. Pozen

Faculty Scholarship

Controlled Substances Act (CSA), U.S. drug law has simultaneously fueled mass incarceration, inhibited needed access, and enabled an opioid crisis. To make better choices, this Article argues that the CSA’s institutional design must account for three distinctive features of psychoactive drugs: the prohibition problem (drug bans tend to backfire when demand is inelastic), the pharma problem (drug companies have supercharged incentives to manipulate markets and exploit consumers), and the pluralism problem (drug policy involves irreducibly political questions that no expert discipline can answer). On their own, each of these problems calls for reform to the CSA. Taken together, they call …

Disconsents, Daryl J. Levinson, David E. Pozen

Faculty Scholarship

Consent is an indispensable standard and organizing principle in any liberal legal order that prizes self-directed autonomy, self-identified preferences, and collective agreement. Yet consent’s capacity to advance those values has become increasingly uncertain in a society beset by power imbalances, information asymmetries, and multiple forms of polarization. In this Article, we document how the rise of neoliberalism has led to greater reliance on consent throughout U.S. law, while at the same time leading to greater doubts about its moral efficacy and empirical feasibility. Connecting and generalizing pathologies of consent-based regulation that have been identified within myriad domains, the Article identifies …

Why Constitutional Argument Matters, Philip C. Bobbitt

Faculty Scholarship

The program for this symposium promised that I would be discussing the “descriptive grammar of constitutional law.” To put my purpose less benignly, I should say that I mean to attack the practice of limiting what I will call “modal analysis” to its descriptive virtues. Part of that attack will be the claim that courts and their commentators should pay closer attention to the modal requirements of the fundamental forms of constitutional discourse, but not because straying from this is a kind of grammatical faux pas. After all, if the system I have urged for constitutional analysis — the system …

Taxing The Architecture: A Structural Remedy For Disinformation In The Algorithmic Marketplace, Padmakshi Sharma

LL.M. Essays & Theses

This paper argues that the constitutional assumption that truth will prevail over falsehood in the marketplace of ideas has always depended on three structural preconditions. These conditions were: distributive parity for counter-speech, institutional segmentation of the information environment, and epistemic credibility signals that allowed non-expert audiences to distinguish authoritative from non-authoritative sources. Together, these conditions ensured that truth was granted a structural advantage sufficient to offset the harms of falsehood. Social media platforms have destroyed all of these conditions. The destruction is a consequence of an economic model organized around behavioral advertising and engagement maximization, which systematically amplifies disinformation over …

The Value Of Jury Rights, Philip A. Hamburger

Faculty Scholarship

The right to a civil jury trial is often dismissed as an inefficient anachronism ill suited to the complexities of modern litigation, and these efficiency concerns have long overshadowed any serious defense of the Seventh Amendment. This Article argues that such skepticism profoundly misunderstands the constitutional function and enduring value of civil jury rights. The Article observes that the Seventh Amendment’s jury right was adopted with the understanding that it would come with some inefficiencies and that contemporary concerns about its inefficiencies tend to be overstated. Ultimately, the Article finds that civil juries are essential for structural reasons such as …

Fact Checking Oral Argument In Slaughter, Lev Menand

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court heard argument on Monday in Trump v. Slaughter, a case in which the President seeks to override the power of Congress to limit, through legislation, presidential removal of federal administrators. The argument revealed some confusion about the law and history of federal offices and multiple precedents important to resolving the question. This post examines mistakes and misreadings with respect to: the design of the Federal Reserve System; the meaning of a fixed term; and the Court’s decisions in Marbury v. Madison, Ex Parte Hennen, and Parsons v. United States.

Slaughter, Parsons, And The Original Meaning Of A Term Of Years, Jane Manners, Lev Menand

Faculty Scholarship

This term the Supreme Court is hearing argument in two major cases regarding the law of federal offices. One — Trump v. Slaughter — may strip Congress of the power to place any restrictions on the President’s ability to remove administrators at will. Another — Trump v. Cook — will address how such restrictions work, assuming that the President has to follow them.

The Constitutional Fight Over The Nlra And The Nlrb: A 90 Year Reprise, Kate Andrias

Faculty Scholarship

This article traces renewed constitutional challenges to the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), placing them in historical and doctrinal context. Contemporary attacks — advanced by major corporations and the Trump Administration — revive the constitutional conflicts of the 1930s. Drawing on arguments rooted in the unitary executive theory, as well as Article III and the Seventh Amendment, the current challenges threaten not only the NLRB’s independence but the broader administrative state and the system of labor rights it sustains. At stake is more than institutional design: the dispute reflects a deeper contest over …

Skrmetti Beyond Scrutiny, Kate Redburn

Faculty Scholarship

In United States v. Skrmetti, the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), a state law that prohibits transgender minors from accessing gender-affirming care. For the first time, the Court considered a fundamental question in civil rights law: How does the Fourteenth Amendment regard transgender people? The Court gave little guidance. It did not sort out principles for deciding when anti-transgender discrimination classifies by sex, nor whether transgender people are a suspect class. Instead, the Court held that “[i]n the medical context, the mere use of sex-based language does not sweep a statute within the reach of …

Bank Supervision And Article Ii, Kathryn Judge

Faculty Scholarship

The administrative state is again at a cross roads. The Supreme Court seems poised to continue its march toward trying to fit all of government neatly into one of the three constitutionally enumerated branches. An important front of this shift has been a flattening of the mechanisms through which officers of the United States may be held appropriately accountable for their actions. Waning are the days when Congress had the flexibility to create the institutions it believed were “necessary and proper” for carrying into execution important policy aims and to determine the appropriate mechanisms for accountability in conjunction with considering …

A Conversation About Stare Decisis, Debra A. Livingston, John Q. Barrett

Faculty Scholarship

John Q. Barrett (“JQB”)

Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston, welcome back to St. John’s.

The Chief Judge has been a friend to us for many years. It is an honor to host someone of her talent and someone in her position: the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

We’re going to have a conversation for the first part of the program, about judging, her work, and stare decisis. But first, we need to meet you and hear a little bit about your background — where you are from — and the path that took …

Political Threads In Legal Tapestry: A Computational Analysis Of Executive Branch Legal Interpretation, 1934–2022, Reilly S. Steel

Faculty Scholarship

How does the push and pull between law and politics shape the work of executive branch lawyers charged with providing “neutral” interpretations of the law? To shed light on this longstanding question, this Article undertakes the first large-scale computational analysis of legal interpretation in the executive branch of the United States federal government. Using a new dataset comprised of the texts of 12,879 pages of opinions issued by the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) in the Department of Justice (DOJ), I use machine learning methods to explore markers of partisanship and ideology in these high-profile executive branch decisions.

Several important …

The Right To Grow Old, Jamal Greene

Faculty Scholarship

This chapter considers the status of a constitutional “right to grow old” under the US Constitution. Understood as a “positive” right – ensuring a certain minimum quality of life to people as they face the challenges of aging – such a right may seem unavailing given the austerity in respect to such rights that many lawyers associate with the US constitutional tradition. This chapter shows this view to be premature, at least. Unlike the kinds of positive rights overtly rejected in prior cases, such as rights to certain forms of social welfare or to racial equality, a right to grow …

Disqualification, Immunity, And The Presidency, Gillian E. Metzger

Faculty Scholarship

Trump v. Anderson and Trump v. United States were two momentous decisions in a momentous Supreme Court term. Sharing then former — and now current — President Trump as a party, the decisions hold important implications for presidential power and accountability.

Anderson arose from a suit brought by Colorado voters to challenge Trump’s inclusion on the Republican primary ballot in that state. They argued that Trump organized and incited the mob that attacked the Capitol on January 6, 2021, and disrupted the Electoral College vote count and certification. In their view, this disqualified him from serving as President under section …

Exorcising Hobbes's Ghost: A Future For Constitutional And International Law, Monica Hakimi

Faculty Scholarship

Daryl Levinson wants to liberate constitutional law from the ghost of Thomas Hobbes. More than 350 years ago, Hobbes advanced a conception of law that, for all the efforts to move past it, continues to resonate. In the strictest iteration of the Hobbesian conception, law cannot exist apart from Leviathan, a sovereign state that is the “sole source of legal authority” in a defined territory. As the only possible source of law, Leviathan cannot itself be subject to law. “[I]t exercise[s] legally limitless power over its citizens and interact[s] with other Leviathans in a lawless international arena”. It is also …

The Common Law Of Constitutional Conventions, David E. Pozen

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Jill Lepore’s Jorde Symposium lecture paints a rich portrait of state constitutional conventions as engines of democratization during the 1800s and issues a dire warning about the United States’ ongoing amendment drought. Citing their unfamiliarity, however, Lepore declines to consider federal constitutional conventions as a possible corrective. In this response Essay, I argue: first, that Lepore’s marginalization of Article V’s convention mechanism is in tension with her own historical and normative account; second, that while Lepore’s wariness of conventions is entirely understandable given the state of our politics — and entirely commonplace among progressives — it carries significant risks …

Loper Bright And The Great Writ, Anthony G. Amsterdam, James S. Liebman

Faculty Scholarship

Chevron deference is dead. The Court’s forty-year, seventy-decision experiment with Article-III-court deference to “reasonable” agency interpretations of ambiguous federal statutes failed, killed in part by concern that it unduly curbed the “judicial Power” to enforce the rule of law in the face of politics, partisanship, and mission-driven agency decision-making.

“AEDPA deference” lives. The Court’s twenty-five-year, seventy-two decision experiment with Article-III-court deference to “reasonable” state-court interpretations of the Constitution under the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act continues to relegate criminal defendants to prison or death, notwithstanding federal habeas judges’ independent judgment that the state courts have misread or misapplied …