Constitutional Law Commons^™

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 …

The Not-So-Standard Model: Reconsidering Agency-Head Review Of Administrative Adjudication Decisions, Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Nina A. Mendelson

Articles

The Supreme Court has invalidated multiple legislative design choices for independent agency structures in recent years, citing Article II and the need for political accountability through presidential control of agencies. In United States v. Arthrex, Inc., the Court turned to administrative adjudication, finding an Appointments Clause violation in the assignment of certain final patent adjudication decisions to appellate panels of unconfirmed administrative patent judges. As a remedy, a different majority declared unenforceable a statutory provision that had insulated Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) administrative adjudication decisions from political review for almost a century. The Court thereby enabled the politically appointed …

Textualism And The Indian Canons Of Statutory Construction, Alex Tallchief Skibine

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

When interpreting statutes enacted for the benefit or regulation of Indians or construing treaties signed with Indian nations, courts are supposed to apply any of five specific canons of construction relating to Indian Affairs. Through examining the modern line of Supreme Court cases involving statutory or treaty interpretation relating to Indian nations, this Article demonstrates that the Court has generally been faithful in applying canons relating to treaty interpretation or abrogation. The Court has also respected the canon requiring unequivocal expression of congressional intent before finding an abrogation of tribal sovereign immunity. However, there are two other canons that the …

Territoriality In American Criminal Law, Emma Kaufman

Michigan Law Review

It is a bedrock principle of American criminal law that the authority to try and punish someone for a crime arises from the crime’s connection to a particular place. Thus, we assume that a person who commits a crime in some location— say, Philadelphia—can be arrested by Philadelphia police for conduct deemed criminal by the Pennsylvania legislature, prosecuted in a Philadelphia court, and punished in a Pennsylvania prison. The idea that criminal law is tied to geography in this way is called the territoriality principle. This idea is so familiar that it usually goes unstated.

This Article foregrounds and questions …

Federal Pleading Standards In State Court, Marcus Gadson

Michigan Law Review

Most state courts cannot follow both their state constitutions and federal pleading standards. Even if they could, policy considerations unique to states compel state courts to reject federal pleading standards. This is because federal courts have changed pleading standards to allow judges to make factual determinations on a motion to dismiss and to require more factual detail in complaints. While scholars have vigorously debated whether these changes are wise, just, and permissible under the federal rules and the Constitution, they have ignored the even more important questions of whether state courts can and should adopt those pleading standards. The oversight …

Delegation At The Founding: A Response To Critics, Julian Davis Mortenson, Nicholas Bagley

Articles

This essay responds to the wide range of commentary on Delegation at the Founding, published previously in the Columbia Law Review. The critics’ arguments deserve thoughtful consideration and a careful response. We’re happy to supply both. As a matter of eighteenth-century legal and political theory, “rulemaking” could not be neatly described as either legislative or executive based on analysis of its scope, subject, or substantive effect. To the contrary: Depending on the relationships you chose to emphasize, a given act could properly be classified as both legislative (from the perspective of the immediate actor) and also executive (from the perspective …

Against A Deconstitutionalisation Of International Law In Times Of Populism, Pandemic, And War, Anne Peters

Articles

On 24th February 2022, the international landscape changed. The German chancellor called it a ‘Zeitenwende’, an epochal change. Russia invaded its neighbour Ukraine, a state that has struggled with corruption and oligarchy but which might nevertheless be qualified as having a democratic and liberal system of government. Russia thereby violated one of the basic principles of international law, the prohibition on the use of force, and in the course of this unlawful war is committing countless grave violations of human rights and humanitarian law, and commits atrocities amounting maybe even to genocide.

Haaland V. Brackeen, Et Al.: Brief Of Indian Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Federal And Tribal Defendants, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Appellate Briefs

Amici are professors and scholars of federal Indian law whose scholarship and clinical practice focus on the subject matter areas of Indian law, tribal powers, and federal- and state-court jurisdiction. Amici possess expertise in this area and an interest in ensuring that cases concerning these issues are decided consistently with the text of the United States Constitution, foundational principles in this area of law, and the express intent of Congress. Amici respectfully submit this brief to provide the Court history and context behind the Constitution’s use of Indian status classifications and the inherently political determinations that the legislative and executive …

Haaland V. Brackeen, Et Al.: Brief Of Amici Curiae Administrative Law And Constitutional Law Professors In Support Of Deb Haaland, Secretary Of The Interior, Et Al., And Cherokee Nation, Et Al., Leah Litman, Daniel T. Deacon

Appellate Briefs

Amici curiae are professors of administrative law, constitutional law, and related public law subjects at institutions around the United States. They have extensive experience studying and teaching the text, history, and structure of the Constitution, as well Supreme Court decisions relating to Congress’s legislative powers and the supremacy of federal law. Their legal expertise thus bears directly on the constitutional issues in this case. Amici share an interest in the proper application of constitutional limits on Congress’s authority to enact supreme federal law and state courts’ obligations to decide properly presented federal questions.<\p>

The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA or …

National Pork Producers Council V. Ross: Brief Of Professors Barry Friedman And Daniel T. Deacon As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Daniel T. Deacon

Appellate Briefs

Barry Friedman is the Jacob D. Fuchsberg Professor of Law and Affiliated Professor of Politics at New York University Law School and is one of the country’s leading authorities on constitutional law and the federal courts. Daniel T. Deacon is a Lecturer at the University of Michigan Law School and has published extensively on topics that include constitutional and administrative law. Professors Friedman and Deacon are the authors of A Course Unbroken: The Constitutional Legitimacy of the Dormant Commerce Clause, 97 Va. L. Rev. 1877 (2011), a leading article examining the origins of the Commerce Clause and defending the validity …

Reed V. Goertz: Brief Of Federal Courts Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Leah Litman, Eve Brensike Primus

Appellate Briefs

This brief is filed on behalf of legal scholars who study federal jurisdiction, federal procedure, and constitutional law, and who have taught and written on the interplay between proceedings in state and federal courts.<\p>

The Court should hold that § 1983 claims challenging the constitutionality of state post-conviction DNA testing statutes do not accrue until the end of state-court litigation denying DNA testing. That is the only rule that comports with principles of federalism and comity, which favor sequencing federal litigation after related state proceedings. Unnecessary co-pendency of state and federal litigation invites unnecessary intrusions into state processes. If a …

Is Corporate Law Nonpartisan?, Ofer Eldar, Gabriel V. Rauterberg

Articles

Only rarely does the United States Supreme Court hear a case with fundamental implications for corporate law. In Carney v. Adams, however, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to address whether the State of Delaware’s requirement of partisan balance for its judiciary violates the First Amendment. Although the Court disposed of the case on other grounds, Justice Sotomayor acknowledged that the issue “will likely be raised again.” The stakes are high because most large businesses are incorporated in Delaware and thus are governed by its corporate law. Former Delaware governors and chief justices lined up to defend the state’s “nonpartisan” …

Most Favored Racial Hierarchy: The Ever-Evolving Ways Of The Supreme Court’S Superordination Of Whiteness, David Simson

Michigan Law Review

This Article engages in a critical comparative analysis of the recent history and likely future trajectory of the Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence in matters of race and religion to uncover new aspects of the racial project that Reggie Oh has recently called the “racial superordination” of whiteness—the reinforcing of the superior status of whites in American society by, among other things, prioritizing their interests in structuring constitutional doctrine. This analysis shows that the Court is increasingly widening the gap between conceptions of, and levels of protection provided for, equality in the contexts of race and religion in ways that prioritize …

Second Chances: Why Michigan Should Categorically Prohibit The Sentence Of Juvenile Life Without Parole, Richard Zhao

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The United States is the only country in the world that sentences children to die in prison. This practice, known as juvenile life without parole (JLWOP), is condemned by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Yet twenty-five states still permit the sentence, and Michigan houses one of the nation’s largest JLWOP populations. Despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s ban on some forms of JLWOP, more must be done to further limit the use of this sentence. The current JLWOP sentencing scheme is untenable, imposes a significant financial burden on taxpayers, and perpetuates racial inequality. This Note explores …

The Politics Of Proportionality, Nelson Tebbe, Micah Schwartzman

Michigan Law Review

A Review of How Rights Went Wrong: Why Our Obsession With Rights Is Tearing America Apart. By Jamal Greene.

Torres V. Texas Department Of Public Safety: Brief Of Scholars Of Constitutional Law And The Law Of Federal And State Courts As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Evan H. Caminker

Appellate Briefs

Amici curiae, listed in the Appendix, are professors of constitutional law and of the law of federal and state courts. Amici hold varying views on state sovereign immunity and the interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment. Amici join in this brief because they agree that the Court’s jurisprudence on these issues reflects inherent tensions that justify consideration of a new approach. Amici propose an approach to sovereign immunity that is grounded in both constitutional text and broader common law principles, and that, in amici’s view, is faithful to the original constitutional design and the text and purpose of the Eleventh Amendment. …

Securing Gun Rights By Statute: The Right To Keep And Bear Arms Outside The Constitution, Jacob D. Charles

Michigan Law Review

In popular and professional discourse, debate about the right to keep and bear arms most often revolves around the Second Amendment. But that narrow reference ignores a vast and expansive nonconstitutional legal regime privileging guns and their owners. This collection of nonconstitutional gun rights confers broad powers and immunities on gun owners that go far beyond those required by the Constitution, like rights to bring guns on private property against an owner’s wishes and to carry a concealed firearm in public with no training or background check. This Article catalogues this set of expansive laws and critically assesses them. Unlike …

The New Major Questions Doctrine, Daniel Deacon, Leah Litman

Law & Economics Working Papers

This article critically analyzes significant recent developments in the major questions doctrine. It highlights important shifts in what role the majorness of an agency policy plays in statutory interpretation, as well as changes in how the Court determines whether an agency policy is major. After the Supreme Court’s October 2021 term, the “new” major questions doctrine operates as a clear statement rule that directs courts not to discern the plain meaning of a statute using the normal tools of statutory interpretation, but to require explicit and specific congressional authorization for certain agency policies. Even broadly worded, otherwise unambiguous statutes do …

Disparate Discrimination, Leah M. Litman

Michigan Law Review

This Article explains and analyzes a recent trend in the Supreme Court’s cases regarding unintentional discrimination, where the argument is that a law has the effect of producing a disadvantage on members of a particular group. In religious discrimination cases, the Court has held that a law is presumptively unconstitutional if the law results in a comparable secular activity being treated more favorably than religious activity. Yet in racial discrimination cases, the Court has said the mere fact that a law more severely disadvantages racial minorities as a group does not suffice to establish unlawful discrimination.

The two tracks for …

A Theory Of Constitutional Norms, Ashraf Ahmed

Michigan Law Review

The political convulsions of the past decade have fueled acute interest in constitutional norms or “conventions.” Despite intense scholarly attention, existing accounts are incomplete and do not answer at least one or more of three major questions: (1) What must all constitutional norms do? (2) What makes them conventional? (3) And why are they constitutional?

This Article advances an original theory of constitutional norms that answers these questions. First, it defines them and explains their general character: they are normative, contingent, and arbitrary practices that implement constitutional text and principle. Most scholars have foregone examining how norms are conventional or …

The Dubious Constitutional Origins Of Treaty Overrides: A Response To Rosenbloom And Shaheen, Reuven Avi-Yonah

Articles

In 1888, the Supreme Court decided a case called Whitney v. Robert- son, which is generally considered to be the source of the proposition that, under the Constitution, later-in-time statutes can override earlier treaties (the Rule). The Rule is highly controversial because it violates articles 26 and 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), which the United States has accepted as binding on it as cus- tomary international law (CIL). Despite that, the United States has since Whitney routinely engaged in treaty overrides, and the Court has repeatedly endorsed the Rule even while narrowing its application …

To Participate And Elect: Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act At 40, Ellen D. Katz, Brian Remlinger, Andrew Dziedzic, Brooke Simone, Jordan Schuler

Other Publications

This paper provides an overview of cases decided under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act between September 1, 1982 and December 31, 2021. It updates our 2006 study documenting Section 2 litigation through 2005. Of note is the substantial decline in the number of Section 2 cases decided and diminished success for the plaintiffs who bring them. While recent litigation (including Brnovich and Merrill v. Milligan) suggests that Section 2 is likely to occupy, at best, a diminished role in future electoral disputes, this paper shows that Section 2’s reach had already declined significantly prior to recent disputes. …

Not A Suicide Pact: Urgent Strategic Recommendations For Reducing Domestic Terrorism In The United States, Barbara L. Mcquade

Articles

America’s Bill of Rights protects U.S. citizens’ rights to free speech, to bear arms, and to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, among other things. But, as the Supreme Court has consistently held, no right is absolute. All rights must be balanced against other societal needs, including and especially public safety. As the threat of domestic terrorism metastasizes in the United States, Americans need to use the practical wisdom that Justice Robert L. Jackson advised in 1949 to ensure the survival of the republic.

In recognition of this growing threat, the Biden administration issued the nation’s first National Strategy …

Textualism, Judicial Supremacy, And The Independent State Legislature Theory, Leah Litman, Katherine Shaw

Articles

This piece offers an extended critique of one aspect of the so-called “independent state legislature” theory. That theory, in brief, holds that the federal Constitution gives state legislatures, and withholds from any other state entity, the power to regulate federal elections. Proponents ground their theory in two provisions of the federal Constitution: Article I’s Elections Clause, which provides that “[t]he Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof,” and Article II’s Presidential Electors Clause, which provides that “[e]ach State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature …

Through A Glass, Darkly: Systemic Racism, Affirmative Action, And Disproportionate Minority Contact, Robin Walker Sterling

Michigan Law Review

This Article is the first to describe how systemic racism persists in a society that openly denounces racism and racist behaviors, using affirmative action and disproportionate minority contact as contrasting examples. Affirmative action and disproportionate minority contact are two sides of the same coin. Far from being distinct, these two social institutions function as two sides of the same ideology, sharing a common historical nucleus rooted in the mythologies that sustained chattel slavery in the United States. The effects of these narratives continue to operate in race-related jurisprudence and in the criminal legal system, sending normative messages about race and …

United States V. Texas: Brief Of Legal Scholars Leah Litman, Erwin Chemerinsky, Michael C. Dorf, Barry Friedman, And Fred O. Smith As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Leah Litman

Appellate Briefs

Amici curiae are constitutional law scholars who teach and write in the fields of constitutional law and federal courts. They share an interest in promoting the appropriate role of the federal courts in maintaining the supremacy of federal law, and in preserving our federal constitutional system and the rule of law.<\p>

In this case, this Court is asked to consider whether the United States may seek relief in federal court to protect constitutional rights in the face of state subterfuge designed to undercut those rights. Texas’s efforts to evade judicial review of Senate Bill 8 (“S.B. 8”) are central to …

The Case Of The Dishonest Scrivener: Gouverneur Morris And The Creation Of The Federalist Constitution, William Michael Treanor

Michigan Law Review

At the end of the Constitutional Convention, the delegates appointed the Committee of Style and Arrangement to bring together the textual provisions that the Convention had previously agreed to and to prepare a final constitution. Pennsylvania delegate Gouverneur Morris drafted the document for the Committee, and, with few revisions and little debate, the Convention adopted Morris’s draft. For more than two hundred years, questions have been raised as to whether Morris covertly altered the text in order to advance his constitutional vision, but modern legal scholars and historians studying the Convention have either ignored the issue or concluded that Morris …

Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization: Brief For Constitutional Law Scholars Lee C. Bollinger, Erwin Chemerinsky, Sherry F. Colb, Michael C. Dorf, Daniel Farber, Joanna L. Grossman, Leah Litman, Martha Minow, Jane S. Schacter, Suzanna Sherry, Geoffrey R. Stone, David A. Strauss, And Laurence H. Tribe As Amici Curiae Supporting Respondents, Leah Litman

Appellate Briefs

Amici, listed in Appendix A, are constitutional law scholars who teach and write in the field of constitutional law, including on limits on the regulation of abortion. They share an interest in promoting the stability of this Court’s abortion jurisprudence as well as its continuity with the constitutional law governing related rights.<\p>

For nearly 50 years, the Supreme Court has recognized that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects a woman’s fundamental right to decide whether to have an abortion. See Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 153-54 (1973). Accordingly, in Roe, the Court held that prior …

Suspect Spheres, Not Enumerated Powers: A Guide For Leaving The Lamppost, Richard Primus, Roderick M. Hills Jr.

Michigan Law Review

Despite longstanding orthodoxy, the Constitution’s enumeration of congressional powers does virtually nothing to limit federal lawmaking. That’s not because of some bizarrely persistent judicial failure to read the Constitution correctly. It’s because the enumeration of congressional powers is not a well-designed technology for limiting federal legislation. Rather than trying to make the enumeration do work that it will not do, decisionmakers should find better ways of thinking about what lawmaking should be done locally rather than nationally. This Article suggests such a rubric, one that asks not whether Congress has permission to do a certain thing but whether a certain …

Pregnancy And The Carceral State, Khiara M. Bridges

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Policing the Womb: Invisible Women and the Criminalization of Motherhood. by Michele Goodwin.