Constitutional Law Commons^™

Memory, Resistance, And Doubt, Richard Primus

Articles

Burroughs v. United States is not a famous case. But it could be. Its central character was a famous man. James Cannon, Jr., was a bishop in the Methodist church, a player in the worlds of business and banking, a ruthless political power broker, and a zealous Prohibitionist. In Virginia, where he lived, his role within the Democratic Party earned him the informal title of “the dry boss of the state,” and his influence extended well beyond the Old Dominion. Indeed, the essayist H.L. Mencken identified Cannon as the most important Prohibitionist in the country. “More than any other man,” …

Fletcher's Uncertainty Principle, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

am here to talk about the equal protection challenges facing Indian Country. I am going to give you my thesis right off the bat, which is that Haaland v. Brackeen decided the equal protection issue for us already, and we should behave as if it is decided.

I will explain what I mean by that. But first, let’s talk about what we will call the Mancari rule. The Mancari rule is fundamentally what Indian law is about, and it goes something like this—I am going to more or less paraphrase the guiding principle of Morton v. Mancari from 1974. Any …

The Basis For Election Exceptionalism In Justiciability And Related Doctrines: Constitutional Compensation In Light Of Purcell, Vikram D. Amar, Evan H. Caminker

Articles

Pursuant to the so-called Purcell doctrine, lower federal courts (and perhaps the U.S. Supreme Court itself) are supposed to refrain from issuing remedies that would alter the rules for election administration in the run-up to Election Day. Whether or not the Purcell rule’s purported justifications are persuasive (e.g., concerns about voter confusion, candidate and campaign expectations, smooth operation of election logistics), one tremendously problematic entailment of Purcell is that elections are held (and candidates are elected and policies are determined) even when serious doubt exists about the legality of the contests under federal statutes and the Constitution. Because of these …

A Republic Of Spending, Jonathan S. Gould

Michigan Law Review

Large-scale spending measures make up many of Congress’s most important recent contributions to national policymaking. Congress has appropriated trillions of dollars to respond to emergencies, fight climate change, expand social safety net programs, spur technological innovation, and strengthen national infrastructure. While the contemporary Congress’s failure to enact landmark regulatory statutes causes many to characterize it as dysfunctional, Congress in fact remains quite active—its policymaking energy is simply concentrated in the spending domain.

Congress’s use of spending rather than regulatory legislation as its primary way of shaping national policy marks a significant shift in American governance. This Article examines the causes …

Tax Delegation Post-Loper Bright, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah

Law & Economics Working Papers

In its recent decision in Loper Bright, the Supreme Court has fundamentally shifted the contours of judicial deference to administrative interpretations by repealing the Chevron doctrine. However, while the Court has curtailed deference, it simultaneously underscored the legitimacy of statutory delegation to agencies. The Internal Revenue Code (Code) is the most intricate legislative text within the U.S. legal framework, necessitating significant technical expertise for its application. It is, therefore, unsurprising that Congress often delegates authority to the IRS for the execution of the statute. In light of the Court's decision in Loper Bright, it becomes imperative to clarify the parameters …

Standing And Probabilistic Injury, Curtis A. Bradley, Ernest A. Young

Michigan Law Review

Standing to sue often turns on questions of probability. For example, public law plaintiffs must show that they are likely to be affected by allegedly unlawful government surveillance or environmental policies, and consumers may wish to sue private defendants over false credit reporting or data breaches that may or may not cause them financial or reputational harm in the future. This Article offers a framework for resolving a wide range of these “probabilistic standing” issues. Our core claim is that courts and commentators ask too much of standing doctrine in probabilistic cases. First, scholars sometimes seek a unified theory of …

Original Public Meaning And Pregnancy’S Ambiguities, Evan D. Bernick, Jill Wieber Lens

Michigan Law Review

Relying on 1868 abortion statutes, the 2022 Supreme Court held in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that no federal constitutional right to abortion exists. Mere months later, a petition for certiorari asked the Court to determine that “person” in the Fourteenth Amendment includes prenatal existence, which would require criminalization of abortion in all states. The petitioners cited Dobbs and claimed the authority of legal history in 1868 and before. These arguments will be heard again, and they are increasingly framed in terms of the “original public meaning” of the Fourteenth Amendment.

This Article refutes these arguments on their own …

Federal Indian Law As Method, Matthew L. M. Fletcher

Articles

Morton v. Mancari is well-known in Indian law circles as a foundation for the tribal self-determination era, which is generally understood to have begun in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The case involved an Act of Congress that required the federal “Indian Office” (now called the Bureau of Indian Affairs) to grant preference in employment to “Indians.” The case is typically understood as the basis for analyzing how federal statutes that apply exclusively to Indian people do not implicate the anti-discrimination principles of the United States Constitution. This understanding of the case, while correct, is too narrow.

Chevron And Stare Decisis, Kent Barnett, Christopher J. Walker

Articles

This Term, in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Commerce, the Supreme Court will expressly consider whether to overrule Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.—a bedrock precedent in administrative law that a reviewing court must defer to a federal agency’s reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute that the agency administers. In our contribution to this Chevron on Trial Symposium, we argue that the Court should decline this invitation because the pull of statutory stare decisis is too strong to overcome.

Don't Call It 'Privacy': Data Protection, From Ideas To Constitutional Law, Raphaël Beauregard-Lacroix

SJD Dissertations

Data protection law has been subject to various criticisms, among which is one of a fundamental kind: devoted to procedures, it lost sight of its privacy-bound origins. This dissertation aims to provide a novel historical and comparative account of the transatlantic development of data protection law, from the origins to this day, identifying how it may yet succeed in reaching the policy goals its original proponents imagined, and untangling key legal concepts along the way.

The regulatory concept of data protection was founded on three basic principles: purpose limitation, universality, and institutional supervision and enforcement. These three principles trace their …

Duties Owed To The Public, Nicolas Cornell

Book Chapters

How does private law conceptualize duties owed to the public-at-large? Are they owed to individual members of the public? This question is interstitial in two ways—it concerns both the space between public law and private law and the spaces between different fields of private law. Different areas of private law handle it in contradictory ways. Duties of public officials are regarded as owed to individual citizens for the purposes of contract law’s preexisting duty rule but as not owed to individuals as a matter of tort law’s public duty rule. Violations of public property might be enforceable through public nuisance, …

Constructing Confrontation: Between Constitutional And Evidence Theory, Michael S. Pardo

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Crawford v. Washington was significant as a matter of both constitutional and evidence law. From a constitutional perspective, the opinion was significant because of its “original public meaning” approach to interpreting the text of the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause. From an evidentiary perspective, the opinion was significant in recognizing a doctrinal rule that potentially excludes evidence in criminal trials that would otherwise be admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence as well as State evidence laws. This Essay explores Crawford and the subsequent Confrontation Clause cases from these distinct perspectives—illuminated by constitutional and …

Revising The Indian Plenary Power Doctrine, M. Henry Ishitani, Alexandra Fay

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

The federal Indian law doctrine of Congressional plenary power is long overdue for an overhaul. Since its troubling nineteenth-century origins in Kagama v. United States (1886), plenary power has justified invasive Congressional interventions and undermined Tribal sovereignty. The doctrine's legal basis remains a constitutional conundrum. This Article considers the Court's recent engagement with plenary power in Haaland v. Brackeen (2023). It argues that the Brackeen opinions may signal judicial readiness to reevaluate the doctrine. The Article takes ahold of Justice Gorsuch's critical assessment and runs with it, ultimately proposing a method for cleaning up this destructive and constitutionally dubious line …

Revocation At The Founding, Jacob Schuman

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court is divided over the constitutional law of community supervision. The justices disagree about the nature of a defendant’s liberty under supervision, the rights that apply when the government punishes violations, and the relationship between parole, probation, and supervised release. These divisions came to a head in 2019’s United States v. Haymond, where the justices split 4–1–4 on whether the right to a jury trial applies to revocation of supervised release. Their opinions focused on the original understanding of the jury right at the time the Constitution was ratified.

This Article aims to settle the debate over …

Channeling A Federal Right To Education Through State Constitutions And Courts, Nicole Sunderlin, Evan Caminker

Articles

Professor Black attributes the ubiquitous adoption of education clauses in state constitutions in the immediate pre- and especially post-Reconstruction era to a “constitutional compromise” struck by Congress and the states. The State Citizenship commitment was designed to enhance the republican nature of both levels of governance by ensuring broader access to political participation through voting and broader access to public education to inform and support democratic deliberation. The education component of this commitment was uniquely secured, argues Black, through a state-federal compromise using two complementary mechanisms: first, by mandating states to embrace a state constitutional obligation to provide basic educational …

A Law At War With Itself: Character Evidence And The Doctrine Of Chances, Len Niehoff, Shannon Hickey

Articles

Certain legal principles have raging within them a kind of civil war. Important but abstract policy concerns pull the doctrine in one direction; common sense and practical experience pull it in another. Casualties ensue.

Perhaps no body of legal doctrine better exemplifies this sort of internal conflict than the general ban on character evidence, as embodied in Federal Rule of Evidence 404(a)(1). That rule states: “Evidence of a person’s character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with that character or trait.” The rule has deep roots in the …

Locke(D) In A Vicious Cycle, Leah Litman

Reviews

The Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy invalidated the SEC’s mechanism for adjudicating fraud claims seeking civil penalties on the ground that the adjudications violated the Seventh Amendment. To explain that conclusion, the Court invoked, among other sources…Baron de Montesquieu (who was quoted by Alexander Hamilton after all!) and William Blackstone. Debates about constitutional interpretation are often peppered with references to a few Enlightenment thinkers, such as Montesquieu, Blackstone, and John Locke. Indeed, even nonconstitutional interpretation debates are as well; in the Court’s recent decision overturning Chevron deference, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Justice …

The Right To Remove In Agency Adjudication, Christopher J. Walker, David Zaring

Articles

In SEC v. Jarkesy, the Supreme Court will decide the constitutional future of agency adjudication, especially in the context of agency enforcement actions and the imposition of civil penalties. If the Court agrees with the Fifth Circuit on any of its three independent reasons for unconstitutionality, agency enforcement and adjudication schemes across the federal regulatory state will be severely disrupted, in ways that are detrimental to both the regulator and the regulated. In this Essay, we propose a path forward: In certain circumstances, the regulated party should have a right to remove an enforcement action from an in-house agency adjudication …

Sins And Omissions: Slavery And The Bill Of Rights, Richard Primus

Articles

According to the conventional story, the Constitutional Convention declined to include a bill of rights in the Constitution because it trusted the enumeration of congressional powers to do the necessary work of limiting the federal government. That conventional story is historically unfounded. It is not supported by contemporary evidence, and it was roundly disbelieved at the time. Although it is not possible to know for certain why (really, for what mix of reasons) the Framers omitted a bill of rights, it seems likely that one major reason was that formulating a bill of rights would have provoked a bitter fight …

Is There Anything Left In The Fight Against Partisan Gerrymandering? Congressional Redistricting Commissions And The “Independent State Legislature Theory”, Derek A. Zeigler, Jose Urteaga

Michigan Law Review

Partisan gerrymandering is a scourge on our democracy. Instead of voters choosing their representatives, representatives choose their voters. Historically, individuals and states could pursue multiple paths to challenge partisan gerrymandering. One way was to bring claims in federal court. The Supreme Court shut this door in Rucho v. Common Cause. States can also resist partisan gerrymandering by establishing congressional redistricting commissions. However, the power of these commissions to draw congressional districts is at risk. In Moore v. Harper, a case decided in the Supreme Court’s 2022-2023 Term, the petitioners asked the Court to embrace the “Independent State Legislature …

States’ Duty Under The Federal Elections Clause And A Federal Right To Education, Evan Caminker

Articles

Fifty years ago, in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, the Supreme Court failed to address one of the preeminent civil rights issues of our generation—substandard and inequitable public education—by holding that the federal Constitution does not protect a general right to education. The Court didn’t completely close the door on a narrower argument that the Constitution guarantees “an opportunity to acquire the basic minimal skills necessary for the enjoyment of the rights of speech and of full participation in the political process.” Both litigants and scholars have been trying ever since to push that door open, pressing …

Toggle Boggle, Leah Litman

Reviews

What is sex discrimination? Or, more generally, what is discrimination?

This question has often centered around a few recurring divisions in constitutional and antidiscrimination law. One division is between intentional discrimination and disparate impact theories of liability; another break is between formal equality and substantive equality; another, related divide is between anti-classification theories of equality and anti-subordination theories.

The Dormant Commerce Clause As A Way To Combat The Anti-Competitive, Anti-Transmission-Development Effects Of State Right Of First Refusal Laws For Electricity Transmission Construction, Walker Mogen

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

To quickly decarbonize the electricity grid, new sources of renewable energy have to be connected to the grid. To connect these sources of energy to the grid, the rate of construction of new electricity infrastructure must increase quickly. The process to construct new electricity transmission infrastructure, however, is filled with chokepoints that slow its construction. State right of first refusal laws for transmission construction are one the things slowing the build out of the grid. These laws limit which companies can construct new transmission infrastructure to utilities and other companies already operating transmission infrastructure in a state. This Note, using …

Due Process And Equal Protection In Michigan Anishinaabe Courts, Matthew Fletcher

Articles

In 1968, largely because the United States Constitution does not apply to tribal government activity, Congress enacted the Indian Civil Rights Act–a federal law that requires tribal governments to guarantee due process and equal protection to persons under tribal jurisdiction. In 1978, the Supreme Court held that persons seeking to enforce those federal rights may do so in tribal forums only; federal and state courts are unavailable. Moreover, the Court held that tribes may choose to interpret the meanings of “due process” and “equal protection” in line with tribal laws, including customary laws. Since the advent of the self-determination era …

The Impact Of Post-Dobbs Abortion Bans On Prenatal Tort Claims, Aviva K. Diamond

Michigan Law Review

In June 2022, the Supreme Court revoked Americans’ fundamental right to abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. However, the Court said nothing about how its decision would impact tort claims related to reproductive care. Many states have since adopted near-total or early-gestational- age abortion bans, which has not only diminished access to reproductive care, but has also incidentally impaired the ability of plaintiffs to bring long-recognized prenatal tort claims. Prenatal tort claims—wrongful pregnancy, birth, and life—allow victims to recover when a medical professional negligently performs reproductive or prenatal care. This Note identifies the impact that post-Dobbs …

Allow Me To Transform: A Black Guy’S Guide To A New Constitution, Brandon Hasbrouck

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Allow Me to Retort: A Black Guy’s Guide to the Constitution. By Elie Mystal.

Status Manipulation In Chae Chan Ping V. United States, Sam Erman

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Chae Chan Ping v. United States. By Rose Cuison-Villazor in Critical Race Judgments: Rewritten U.S. Court Opinions on Race and the Law 74, 84. Edited by Bennett Capers, Devon W. Carbado, R.A. Lenhardt and Angela Onwuachi-Willig.

Akhil Amar’S Unusable Past, Gregory Ablavsky

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Words That Made Us: America’s Constitutional Conversation, 1760–1840. By Akhil Reed Amar.

Constitutional Losses And (Some) Statutory Wins For Criminal Defendants: Select Criminal Law And Procedure Cases From The Supreme Court's 2022-2023 Term., Eve Brensike Primus, Mark Rucci

Articles

The Supreme Court’s 2022–23 Term included a number of important statutory interpretation rulings, as well as significant cases concerning the scope of the Confrontation Clause; the Venue, Vicinage, and Double Jeopardy Clauses; the federal courts’ ability to entertain claims of legal innocence; and the contours of the adequate and independent state ground doctrine. It also was the first term for Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson—the first former public defender and first Black woman to join the centuries-old institution. Although Justice Jackson joined a Court ruptured along ideological lines and confronting serious challenges to its legitimacy and ethical standards, she quickly proved …

Constitutional Review Of Federal Tax Legislation, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah, Yoseph M. Edrey

Articles

What does the Constitution mean when it says that “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States” (U.S. Const. Article I, Section 8, Clause 1)?

The definition of “tax” for constitutional purposes has become important considering the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (“NFIB”), in which Chief Justice Roberts for the Court upheld the constitutionality of the individual mandate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) under the taxing …