Constitutional Law Commons^™

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

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

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. …

Show And Tell: Writing Constitutional Law Casebooks When The Law Doesn't Matter, William D. Araiza

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Writing a constitutional law casebook today presents significant challenges. One reason among several stands out: law matters less—indeed, sometimes very little—to those charged with interpreting our constitutional law and implementing our constitutional system.

This Essay examines this challenge and explains how my contribution to the constitutional casebook genre attempts to answer it. It argues that the current moment requires instructors, and the books they use, to “show”—that is, to demonstrate to their students both the handiwork of those interpreters and implementers and alternative pathways. Sometimes, however, practical considerations preclude such showing. In those situations, “telling” may be required. But regardless …

Coping With A Court One Disagrees With, Randy E. Barnett, Josh Blackman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I of this Essay focuses on our approach to teaching the constitutional canon. This part is adapted from the Preface to our constitutional law casebook. Part II traces the evolution of our casebook from the First Edition to the Fourth Edition, and the forthcoming Fifth Edition. We demonstrate that the constitutional canon has changed, but remains remarkably stable. Part III addresses how we, and other like-minded law professors, managed to teach decisions that we fundamentally disagreed with.

This abstract has been taken from the authors' introduction. 

What Should A Constitutional Law Casebook Be?, William Funk

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

What is the purpose of a “casebook”? It is not a “hornbook,” designed to summarize or explain the law in a specific area, generally aimed at law students or lawyers to provide a straightforward statement of the law. It is not a “treatise,” a comprehensive, systematic exposition of the law in a particular field, involving an in-depth analysis and interpretation of the law. And it is not a “study aid,” supplementary material designed to help students do better in their classes. It is the book used by professors in their classes. For professors of constitutional law, it is a tool …

Intellectual Integrity, Collaboration, And The Market, Mark Tushnet

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

My reflections are those of someone who co-edited/co-authored two casebooks that were commercially and intellectually successful and one that was intellectually but not commercially successful. I start with the assumption that people decide to do a casebook because they find that existing materials don’t do some things they think ought to be done in the course (and do some things that aren’t really necessary for teaching purposes). That is, doing a casebook is at the outset an intellectual project.

Executing that project runs up against some constraints almost immediately. A simple one is that you might well think that you …

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

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Essay argues that constitutional law cannot (and should not) be an autonomous subject within the legal curriculum. This argument echoes a long-standing debate about whether law itself is an autonomous scholarly discipline. The answer to that question is surely, as Allan Farnsworth put it, “sometimes YES and sometimes NO.” But this Essay does not focus on law’s autonomy from other disciplines, such as political science, psychology, or economics. Rather, I consider the extent to which constitutional law should overlap with other legal subjects, such as legal history, administrative law, or statutory interpretation. My conclusion is that, at least in …

The Political Dynamics Of Constitutional Law, Neal Devins

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

What Makes A Con Law "Doctrine" And Why Does It Matter?, Allison Orr Larsen

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

A few years ago, I started wondering about the “major questions doctrine” (or MQD) in administrative law, and I found myself asking: “When did that become a thing?” I was familiar with the cases that stand for the proposition that Congress does not lightly delegate high stakes questions to administrative agencies—cases that date back to 2000 and specifically to a decision about cigarette advertising and the FDA. But up until 2022, it was rare for courts and commentators to refer to that collection of cases as a “doctrine.” Today, by contrast, the major questions doctrine is bread and butter administrative …

Original Public Meaning And The Rule Of Recognition, Andrew Jensen Kerr

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Framer intent no longer possesses the same cachet it once held. But Framer influence still matters for public meaning originalism, particularly for communications like The Federalist Papers, in which Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison marketed the work of the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention to state ratifying conventions and the constituencies they represented. Contemporary originalists posit that what the Constitution meant to this public audience at the time of ratification is cemented in time forever (the fixation thesis). The starting point for my analysis is the prosaic observation that our Framers occasionally changed their minds about the meaning of …

Animus, Again, William D. Araiza

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In the first week of his second term, President Donald Trump issued multiple executive orders targeting immigrants and transgender people. Additional actions targeting these and other vulnerable groups have already followed. Others may come; more generally, such orders will likely remain a part of the President’s policy agenda and governing style. These actions call for analysis of the legal tools litigants can deploy to challenge them. That call is urgent, as a response not just to the orders already issued, but to others the Administration might promulgate in the future.

One of those tools is equal protection animus. This Article …

The Jurisprudence Of Constitutional Entitlement, David Schraub

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Lawyers are accustomed to thinking of constitutional law as a familiar binary: Either a given governmental policy or practice is constitutional and therefore permitted, or unconstitutional and forbidden. But not all constitutional laws are created equal. A state practice which may be constitutional in concept (such as the death penalty) may, in some or many applications, violate specific constitutional rules and become impermissible. When a policy which has been affirmed to be constitutional in general repeatedly runs up against problems as-applied, a legal tension emerges: can the state implement the policy or not? This dilemma illuminates a third constitutional category: …

Ten Commandments In The Public Square And Public Schools, Mark David Hall, Andrea Picciotti-Bayer

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Ten Commandments are of paramount importance to the Jewish and Christian faiths, and they are viewed by many as a source of Western law. In America, they have been (and are) taught in churches and synagogues, and throughout much of this nation’s history they have been taught by parents, tutors, and teachers in private and public schools. They are regularly displayed in courthouses and statehouse grounds, and some states have desired to display them in public schools. Predictably, those who would scrub religion from the public square have argued that Ten Commandment displays on public property violate the First …

Regulating Deception To Protect Democracy: Global Election Misinformation Regulations Analyzed Under U.S. First Amendment Doctrine, Stephanie Hoke

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Note argues that the marketplace of ideas may not always be a workable theory for the election misinformation that pervades social media platforms. Social media is a unique medium because it does not have the same safeguards as television, radio, and newspapers that are used to filter out false claims and information. Due to the lack of safeguards and the algorithms that promote misinformed posts, social media platforms provide a thriving environment for election misinformation. In addition, the presence of online “echo chambers” and the speed at which misinformation can spread calls for some form of government regulation. In …

The Endorsement Test’S Early Years, 1983–1985: Notes From The O’Connor Files, Jay Wexler

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

One of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s signature contributions to U.S. constitutional law was the endorsement test, a subtle but critically important reformulation of the Court’s then prevailing approach to applying the Establishment Clause that focused on the message sent by government action supporting religion and the potentially harmful effects of that message on religious minorities and the political community. Now that the current Court has discarded the endorsement test, leaving the government freer than ever to support religion in a variety of ways, we should expect to see the harms that Justice O’Connor cared about become increasingly widespread and prevalent. …

Not Born A Democracy: Constitutional Preconditions, Martha Minow

William & Mary Law Review

Beneath growing perceptions of constitutional crisis and democratic fragility in the United States lies a fundamental conundrum. Critical preconditions for effective self-government are either weak or missing in action, and our constitutional system, at least for now, stands in the way of actions to strengthen or build those preconditions. This Article focuses on three essential predicates for constitutional democracy that face jeopardy: education, reliable news, and security against lethal violence. As basic as these elements may be, repeated efforts to secure a federal constitutional right to education have failed in the courts. Because of a confluence of legal, technological, and …

Facial Recognition Ai, Margaret Hu

Faculty Publications

The integration of algorithmic decisionmaking and artificial intelligence (“AI”) into facial recognition technology poses new, unprecedented risks to privacy and individual autonomy rights, particularly in urban settings. The murder of Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare, in New York City on December 4, 2024, provides a timely case study to examine the deployment of facial recognition systems by the New York Police Department and other law enforcement agencies to identify the suspect. New York City deploys some of the most sophisticated surveillance architecture in the nation, put into place following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This Article explores the …

The First Amendment And The Commencement Provocateur, Duncan Hosie

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article explores an untheorized area of First Amendment doctrine: students’ graduation speeches at public or private universities that embrace free speech principles, either by state statute, state constitutional law, or internal policy. Responding to recent graduation speech controversies, it develops a two-tier theory that reconciles a multiplicity of values, including students’ expressive interests, universities’ institutional interests in curating commencement ceremonies and preventing reputational damage and political reprisals, and the interests of captive audiences in avoiding speech they deem offensive or profane. The Article challenges the prevailing view that university students’ graduation speeches implicate individual First Amendment rights. It develops …

But For A Free Press: A Response To Press Freedom Skeptics, Patrick J. Charles, Kevin Francis O'Neill

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article is divided into three Parts. Part I will outline the history-in-law case for why the historical record sufficiently supports recognizing distinct constitutional press freedoms. Part II then provides a history-in-law response to some of the most common arguments made by press freedom skeptics as to why distinct constitutional press freedoms should not be recognized by the courts. Lastly, Part III makes the case for why the recognition of distinct constitutional press freedoms should become a jurisprudential reality and provides a roadmap to accomplish this.

This abstract has been taken from the authors' introduction.

Second Amendment Principles, Jamie G. Mcwilliam

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In United States v. Rahimi, the Supreme Court explained that firearm regulations “must comport with the principles underlying the Second Amendment.” This Article examines what those principles are, how to derive them, and how to apply them in concrete cases. It begins with the Second Amendment’s core principle of defense of self and community, which traces its lineage back to classical thinkers like Aquinas and Grotius. The tradition of firearm regulation that surrounded the adoption of the Second Amendment depended on this fundamental principle. But it also developed subsidiary principles that implement the defense principle in specific ways. This …

Understanding Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization: How The Modern Supreme Court Broke From Tradition And Changed The Original Meaning Of Due Process, Matthew W. Lunder

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

What follows here describes and criticizes the modern liberal and conservative approaches to substantive due process. Part I shows how substantive due process came about in the mid-twentieth century as the union of two extant doctrines: incorporation and fundamental rights. Part II then describes how modern conservatism used the doctrine to arrive at the deeply rooted-in-history-and-tradition test and shows the deliberate reconfiguration of the jurisprudence during the latter twentieth century into the novel patchwork of the modern-conservative method applied in Dobbs. Part III offers a contrast, describing and explaining the traditional due-process analysis of medieval origin and the concept of …

The Bare-Majority Requirement Of The Delaware Judiciary And Its Unfortunate Violation Of The First Amendment, Tyler Mayhew

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Note will attempt to remedy the circuit split on the issue of whether judges are policymakers for purposes of the First Amendment, and if they are not—as this Note concludes—whether the Delaware Constitution is in violation of the First Amendment through its major-party and bare-majority requirement.

First, this Note will analyze the development of the only challenge to article IV, section 3 of the Delaware Constitution as it proceeded from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware to the U.S. Supreme Court where it was thrown out on standing. Second, this Note will argue that judges are …

Hunting For Meaningful Boundaries: Virginia's Dog Retrieval Statute And Defining Per Se Regulatory Takings Under Cedar Point, Mason Miller

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Note will begin with a summary of the [Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid] decision. Next, it will provide an overview of Virginia’s dog retrieval statute and discuss a recent case challenging the same. The Note will then analyze the statute by applying the Cedar Point standard, with special attention given to the exceptions, to determine if the law constitutes a per se taking. Finally, the Note will conclude by exploring some implications of the analysis, again emphasizing the effect of the amorphous exceptions.

This abstract has been taken from the author's introduction.

The Next Generation Of Free Expression Scholarship: A Very Short Manifesto (In Memory Of Fred Schauer), Mark Tushnet

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Manifesto begins with a discussion of the accomplishments of the prior generation of free expression scholarship. The core of the Manifesto starts with a description of the idea of epistemic authority and draws upon Leiter’s analysis to show its importance in free expression theory. It emphasizes, with Leiter, that epistemic authority is relational: between and among epistemic authorities, and between such authorities and “ordinary” citizens (that is, those who aren’t near the core of an epistemic community that, as a collective, defines the community’s core and boundaries).

That discussion is followed by a description of challenges to the idea …

Taking Back The Takings Clause: The Case For Compensating Innocent Property Owners Caught In The Crossfire Of Police Activity, Kathleen Collins

William & Mary Law Review

Part I of this Note will provide an overview of the history of the Takings Clause, the role of the police power in takings jurisprudence, and the necessity exception to takings. Specifically, Part I will demonstrate that (1) the gravity of physical government intrusions has led the Supreme Court to consistently treat such intrusions as per se takings, (2) any distinction between eminent domain and the police power exists in the context of regulatory takings, and (3) the necessity exception rests on a shaky foundation as a common law tort doctrine. Part II will refute Lech’s conclusion that law …

Dobbs And The New Doctrine Of Stare Decisis, Russell A. Miller

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Alongside the historic and troubling annulment of the half-century-old Substantive Due Process right to abortion, Dobbs produced another significant outcome. To get its substantive constitutional law result, the Court’s majority also had to reconceive—and significantly weaken—the doctrine of stare decisis. This was necessary because, following Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, the constitutional right to abortion largely depended on respect for precedent as the basis for its survival. To overturn Roe, the Dobbs majority had to blast through the established practice of precedent and articulate a new doctrine of stare decisis. It seems that precedent …

Ai And The Press Clause, Jared Schroeder

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Generative AI took a massive leap forward in late 2022 and early 2023 with the introduction of public access to ChatGPT and Bard. OpenAI, whose ChatGPT tool garnered more than 100 million users in fewer than two months, upgraded to GPT-4 in March 2023. These AI tools, and those who create and use them, almost certainly represent the vanguard of a new generation of publishers, which will join the long queue of communicators who have challenged courts to define the role and place of the Press Clause. AI publishers raise substantial legal questions in fields including defamation, intellectual property, and …

The Article V Convention Threat Awakens: Looking Within, Abroad, And Ahead, Willow Hasson

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Convention of States (COS) movement likely represents the passionate factions that Founders, like Madison, warned against and should thus be taken seriously. COS is now practicing its Article V Convention simulations every few years so that when it reaches its threshold of captured state legislatures, its processes will be fine-tuned, and there will be no going back. Not only could COS one day succeed, as evidenced by their supporters reaching new heights of politics, but their concerns are also worth focusing on as they point to an American constitutional flaw. Their frenzy for change is misdirected, and they aim …

Camera-Shy Courtrooms: Balancing Extraordinary Transparency And The Appearance Of Justice, Caroline Olsen

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

High-profile trials alert us to the dissonance between transparency and accountability in the federal judiciary. This Note will explore this tension and argue that when policymakers respond to calls for “extraordinary transparency,” transparency should be subordinate to fairness. Part I will discuss the principles underlying public adjudication and how, through various constitutional challenges, the limits of public access have changed over time. Analyzing modern high-profile trials, Part II will demonstrate how those very principles are inadequately protected in jurisdictions that allow unrestrained public access to the courtroom. Part III will describe how transparency, when conflated with accountability, threatens procedural due …

Fame, Fakes, And The First Amendment: A Three-State Analysis Of The Right Of Publicity In Addressing Deepfakes, Alexandra Reilly

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I of this Note will set the scene of current concerns with deepfakes by those in media and pending changes in the right of publicity landscape. Part II discusses the standing of the right of publicity in three states. Parts III and IV address the current balancing tests for the First Amendment and intellectual property statutes. Part V examines the pathway for expansion of the right of publicity federally to combat the threat posed by deepfakes and Part VI analyzes the interplay with intellectual property doctrines and the First Amendment.

This abstract has been taken from the author's introduction.

Race, The Academy, And The Constitution Of The War On Drugs, Bennett Capers, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Publications

The war on drugs is widely viewed as a policy failure. Despite massive government intrusions on personal liberty, drug addiction, overdoses, and drug-related violence have only increased since the war was declared in 1971. David Pozen’s new book, The Constitution of the War on Drugs, reveals a constitutional failure as well. Pozen chronicles a host of constitutional arguments that American litigants deployed to protect a “right” to use drugs with surprising, if fleeting, success. Pozen asks what might have been, exploring why the courts backtracked and effectively removed the Constitution as a meaningful obstacle to drug prohibitions.

This Review …