Constitutional Law Commons^™

Litigating Birthright Citizenship In The Shadow Of World War Ii: The Continuing Relevance Of A Forgotten Case, Rachel E. Rosenbloom

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

With the question of birthright citizenship before the Supreme Court this term in Trump v. Barbara, this Article explores the last time that federal courts confronted an attempt to restrict birthright citizenship. It tells the story of two lawsuits, Regan v. King and Fisk v. Wade, filed in 1942 by organizations seeking to overturn United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the 1898 Supreme Court decision that affirmed the broad scope of birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment. While the cases left little mark doctrinally, their history sheds light on a dimension of birthright citizenship litigation that has …

The History Of The Constitution Is Our Future., Maggie Blackhawk

Michigan Law Review

The Constitution of the United States establishes a government; it also stands as the fundamental law of a people. It shapes daily life, distributes power, and sets a direction for the future. And yet when we ask about the reach and meaning of the Constitution, we are increasingly told to look backward. The answers to our future are said to lie in the past.

Closing Time?, Aziz Z. Huq

Michigan Law Review

A review of No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States. By Erwin Chemerinsky.

The Court And The Killing State, Eric Berger

Michigan Law Review

A review of Secrets of the Killing State: The Untold Story of Lethal Injection. By Corinna Barrett Lain.

The Young And The Lawless, Sarah Medina Camiscoli

Michigan Law Review

A review of Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes. By Leah Litman.

Expressive Association At Work, Elizabeth Sepper, James D. Nelson, Charlotte Garden

Michigan Law Review

Do employers have constitutional rights of expressive association? Two decades ago, in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, the Supreme Court held that a state law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation could not be applied to a membership organization that wished to exclude a gay leader. Today, courts face a rising tide of claims from employers, who argue that Dale constitutionally insulates their hiring and firing decisions from antidiscrimination law. A narrow majority of courts have denied such claims, holding that Dale does not apply at work. Increasingly, however, courts are siding with these employers, eliding any distinction …

Tax Laws And Proportionality: Analyzing Implementation And Advocating For Reform, Moshe A. Jaffe

SJD Dissertations

The application of judicial review to tax legislation presents unique challenges and inconsistencies. This study contends that the proportionality doctrine, widely used in numerous legal systems, offers the best framework for reviewing the constitutionality of tax laws. By examining the implementation of proportionality in countries such as Germany, Israel, and Canada, this research argues that adopting this doctrine—excluding the Stricto Sensu sub-test—could provide a more consistent and fair method for judicial review of tax legislation. Specifically, this approach avoids the indeterminacy and subjectivity often associated with open-ended balancing, while still ensuring that tax measures serve legitimate aims and employ means …

The Crisis Of Appropriations Law, Samuel R. Bagenstos

Articles

Appropriations law is a unique body of federal law.  Appropriations law imposes its own somewhat baroque set of statutory interpretation principles, approves of very broad delegations to the Executive Branch without meaningful limiting principles, and is often exempt from judicial review.  But perhaps that is all about to change.  Donald Trump’s historically aggressive challenge to Congress’s power of the purse has spurred an unusually large volume of exceptionally high-stakes appropriations law litigation. 

The potential implications go beyond the high-profile issues such as enforcement of the Impoundment Control Act.  In general, the unusual features of appropriations law are built on a …

Repealing Reorgs, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah

Law & Economics Working Papers

Under the Supreme Court's opinion in Moore, it is likely that realization is essential for defining income as a constitutional matter. Therefore, when a transaction involves realization, it should presumptively be taxable unless there are very good reason for nonrecognition of gain. Given this reality, there are good reasons for Congress to consider repealing tax-free reorganizations and the other nonrecognition rules of the corporate tax, primarily for non-tax reasons. Acquisitive A, B, and C reorganizations and acquisitive section 351 transactions typically are used for large public corporations to acquire startups, which encourages monopolies. Triangular mergers raise corporate governance concerns …

(Re)Birth Of A Nation: Reconstruction’S Unfinished Business, Zanita E. Fenton

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

The irony, alluding to the title of the 1915 silent movie Birth of a Nation, seeks to make conspicuous the counter-stories that more authentically account for the “birth” and development of American society. Ku Klux Klan-sponsored propaganda designed to evoke hyper-racist fearmongering and perpetuate sexual paternalism over White women, the plot from Birth of a Nation reflects the paradigmatic race-bait: relentless pursuit of a White woman by a Black man. This storyline was fictionalized, culturally unrealistic and deliberately omitted the very real sexual exploitation of Black women and girls. Birth of a Nation parallels Constitutional history that marginalizes supplemental …

One Hundred Years Of Morales Y Benet V. La Junta Local De Inscripciones: The Use Of The Insular Cases To Deny Women’S Voting Rights In Puerto Rico, Joel Andrews Cosme-Morales

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

The centenary of

Morales y Benet provides an opportunity to reflect on the inequalities women faced under Puerto Rican colonialism in the early 20th century, shaped by the legal imperialism of the United States over the archipelago. This article explores the holding in Morales y Benet v. La Junta Local de Inscripciones and its impact on women’s lives during the last 100 years.

The decision in

Morales y Benet came at a time when women in the mainland United States had already secured the right to vote, following decades of suffrage activism that culminated in the passage of the Nineteenth …

The Imposition Of Constitutional Rights, Alvin Padilla-Babilonia

Michigan Law Review

One of the central principles of constitutionalism is that citizenship stands for equal rights under the law. According to this ideal, a U.S. citizen living in Puerto Rico or Guam should have the same constitutional rights as a citizen living on the mainland. However, throughout U.S. history, constitutional rights have been neither uniform nor centralized. While constitutional rights held importance, they coexisted with ideals of democratic self-governance and legal pluralism. Today, Supreme Court justices and legal scholars argue that all constitutional rights should apply in the territories. This view upholds citizenship, equal rights, and the rule of law. But the …

Trump V. Casa, Inc.: Brief Of Scholars Of Constitutional Law And Immigration As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Samuel Erman

Appellate Briefs

Amici are law professors whose research focuses on constitutional law and immigration. Amici have an interest in ensuring that the Fourteenth Amendment is interpreted in a manner consistent with its text and history, and accordingly have an interest in this case.

Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board V. Drummond, Et Al.: Brief Of Amici Curiae Constitutional And Education Law Scholars In Support Of Respondent, Elise Davis Boddie

Appellate Briefs

As Amici Curiae, the Constitutional and Education Law Scholars listed in the Appendix submit this brief in support of Respondent. Amici are immersed in the study of constitutional and education law through their scholarship and teaching and believe in upholding core constitutional rights in the provision of public education. Amici are acutely aware of the role public education has historically played in preserving and making possible our democratic system of government. Amici seek to assist this Court by explaining how state laws have created charter schools as a means of discharging states’ core constitutional obligations to provide public education …

Disagreement And Historical Argument Or How Not To Think About Removal, Andrea Scoseria Katz, Noah A. Rosenblum, Jane Manners

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Scholars have debated the reach of the President’s power to remove government officers for over one hundred years. This old fight is now suddenly urgent as President Trump asserts far-reaching powers to control the federal bureaucracy and the Supreme Court transforms Unitary Executive Theory into caselaw. Yet the scholarly case for an indefeasible presidential removal power has never been weaker.

This Essay continues an ongoing conversation about how to read some critical early republic evidence about removal. It briefly recapitulates the stakes of the disagreement before offering in-depth analyses of developments in Pennsylvania removal practice, including a reading of the …

Trump V. United States And The Half-Originalist Presidency, Christine Kexel Chabot

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. United States has been criticized for its ahistorical approach to presidential immunity. This Essay offers the first account of the historical mismatch between the Trump Court’s decision to immunize presidential removal power and Founding era conceptions of the presidency. Unlike the presumptive immunity that the Court recognized for most other official presidential acts, the immunity afforded for presidential removal power is absolute. The Court ruled that the President’s “unrestricted power of removal” can never be regulated by Congress or considered as evidence of wrongdoing, even when the President threatens removal to effectuate …

The Misuse Of Ratification-Era Sources By Unitary Executive Theorists, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This symposium essay suggests that, given an ostensibly originalist Supreme Court, the future depends on getting the past right. The unitary executive theory is approaching its political and doctrinal zenith in 2025, at the very moment it is approaching an evidentiary crisis. This essay details that crisis: a subset of misuses and misrepresentations of sources in the unitary executive scholarship. This subset focuses on serious misrepresentations of the Ratifications debates.

The Ratification debates appropriately have become the primary source of evidence for original public meaning, the dominant theory of originalism. The Ratification debates have always been a significant problem for …

Supreme Court Gives States The Green Light To Go Ham: The Dormant Commerce Clause In Renewable Energy In Light Of National Pork Producers, Ellie Carl

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

Two years ago, the Supreme Court slaughtered the Dormant Commerce Clause in its decision in National Pork Producers v. Ross. While the case is not explicitly about environmental law, it significantly affects environmental laws and policies, especially pertaining to state renewable portfolio standards. These state policies are especially prone to Dormant Commerce Clause litigation, given the interstate nature of electric grids. This paper argues that the scope of the Dormant Commerce Clause in light of this decision is appropriate for ensuring that states have adequate wiggle room in renewable energy regulation, but not an excessive amount of leeway so …

Democratizing Constitutional Memory, Reva B. Siegel

Michigan Law Review

The Court regularly makes claims on the past—claims that have grown in prominence since conservatives on the Roberts Court invoked “history and tradition” to overrule longstanding case law on religious free exercise, the right to bear arms, and the right to abortion in its 2021 term and to threaten other rights since. The Court claims its historically based approach constrains judges by focusing interpretation on objective and impersonal facts in the past.

Constitutional Iconoclasm, Andrew J. Lanham

Michigan Law Review

A review of The Constitutional Bind: How Americans Came to Idolize a Document That Fails Them. By Aziz Rana.

Some Realism About Originalism, William J. Novak

Michigan Law Review

A review of Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation. By Jack M. Balkin.

Constitutional Failure, Erwin Chemerinsky

Michigan Law Review

A review of The Constitution of the War on Drugs. By David Pozen.

Exorcising Hobbes’S Ghost: A Future For Constitutional And International Law, Monica Hakimi

Michigan Law Review

A review of Law for Leviathan: Constitutional Law, International Law, and the State. By Daryl Levinson.

Retrenchment By Diversion: The New Politics Of Parental Rights, Mary Ziegler, Maxine Eichner, Naomi Cahn

Michigan Law Review

For the past century, the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the importance of parents’ rights to direct their children’s upbringing and education. Yet suddenly the rhetoric of parental rights is being used to ground a broad range of claims on issues such as what can be taught in public schools, when minors can access gender-affirming care, or who will be punished for helping minors travel for abortion care. Why have parental-rights claims surged so visibly in contemporary law and politics? And are all the new arguments made under the banner of parental rights equally rooted in constitutional precedent?

This Article …

Perttu V. Richards: Brief Of Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Margo Schlanger

Appellate Briefs

Amici are professors of law who have studied, taught, and written about prisoner litigation and about rights to jury trials. They submit this brief to share their views, based on that experience, on the proper interpretation of the Prison Litigation Reform Act) in light of the important jury trial rights at stake and the practical realities of prisoner litigation.

Federal Communications Commission V. Consumers' Research: Brief Of Julian Davis Mortenson And Nicholas Bagley As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Julian Mortenson, Nicholas Bagley

Appellate Briefs

Julian Davis Mortenson and Nicholas Bagley are professors at the University of Michigan Law School. Mortenson is a specialist on the history of executive authority and the separation of powers. Bagley is a leading scholar in administrative law. They are the co-authors of Delegation at the Founding, 121 Colum. L. Rev. 277 (2021), a leading article examining Founding- era constitutional principles regarding legislative delegations of authority, and Delegation at the Founding: A Response to the Critics, 122 Colum. L. Rev. 2323 (2022).

The Comstock Act’S Equal Protection Problem, Danny Y. Li

Michigan Law Review Online

Following its victory in Dobbs, the antiabortion movement has set its sights on a national abortion ban. Affiliates of the second Trump Admin- istration—including the vice president-elect—have endorsed the re- newed enforcement of the 1873 Comstock Act as one avenue for implementing such a ban. This Essay argues that contemporary enforce- ment of the Comstock Act as a national abortion ban would be unconsti- tutional. The Act violates the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection guarantee because it was enacted with the discriminatory purpose of in- hibiting illicit sex to promote women’s sexual purity. Only contemporary reenactment of the law without constitutionally …

After Courts: Democratizing Statutory Law, Ryan D. Doerfler, Samuel Moyn

Michigan Law Review

In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton argued for locating interpretive authority over law separately from those institutions tasked with formulating it. Hamilton’s vision, never accurate as a description of American practice, has not been credible for a long time. To the extent enormous power is still allocated to judges, our legal institutions have been out of step with our legal theory, which has long regarded them as political actors and policymakers. More practically, every term it is clearer and clearer that the role of the Supreme Court in statutory cases (including checking administrative rulemaking and other processes) is, if anything, …

The New Substantive Due Process, Leah M. Litman

Articles

After the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade, commentators made much about the possible demise of substantive due process—the idea that the Constitution safeguards certain substantive liberties that are not specifically or explicitly spelled out in the Constitution. Judges and scholars are debating which substantive due process decisions are next on the chopping block and whether the entire domain of substantive due process is in jeopardy. But a curious thing happened as the Court scaled back and openly questioned the traditional individual-rights line of substantive due process: Rather than eliminating it entirely, the Court seems to have transposed it elsewhere. …

Inventing Birthright: The Nineteenth-Century Fabrication Of Jus Soli And Jus Sanguinis, Sam Erman, Nathan Perl-Rosenthal

Articles

Formal membership in a state has been an essential political status for well over a century. It is typically gained at birth, either jus soli or jus sanguinis. Jus soli assigns nationality by birth in a nation's territory; jus sanguinis assigns children their parents’ nationality. This article provides an alternative intellectual history of the modern dominance of these principles for attributing nationality. Contrary to prior scholarship, soli and sanguinis were not restatements of existing principles. The soli/sanguinis binary was a nineteenth-century invention. Old-regime European empires attributed membership in the community under one or another single natural law principle. Parentage and …