Constitutional Law Commons^™

When The Second Amendment Meets The Third Dimension: Bruen In The Age Of 3d-Printed Firearms, Andrew Touma

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

3D-printed firearms pose a serious threat to the public by allowing individuals to circumvent traditional regulatory safeguards. Although the first shot from a 3D-printed firearm was over a decade ago, these weapons continue to exploit gaps in the federal regulatory scheme. In the meantime, state governments have adopted a variety of approaches to regulating 3D-printed firearms. As 3D printing pushes firearms technology into the future, the Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen directs Second Amendment doctrine to look to history, leaving questions over whether a decidedly historical methodology could effectively adapt to technological …

Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Possess: Mapping A Potential Second Amendment Challenge To 18 U.S. Code § 922(G)(6), Emil Zakarian

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

For decades, the United States military discharged LGBTQ+ service members based on their sexual orientation, often assigning discharge characterizations that carry enduring legal consequences. One overlooked consequence arises under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(6), which prohibits individuals discharged "under dishonorable conditions" from possessing firearms. Although this provision has received limited judicial scrutiny, the Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen calls its constitutionality into question by requiring that modern firearm regulations be consistent with the Nation's historical tradition of regulation.

This Note argues that § 922(g)(6) is constitutionally vulnerable as applied to veterans discharged solely …

It's In The Money: The Independent Federal Reserve, Kathrynne E. Curtis

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The case at the heart of the current controversy involves the President's firing of a Federal Reserve Governor against a backdrop of crumbling precedent. The backbone of administrative agency independence, Humphrey's Executor, awaits the Supreme Court's judgment. Therefore, distinguishing the Federal Reserve—responsible for controlling monetary policy and setting interest rates—has never been more pressing. This Note argues that the Federal Reserve can be meaningfully distinguished on a historical basis, as the Court suggests in Trump v. Wilcox, by reference to its family tree: the First and Second National Banks. Precedent and the fallout from lapses in the early …

Humphrey's Eulogy: A Functionalist View Of Trump V. Slaughter And The Role Of The Ftc, Alex Zhang

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Trump v. Slaughter presents the Supreme Court with a foundational question about the administrative state: whether the for-cause removal protections afforded to Federal Trade Commission Commissioners under the FTC Act are consistent with Article II's vesting of executive power in the President, and, if not, whether Humphrey's Executor v. United States should be overruled.

In March 2025, President Trump removed two FTC Commissioners without satisfying the statutory standard of inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. The dismissed Commissioners sued, and the District Court for the District of Columbia granted summary judgment in their favor, holding that Humphrey's Executor …

Using Ai To Identify National Security Threats: A Holistic Examination Of The Legal Risks And Increased Need For Regulation, Skylar Mcvicar

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Artificial intelligence (AI) is integrating rapidly into daily practice, including in the national security sector. AI has the potential to improve bureaucratic efficiency, enhance military intelligence and threat assessment, and develop autonomous vehicles and weapons, making it a revolutionary tool in national security. Since AI implementation is a relatively recent phenomenon, there is currently limited governmental regulation in place to safeguard against potential violations of civil liberties and other legal risks. Given AI's capacity to infringe on certain civil liberties such as the Fourth Amendment right to privacy and the Fourteenth Amendment protection against discriminatory policies, establishing strong oversight measures …

Towards State Legislative Codification Of The Wpath Soc Guidelines, Suresh Hanubal

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Transgender rights have increasingly come under assault in the United States. As of early 2026, twenty-seven states have passed either bans or restrictions on access to gender-affirming care. The issue has also become a central focus at the federal level. The U.S. Supreme Court decided United States v. Skrmetti, a case concerning the legality of state restrictions on gender-affirming care, in the 2024 – 2025 term. Moreover, the second Trump administration has been clear that rolling back transgender rights, including access to gender-affirming care, is a priority. In this political environment, where access to gender-affirming care in the United States …

Destabilization Or Clarification: The Potential Impact Of Chiles V. Salazar On Nifla And Other First Amendment Jurisprudence, Zhihan Xu

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

In 2019, the Colorado General Assembly passed the Minor Conversion Therapy Law (MCTL), a statute which prohibits mental health professionals from engaging in conversion therapy for minors. Three years later, Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor and addiction counselor, filed a pre-enforcement challenge and sought a preliminary injunction, alleging that the MCTL improperly abridges her First Amendment right to free speech. Colorado challenged her claim, arguing that the MCTL merely regulates professional conduct and only incidentally (and permissibly) burdens speech. Chiles v. Salazar will decide whether the MCTL is a speech restriction or professional regulation, and, if it is a …

Reflections On Judging At The Intersection Of Constitutional Claims And Public Policy, Kimberly J. Mueller

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Trial courts play an essential role in our judicial system. At the trial level, lived realities meet legal theories, and generalist judges must resolve constitutional disputes, develop the factual record, and administer justice. However, institutions, especially courts, face increasing pressure. This Keynote Address draws on cases over which I have presided to illustrate how careful process in trial courts helps maintain public trust in our institutions. These experiences reveal three lessons that trial courts teach us. First, the people bringing claims matter; they are real individuals seeking relief by telling authentic stories. Second, pleadings matter because they frame and shape …

Mexico’S Judicial Elections And The Politics Of Reform, Amanda Driscoll, Michael J. Nelson, Julio Ríos-Figueroa

Judicature International

No abstract provided.

Applying History As Law: The Role Of Historical Facts In Implementing Constitutional Doctrine, Joseph Blocher, Brandon L. Garrett

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court has long relied on historical evidence in constitutional cases, but recent years have seen a major change in how it does so: not only to interpret the meaning of constitutional text, but to establish doctrinal tests that call for historical evidence to be used in the application of those tests going forward. Broadly speaking, originalism has moved from the realm of legal interpretation to that of law declaration and then to law application. This transformation in the legal significance of history raises important questions for originalism as a practice of constitutional adjudication, not simply a theory …

The Foreign Commerce Power, Kathleen Claussen, Timothy Meyer

Faculty Scholarship

This Article is the first to scrutinize presidential trade authority under the Constitution. The Constitution grants the President no independent power to regulate foreign commerce. That conclusion, while apparent from a straightforward reading of Articles I and II, stands in stark contrast to executive conduct of U.S. trade policy in recent years. This Article traces the roots of this constitutional distortion to a confluence of doctrinal drift and academic oversight. Courts and commentators have increasingly relied on an expansive conception of executive power grounded in a perceived general foreign affairs authority. In doing so, they have blurred the line between …

The Scotus Tournament: Winning Isn't Everything, Tracey E. George, Mitu Gulati, Albert H. Yoon

Duke Law Journal Online

Litigation at the U.S. Supreme Court is a tournament of champions. This Essay presents an empirical analysis of Supreme Court advocacy over time (1970-2023), examining how the elitification of the legal profession has transformed Supreme Court oral arguments. Drawing on a dataset of 7,077 cases and 4,599 private attorneys, we analyze the rise of repeat players and their litigation success. Our findings reveal a transformation. In the 1970s, most Court advocates were rookies: first-time advocates from various backgrounds. Today, a small number of superstars dominate: attorneys with extensive experience, elite law school degrees, Supreme Court clerkships, and stints in the …

Restoring Chevron Deference By Statute, Scott Dodson

Duke Law Journal Online

This paper details a solution for legislatively restoring Chevron deference: amend the APA to direct lower federal courts to give deference to reasonable agency decisions but retain nondeferential judicial review by the U.S. Supreme Court. This solution restores most of the practical benefits of Chevron by giving agencies flexibility to implement congressional policy directives with the expertise they have acquired, by maintaining stability in administrative regulation, and by relieving lower federal courts of the burdens of nondeferential review. And retaining nondeferential judicial review in the Supreme Court will preserve the constitutional role of the judicial branch to say what the …

A Matter Of Public Concern: Wright V. Dorsey And The Need For Speech Protections Beyond Anti-Slapp Law, Henry Valentine

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Wright v. Dorsey, a recent defamation case, demonstrates the limitations of anti-SLAPP ("Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation") law and the need for supplemental speech protections. Joshua Wright, an antitrust law practitioner and former professor, sued Elyse Dorsey and Angela Landry for defamation. Dorsey and Landry had claimed that Wright used his position as their professor (and later employer) to pressure them into non-consensual sexual relationships; Wright acknowledged their relationships but claimed they were fully consensual, and that stating otherwise was defamatory. Anti-SLAPP law failed to protect Dorsey and Landry even though Wright's lawsuit was ultimately a SLAPP. To better protect …

The Rogue Private Company And National Defense Emergencies, Gavin Small

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

This Note explores two overlapping challenges in the United States constitutional and political system. First, the United States increasingly relies on private companies for technologies necessary for national defense. This has given outsized power to a few unelected corporations and people who might have their own incentives that misalign with those of the United States. This is particularly dangerous in an emergency situation where the United States government, not a private company with its own interests, should be making decisions regarding national security. As an example, this Note focuses on the massive role that the company SpaceX plays in the …

Forcing Our Hand: Evaluating The Use Of Force In Responses To Wrongful Detentions Abroad, Tyler J. Marovitz

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Wrongful detentions are on the rise. Over the past ten years, U.S. nationals have increasingly found themselves detained abroad upon spurious allegations, facing trumped-up charges, and deprived of basic due process protections. Most of these detentions occur in countries hostile to the United States: Russia, Iran, North Korea, China, and Venezuela. The U.S. has opted to release rightfully detained foreigners to those nations in exchange for its wrongfully detained nationals. All of this perpetuates a “prisoner bazaar” that encourages unscrupulous nations to continue their bad-faith detentions of U.S. nationals. This Note investigates this emerging issue through a use of military …

Pick Your Precedent: Bostock, Dobbs, And The Uncertain Reach Of Intermediate Scrutiny In United States V. Skrmetti, Molly Pines

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The Supreme Court will yet again wade into highly politically charged waters this term when it decides United States v. Skrmetti, a case about gender-affirming healthcare for minors. More specifically, Skrmetti will decide whether SB1, a 2023 Tennessee law that bans gender-affirming care for individuals below age 18, violates the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The Tennessee Plaintiffs and the Biden administration, which intervened on their behalf, have argued that SB1 unconstitutionally discriminates on the basis of sex and transgender status. In response, Tennessee has argued that SB1 only uses age and medical purpose—not sex or transgender status—to delineate …

Stacked Against Defendants: Retroactivity, Vacatur, And The First Step Act In Hewitt V. United States, Matthew N. Barry

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

In 2018, Congress passed the First Step Act with overwhelming bipartisan support. One of its provisions, § 403, clarifies 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) by eliminating the "stacking" of mandatory minimum sentences for certain firearm offenses for first-time offenders. Section 403(b) makes the provision retroactive so long as "a sentence for the offense has not been imposed" as of the Act's date of enactment.

In 2009, bank robbers Corey Duffey, Tony Hewitt, and Jarvis Ross were convicted of several federal crimes, including stacked § 924(c) offenses. After their sentences were vacated in 2020, they argued that they should be resentenced under …

Fraudulent Transfer Law And Sovereign Immunity: An Actual Abuse Of Federalism?, Kyle Beck

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

After All Resort Group filed for bankruptcy, David Miller, its appointed trustee, sought to claw back tax payments the company had made on behalf of two of its principals to the IRS by arguing the payments constituted fraudulent transfers. Unlike a typical clawback action, however, the trustee brought this proceeding under Section 544(b), rather than the more common fraudulent transfer provision, Section 548, because § 544(b) permits the trustee to rely on state fraudulent transfer law—which has longer statutes of limitations than the federal fraudulent transfer provision. The Government challenged this action, arguing that recovery from the IRS was barred …

Listening On Campus: Academic Freedom And Its Audiences, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

Current debates about campus speech often conflate two related but importantly distinct values: free speech and academic freedom. Both are widely perceived to be in crisis, but they are not interchangeable, and slippage between the two makes it even harder to frame, let alone address, difficult questions about speech in university settings. Many of the most fundamental challenges—indeed, much of what makes campus speech unique in the first place—arise from the need to accommodate both values. In doing so, defenders of academic freedom must, as advocates of free speech have, more clearly articulate an account of listener interests. The basic …

Teaching Firearms Law: One Big Opportunity And Three Pedagogical Challenges, Joseph Blocher, Jacob D. Charles, Darrell A.H. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court’s groundbreaking 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller ushered in a new era for the Second Amendment: one in which the right to keep and bear arms, long dormant as a matter of practical impact and even “embarrassing” as a matter of legal scholarship, vaulted into the front ranks of constitutional law. The Court itself has only revisited the Amendment a few times since then—albeit once by revolutionizing the doctrine. Meanwhile, lower courts have issued thousands of decisions giving shape to the right, while scholars have generated work that is increasingly deep, diverse, and challenging. …

Cost–Benefit Analysis, Matthew D. Adler

Faculty Scholarship

This chapter will address the place of cost–benefit analysis (CBA) in constitutional law, by way of a case study. I’ll describe, and puzzle over, CBA’s absence from most U.S. constitutional doctrines, notwithstanding its major role in U.S. administrative law. The general questions that I seek to illuminate are by no means limited to the U.S. How might CBA figure within the tests that constitutional courts use to adjudicate alleged violations of constitutional rights? How might it serve to determine the structure of constitutional institutions? Would it be justified for CBA to play these doctrinal roles? But these general questions are …

Brief Of Professors Julian Arato, Rachel Brewster, Harlan Grant Cohen, David Singh Grewal, J. Benton Heath, Timothy Meyer, Gregory Shaffer, And Chantal Thomas As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners In No. 24-1287 And Respondents In No. 25-250, Julian Arato, Rachel Brewster, Harlan Grant Cohen, David Singh Grewal, J. Benton Heath, Timothy Meyer, Gregory Shaffer, Chantal Thomas

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

History And Tradition As Heightened Scrutiny, Andrew Willinger

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court is turning to methodologies privileging text, history, and tradition, or THT, to interpret and implement various constitutional provisions. The Court has recently endorsed historically-focused approaches to determine how the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and carry a firearm, how the First Amendment protects the rights to free speech and freedom of religion, and whether the Due Process Clause protects reproductive autonomy, among other questions.

Much scholarship and popular commentary surrounding THT portrays the methodology as sui generis: presenting unique analytical challenges and impervious to direct comparison to existing doctrinal approaches. However, the jurist most …

Judge–Scholar Collaboration And The Second Amendment, Andrew Willinger, Eric Ruben

Faculty Scholarship

Legal scholarship is overly abstract and theoretical, making it unhelpful to judges and lawyers. That, at least, is the classic critique from the bench. When it comes to the Second Amendment, however, a different pattern has emerged: judges consistently cite law review articles and look to the academy for guidance. Most recently, in United States v. Rahimi, some Justices went further, implicitly inviting more scholarly work to help the Court answer open questions raised by its novel methodological approach to the Second Amendment. This Article explores this aberrant trend.

We raise several explanations for the distinctive scholarly role in …

States In The Separation Of Powers, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

What Belongs In A Constitutional Law Casebook?, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

On Responsive Judging, Rosalind Dixon

Judicature International

No abstract provided.

Discharging Equity: Harrington V. Purdue Pharma L.P. And The Validity Of Nonconsensual Third-Party Releases, Andrew Klauber

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

In September 2019, Purdue Pharma L.P. petitioned for bankruptcy in the Southern District of New York. Purdue, which the Sackler family had owned and operated for decades, developed and aggressively marketed addictive opioid products, contributing to the modern opioid epidemic. The tsunami of litigation arising from the opioid epidemic gave rise to claims against Purdue and the Sackler family estimated to total more than $40 trillion, causing Purdue to petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

In Purdue’s plan of reorganization, it employed a nonconsensual third-party release to discharge claims against the Sackler family. Nonconsensual third-party releases controversially enjoin parties to a …

Barcoding Bodies: Rfid Technology And The Perils Of E-Carceration, Jackson Samples

Duke Law & Technology Review

Electronic surveillance now plays a central role in the criminal legal system. Every year, hundreds of thousands of people are tracked by ankle monitors and smartphone technology. And frighteningly, commentators and policymakers have now proposed implanting radio frequency identification (“RFID”) chips into people’s bodies for surveillance purposes. This Note examines the unique risks of these proposals—particularly with respect to people on probation and parole—and argues that RFID implants would constitute a systematic violation of individual privacy and bodily integrity. As a result, they would also violate the Fourth Amendment.