Constitutional Law Commons^™

Veterans' Benefits Exceptionalism After Axon: Johnson V. U.S. Congress And The Future Of Structural Constitutional Review In Va., Robert Molina

ConLawNOW

This Essay addresses the pending case before the U.S. Supreme Court, Johnson v. U.S. Congress, and argues that the Court should resolve the tension between regular federal jurisdiction and specialized administrative court jurisdiction for veterans’ benefits claims. Veterans’ benefits exceptionalism, it asserts, should not overcome the usual federal court process. Ordinary benefits-entitlement claims, and some statutory-validity claims, may properly remain in the specialized pipeline established by the Veterans’ Judicial Review Act. But structural constitutional challenges to the Veterans Administration adjudicatory apparatus should receive immediate district court review when they satisfy the three-factor test the Court applies to determine whether …

The Norm Against Nakedly Partisan Justifications And The Callais Exception, Jason Marisam

ConLawNOW

Public law has long maintained a norm against nakedly partisan justifications: while officials may sometimes pursue partisan ends in office, they must justify their actions in court with reasons that do not roughly equal “this benefits my political party” or “this hurts the opposition.” This norm has operated across doctrinal fields, including public employment, administrative law, and election law. In the 2025-26 term, in Louisiana v. Callais, the U.S. Supreme Court abandoned the norm entirely in the redistricting context, treating a state’s pursuit of partisan advantage as a legitimate interest that can defeat a claim under the Voting Rights …

Book Review: Judicial Originalism As A Byproduct Of An Overly Difficult Amendment Process: Jill Lepore's We The People, Charles Britton

ConLawNOW

This essay reviews the book by Jill Lepore, We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution, winner of the 2026 Pulitzer Prize for history.  It explains how Lepore examines the history of constitutional amendment—both successes and failures—to argue that frequent amendment was the democratic intent of the Framers. And shows how this amendment philosophy contradicts the originalism of the current Supreme Court.

Book Review: After Apprendi And Erlinger, The Jury - Not The Judge - Determines Whether Or Not The Defendant Is A Habitual Traffic Offender, Harvey Gee

ConLawNOW

This book review discusses Justice Abandoned: How the Supreme Court Ignored the Constitution and Enabled Mass Incarceration by Rachel Barkow. The review concludes that the book persuasively argues that from the 1960s through the 1980s, the Supreme Court repeatedly departed from constitutional text, history, and precedent in expanding the government’s power to arrest, prosecute, and detain. And contends that these trends both curtailed individual liberty and worsened racial inequality. The review then builds on Barkow’s important scholarship to extend her conversation to cover criminal litigation in general jurisdiction state courts—where people are compelled to go when they are cited or …

The Holy Trinity: Religion Clauses And Education Funding On The Roberts Court, Philip T.K. Daniel, Jeffrey C. Sun

ConLawNOW

The Supreme Court’s trinity of education subsidy cases have created an emergent pattern in education funding cases that extend much further than just emphasizing rules of neutrality and accommodation. These also potentially harm minoritized perspectives and identities by moving far beyond historic doctrinal groundings of separation of church and state. In three key cases all authored by Chief Justice Roberts, Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer (2017),  Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (2020), and Carson v. Makin (2022), the Court in this “Holy Trinity” of decisions moved from a theory of benevolent neutrality to policy abdication, relinquishing …

Book Review: Justice Breyer's Problematic Pragmatism, Mark S. Kende

ConLawNOW

Courts often face difficult questions of statutory interpretation and constitutional interpretation. Various judges take different approaches. This essay reviews the book, Reading the Constitution, Why I Chose Pragmatism Not Textualism, authored by former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, who used methods that were often in the Court minority. Justice Breyer argued in favor of relying on purpose in federal statutory interpretation cases, and in favor of pragmatic balancing in federal constitutional cases. He was anti-formalistic and therefore generally opposed to textualism or originalism. The essay argues that this trade publication, intended for a general audience, has strengths and …

The President As Agent: Reframing The Major Questions Doctrine, Matthew Collins

ConLawNOW

On the heels of the Learning Resources v. Trump decision, this Essay argues that agency theory provides an important framework for understanding the major questions doctrine. This perspective has received little attention in legal scholarship. The Essay casts the major questions doctrine in a new light by framing it as a constraint on the president acting as Congress’s agent. By highlighting this bridge between private-law agency principles and public law, the piece offers two novel insights. First, it reconceptualizes the relationship between the major questions and nondelegation doctrines: the former addresses the unfaithful execution of Congress’s directives by the executive …

Note: Antitrust Law In Professional Sports: How Major League Baseball Has Continued Being The Exception To The Rule, Joey Martinez

ConLawNOW

This Note argues that baseball should be put on the same playing field as other professional sports leagues. It explores the legal anomaly of baseball’s antitrust exemption and argues that either the Supreme Court or Congress should remove the exemption to subject Major League Baseball to federal antitrust laws to increase competition in professional baseball and improve conditions in the minor leagues. The article traces the history of baseball’s hundred-year-old antitrust exemption and details how the federal courts and Congress have treated it, including recent attempts by Congress to repeal baseball’s exemption. It then compares baseball to other professional and …

Book Review: We're All Traditionalists Now (Most Of The Time), Richard H. Fallon, Jr., The Changing Constitution: Constitutional Law In The Trump-Era Supreme Court, Michael Gentithes

ConLawNOW

This review highlights the scope and importance of Richard Fallon’s book, The Changing Constitution: Constitutional Law in the Trump-Era Supreme Court. Fallon, a giant of constitutional work, provides a comprehensive, accessible, and vitally important catalogue of the Court’s methodological changes in his posthumously published book. The book argues that while textualism and originalism “have achieved unparalleled prominence,” the Court is also “not consistently originalist” and often relies on a version of traditionalism, similar to but importantly distinct from originalism, that marks an important and undertheorized change. And in yet other areas, the Court eschews either originalism or traditionalism for …

What Motivates Selectors To Pick A Woman Justice?, Maria C. Escobar-Lemmon, Alice J. Kang, Miki Caul Kittilson, Shan-Jan Sarah Liu

ConLawNOW

This article examines increases in women’s appointment to high courts around the world. It builds on research suggesting that movement by countries to appoint the first women to important benches often influenced neighboring countries. The same authors here look at the related feature that women in advanced industrial countries are appointed to constitutional and supreme courts sooner when subject to electoral pressure. They suggest that electoral pressure is not defined by the left-right ideological spectrum, but rather depends on a more specific support for gender equality.

Activist Judicial Restraints, Michael Gentithes

Akron Law Faculty Publications

For decades, jurists and scholars have touted the virtues of judicial restraint—a characteristic of judges who only adjudicate issues they are competent to resolve, thereby avoiding political thickets and preserving their authority. Judicial restraint is ingrained in justiciability doctrines that emanate from Article III of the Constitution. When applied evenhandedly, standing requirements, the political question doctrine, and prudential manageability prerequisites to litigation help the Court maintain an appropriately restrained docket.

The Roberts Court falls well short of this restrained ideal in potentially dangerous and destructive ways. The Court has changed justiciability doctrines into “activist judicial restraints” that, rather than avoiding …

Checks, Balances, Tariffs, And Justice Kavanaugh, Stanley I. Langbein

ConLawNOW

Justice Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion in FCC v. Consumers Research was remarkable in a number of respects, principally because it expressed very strong views on matters currently under consideration by the Supreme Court, although some of the issues he resolved were not issues posed by the Consumers’ Research case itself. Foremost among the positions he expressed were a muted version of the nondelegation doctrine and the view that the major questions doctrine has virtually no application to matters involving foreign affairs. The tariff decision now pending before the Court, in the V.O.S. Enterprises and Learning Research cases, may present a collision …

Fundamental Fairness Guides The Supreme Court's Criminal Justice Decisions In The 2024-2025 Term, Sharon R. Fairley

ConLawNOW

During the 2024-2025 term, the Supreme Court decided fifteen cases related to the criminal justice system. These cases were brought by criminal defendants seeking post-conviction relief and civil litigants seeking redress for governmental harms arising out of criminal processes. Remarkably, two-thirds of the cases resulted in decisions favoring defendants or civil litigants opposing the government. This Article argues that the pro-defendant outcomes from this term are consistent with a recent trend in the Court’s decisions favoring defendants in these types of cases. The pro-defendant outcomes from the 2024-2025 term generally resulted from the less conservative justices aligning with the liberal …

Book Review: Robert J. Jarvis, The Neglected Amendments Of The U.S. Constitution: Text, History, And Interpretation, Jonathan E. Moore

ConLawNOW

This essay offers an engaging review of the casebook, The Neglected Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, by Professor Robert Jarvis. While most lawyers, and many nonlawyers, could readily identify many of the “big twelve” constitutional amendments, few are familiar with the other fifteen. This book focuses on the neglected fifteen, arguing they deserve sustained attention as historically and politically important today. Topics include several amendments potentially going in play, such as the Twenty-second limiting the president to two terms, Twenty-fifth on presidential succession and disability, Twenty-seventh on congressional pay raises, and the Ninth on rights retained by the people. …

Stare Decisis After The Rejection Of Lockstepping In State Constitutional Law: An Ohio Perspective, Jonathan L. Entin

ConLawNOW

State constitutions contain numerous rights-protecting provisions that are analogous to provisions of the United States Constitution. But lawyers and courts often ignored state constitutions. Even when courts interpreted state constitutions, they often followed an approach known as lockstepping: state constitutional rights were viewed as having the same meaning as analogous federal provisions, even when the state provisions had different wording and were adopted for different purposes at different times than their federal analogues. In recent decades, however, commentators and judges have claimed that state constitutions might afford greater protection to individual rights than the U.S. Constitution. The growth of the …

Fcc V Consumers' Research: The Non-Delegation Doctrine And The Power To Tax, Bernard W. Bell

ConLawNOW

This Essay examines the 2025 Supreme Court case of Federal Communications Commission v. Consumers’ Research which seemingly involved an esoteric question of telecommunications law, but instead provided the Court with an opportunity some Justices have long sought to prune a foundational doctrine of the administrative state—the nondelegation doctrine. The nondelegation doctrine has garnered considerable judicial and academic attention, especially in comparison to the paucity of cases invalidating federal statutes on such grounds. The Court could have abandoned the forgiving “intelligible principle” test applied to congressional delegations for almost one hundred years, or, more cautiously, could have crafted a special rule …

Book Review: Jonathan Gienapp, Against Constitutional Originalism: A Historical Critique, Timothy Smith

ConLawNOW

This essay reviews the new book, Against Constitutional Originalism by Professor Jonathan Gienapp. It shows how this important book complicates the legal theory of originalism and its understanding of the Constitution. Gienapp convincingly shows that Founding-era Americans had a very different understanding of the nature of constitutions—what they are and how they worked. The conception of the Constitution that feels natural to modern Americans actually developed gradually in the decades and centuries after the Founding and was not the original meaning. Gienapp contends that this creates foundational problems for the originalist approach to Constitutional interpretation. It exposes the fundamental misunderstanding …

Police Officer Use Of Force And Officer-Created Jeopardy After Barnes V. Felix: The Supreme Court's Important (Albeit Incomplete) Step In The Right Direction, Cynthia Lee

ConLawNOW

This essay analyzes the Supreme Court’s 2025 unanimous decision in Barnes v. Felix rejecting the moment of threat doctrine that limited courts assessing the reasonableness of a law enforcement officer’s use of force. Under this narrow time-framing approach, courts were limited to considering only those facts and circumstances known to the officer at the moment of the threat, and acts occurring before the officer seized the individual that may have contributed to the dangerous situation could not be considered. Rejecting this narrow approach, the Court reaffirmed its longstanding rule that in assessing the reasonableness of an officer’s use of force …

Personal Jurisdiction And The Fifth Amendment, Scott Dodson

ConLawNOW

The Supreme Court has avoided clarifying the relationship between federal-court personal jurisdiction, congressional statutes, and the Fifth Amendment. Until now, that is. In June 2025, the Court decided two important cases involving constraints on a federal court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction outside of Rule 4(k)(1)(A), which typically ties federal-court personal jurisdiction to state-court personal jurisdiction. This brief essay explains and analyzes those cases, situating them in the Court’s larger agenda for personal jurisdiction. It also discusses some open questions raised by the decisions and the role that personal jurisdiction in the United States may now play on the global stage.

A Reflective Case Study Of Leadership Models In The Fight For Abortion Access, Jamie R. Abrams

ConLawNOW

This Essay presents a reflective case study on divergent leadership models in the fight for abortion access. Just as scholars study what is happening regarding abortion access, it is equally important to study how people advocate for supportive laws and policies, where they advocate, and who they center in the advocacy, so that tactics remain effective in a rapidly evolving legal, political, and social landscape. This Essay analyzes the “I Stand with Planned Parenthood” advocacy campaign of the 2000s as an example of a centralized and individual leadership model, and it identifies strategic strengths and weaknesses of that approach. This …

It's Not About Children: How Gender Resentment Shapes Public Opinion On Abortion In The United States, Nicole Kalaf-Hughes, Debra Leiter

ConLawNOW

The debate around women’s reproductive health care, and particularly restrictions on abortion, remains a hotly contested area of American politics. Increasingly, restrictions on abortion access have become politically salient and increasingly common. While traditional justification from anti-abortion forces often rests on arguments about the reverence for life, increasingly we have seen an emphasis on the argument that anti-abortion policy protect women and children. Yet if those preferences truly drive abortion attitudes, then the same attitudes that predict abortion restrictions should also predict preferences for policies that materially support women and children. However, if instead attitudes towards women’s place in society …

Comparative Lessons For Enhancing Representation In The U.S. Judiciary - And Countering Democratic Decline, Shruti Rana

ConLawNOW

This Essay draws upon efforts to build more representative judiciaries in other countries and in international fora to identify promising strategies for enhancing representation in the U.S. judiciary, particularly with respect to gender and parity. It argues that efforts to enhance judicial representation and parity in the United States could benefit from incorporating and building upon international legal principles and the practices of international courts, institutions, and organizations with respect to parity and representation. Crucially, at the same time, efforts to ensure greater representation and parity in U.S. courts could further support the rule of law and counter democratic decline …

The Embodied Nature Of Representation: Reframing "Best Candidate" Narratives In Supreme Court Nominations, Susan Tanner

ConLawNOW

This Essay explores how discourse surrounding Supreme Court nominations reflects broader societal debates about merit, representation, and inclusion. Through analysis of the controversy surrounding President Biden’s commitment to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court, this piece examines three interconnected themes: the embodied nature of representation, the relationship between diversity and judicial legitimacy, and the problematic nature of “best candidate” narratives. It challenges traditional conceptions of merit in judicial nominations and argues for a more nuanced understanding that recognizes the value of diverse lived experiences on the bench.

Black Women Are Supreme: An Empirical Examination Of Black Women's Evaluations Of Ketanji Brown Jackson, Christine M. Slaughter, Camille Burge-Hicks, Nadia E. Brown

ConLawNOW

This article discusses research on the nomination of the first Black woman Supreme Court Justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson. The study examines how emotions and feelings of connectedness to racial and gender groups shaped evaluations of the historic nomination. The research finds that Black women were overwhelmingly enthusiastic about Jackson’s nomination, but that enthusiasm was attenuated by a wide range of variables like interest in politics and the interplay between racial and gender identity. It analyzes how linked fate, a sense of connection to one’s racial group, is associated with the evaluations of the Jackson nomination. The study finds that Black …

Book Review: Jill Elaine Hasday, We The Men: How Forgetting Women's Struggles For Equality Perpetuates Inequality, Taylor King

ConLawNOW

This essay reviews Jill Elaine Hasday’s book, We the Men. It explains how Hasday traces key historical cases and stories of women’s demand for equality that have been forgotten. These important histories include the Nineteenth Amendment, Title VII equal employment, and the Equal Rights Amendment, among others. The book makes the claim that erasing women’s history is problematic for protecting gender equality in the future.

Project 2025 And Due Process After Dobbs, Tracy Turner

ConLawNOW

Project 2025 supporters have been appointed to prominent federal offices in the second Trump Administration. This includes, most notably, the Office of Management and Budget, for a key strategy of implementing the Project’s goals is manipulation of federal funding. This Essay explores what this might mean for women’s rights and suggests a legal theory with which to challenge Project initiatives. Project 2025 repackages a platform that is fully anti-feminist. It is not a new platform. It is the same set of tools that has been used against feminism since the movement’s inception. It expansively seeks policy changes for abortion, contraception, …

Is There A Gender Gap In Campaign Spending Strategies?, Paul S. Herrnson, Charles Hunt, Jaclyn Kettler

ConLawNOW

Women politicians have traditionally faced greater challenges when running for office than their male counterparts. These include less encouragement from political gatekeepers, fundraising obstacles, and voter skepticism about their abilities—particularly among men. Nevertheless, women have made substantial advances in the electoral arena, including increasing their numbers in Congress. Some of these gains can be attributed to changing voter attitudes, the mobilization of female campaign contributors, and recent female politicians learning from the successes of their predecessors. Studies have documented the similarities and differences in how men and women candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives raise money, staff campaign organizations, …

The Myth Of The Fourteenth Amendment And The Civil Rights Act Of 1866, Earl M. Maltz

ConLawNOW

Although legal scholars who focus on the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment disagree about many things, almost all agree that John Bingham proposed what was to become Section One of the amendment in order to definitively establish the constitutionality of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. In fact, however, the Joint Committee on Reconstruction chose to insert the Bingham formulation in place of a provision that would have explicitly constitutionalized the Civil Rights Act. This Essay describes the circumstances that provided the backdrop for the consideration of the Bingham proposal and the implications that this context has for our …

Pipelines & Presidential Candidates: The Dynamics Of Women Running For Public Office In Ohio, Irene Jayapandian, Barbara Palmer

ConLawNOW

Over one hundred years ago, Ohio was at the forefront of women’s political participation. In 1872, Victoria Woodhull became the first woman to run for president. In 1922, six women were elected to the Ohio state legislature for the first time, and Florence Allen was elected to the Ohio Supreme Court, making her the first woman to be elected to any state supreme court in the nation. This research looks at where the state stands now in the number of women running for office, their success rates, and the impact of having a woman at the top of the ticket. …

Is Wisconsin V. Yoder Limited To Its Facts?, Chad Flanders

ConLawNOW

Although Wisconsin v. Yoder is over fifty years old and clearly part of the canon of free exercise law, its meaning is surprisingly contested in a case the Supreme Court decided to hear in early 2025, Mahmoud v. Taylor. In Mahmoud, the plaintiffs are parents who balked at their children being exposed to readings and lessons during the school day that ran counter to their religious views on sexual morality. Their main argument is that they should win because Yoder is directly on point. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected this argument holding that Yoder is basically a …