Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Normative & Historical Cases For Proportional Deportation, Angela M. Banks

Faculty Publications

Is citizenship status a legitimate basis for allocating rights in the United States?

In immigration law the right to remain in the United States is significantly tied to citizenship status. Citizens have an absolutely secure right to remain in the United States regardless of their actions. Noncitizens’ right to remain is less secure because they can be deported if convicted of specific criminal offenses. This Article contends that citizenship is not a legitimate basis for allocating the right to remain. This Article offers normative and historical arguments for a right to remain for noncitizens. This right should be granted to …

Gary Wall, Plaintiff-Appellant V. James Wade, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees: Reply Brief Of Appellant, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Robert M. Luck Iii, Patricia E. Roberts

Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic

No abstract provided.

Gary Wall, Plaintiff-Appellant V. James Wade, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees: Brief Of Appellant, Tillman J. Breckenridge, Robert M. Luck Iii, Patricia E. Roberts

Appellate and Supreme Court Clinic

No abstract provided.

The Dormant Second Amendment: Exploring The Rise, Fall, And Potential Resurrection Of Independent State Militias, Michael J. Golden

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The term “militia” is polarizing, misunderstood, misapplied, and generally difficult for modern Americans to digest. That is not surprising, given the depth and breadth of American militia history and militias’ substantial evolution over four centuries.

Historically, militia simply refers to a broad-based civic duty to protect one’s fellow citizens from internal and external dangers and is not limited to activities involving firearms. Reestablishing militia’s true meaning and purpose—and reinvigorating independent state militias in the United States to effect that purpose—has the potential to address states’ emerging financial and security gaps and to produce multiple other significant benefits, including recalibrating federalism. …

A Winn For Originalism Puts Establishment Clause Reform Within Reach, Patrick T. Gillen

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Distinguishing Between Custom And Law: Empirical Examples Of Endogeneity In Property And First Amendment Precedents, Daniel L. Chen, Susan Yeh

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Federal Circuit As A Federal Court, Paul R. Gugliuzza

William & Mary Law Review

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over patent appeals and, as a consequence, the last word on many legal issues important to innovation policy. This Article shows how the Federal Circuit augments its already significant power by impeding other government institutions from influencing the patent system. Specifically, the Federal Circuit has shaped patent-law doctrine, along with rules of jurisdiction, procedure, and administrative law, to preserve and expand the court's power in four interinstitutional relationships: the court's federalism relationship with state courts, its separation of powers relationship with the executive and legislative branches, its vertical …

The Exceptions Clause As A Structural Safeguard, Tara Leigh Grove

Faculty Publications

Scholars have long treated the Exceptions Clause of Article III as a serious threat to the Supreme Court’s central constitutional function: establishing definitive and uniform rules of federal law. This Article argues that scholars have overlooked an important function of the Clause. Congress has repeatedly used its broad “exceptions power” to facilitate, not to undermine, the Supreme Court’s constitutional role. Drawing on insights from social science, this Article asserts that Congress has an incentive to use its control over federal jurisdiction to promote the Court’s role in settling disputed federal questions. Notably, this argument has considerable historical support. When the …

Speech, Intent, And The Chilling Effect, Leslie Kendrick

William & Mary Law Review

Speaker’s intent requirements are a common but unremarked feature of First Amendment law. From the “actual malice” standard for defamation to the specific-intent requirement for incitement, many types of expression are protected or unprotected depending on the state of mind with which they are said. To the extent that courts and commentators have considered why speaker’s intent should determine First Amendment protection, they have relied upon the chilling effect. On this view, imposing strict liability for harmful speech, such as defamatory statements, would overdeter, or chill, valuable speech, such as true political information. Intent requirements are necessary prophylactically to provide …

Erie's International Effect, Michael S. Green

Faculty Publications

To what extent does the Erie doctrine apply in an international context? In his article When Erie Goes International, Professor Childress argues that a federal court choosing between state law and the law of a foreign nation should often (or perhaps always) ignore Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. and use federal choice of law rules rather than the rules of the state where the federal court is located.

In this Essay, I have three points to make in response. The first is that Childress’s article, even if successful, leaves the bulk of the Erie doctrine unchanged in …

Property's Constitution, James Y. Stern

Faculty Publications

Long-standing disagreements over the definition of property as a matter of legal theory present a special problem in constitutional law. The Due Process and Takings Clauses establish individual rights that can be asserted only if “property” is at stake. Yet the leading cases interpreting constitutional property doctrines have never managed to articulate a coherent general view of property, and in some instances have reached opposite conclusions about its meaning. Most notably, government benefits provided in the form of individual legal entitlements are considered “property” for purposes of due process but not takings doctrines, a conflict the cases acknowledge but do …

Privacy And Consent Over Time: The Role Of Agreement In Fourth Amendment Analysis, Christine Jolls

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Battle For Disclosure Tort, Jared A. Wilkerson

W&M Law Student Publications

Legal scholars guided the creation and development of privacy torts, including what would become known as the disclosure tort, for about seventy-five years (1890-1965), a period in which most states came to recognize a common law or statutory right to privacy. Since then, scholarly attempts to curb or modify the tort have yielded little. This Article-beginning with the formalism-realism debate won by Brandeis, Pound, and Prosser and ending with modern experts--shows that notwithstanding enormous efforts by contemporary legal academics, would-be reformers of the disclosure tort have not budged it since Prosser's Restatement (Second). The Article presents both a lesson and …

Lawrence's Stealth Constitutionalism And Same-Sex Marriage Litigation, Eric Berger

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Constitutional law scholarship often focuses on two taxonomies: doctrinal categories and interpretive methodologies. Consequently, constitutional scholars sometimes neglect other important facets of constitutional decisionmaking, particularly extra-doctrinal stealth determinations that courts render frequently in constitutional opinions. The U.S. Supreme Court regularly confronts the questions underlying these determinations, but despite their centrality to constitutional decisionmaking, these issues often escape careful scrutiny.

Lawrence v. Texas exemplifies the phenomenon. Lawrence framed its central question at a broad level of generality; relied on hybrid reasoning, using equal-protection rationales to support a substantive due process holding; declined to identify a level of scrutiny; and invoked changing …

Social Science Studies And The Children Of Lesbians And Gay Men: The Rational Basis Perspective, Carlos A. Ball

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article seeks to determine whether the social science literature on the children of lesbians and gay men precludes the government from relying on child welfare considerations to justify same-sex marriage bans and parenting restrictions affecting lesbians and gay men under the highly deferential rational basis test. Under that test, courts must uphold laws and regulations that have any conceivable basis of fact which is rationally related to a legitimate state interest. After comprehensively reviewing the social science literature, the Article concludes that the empirical evidence showing the lack of an association between parental sexual orientation and the psychological and …

To Cut Or Not To Cut?: Addressing Proposals To Ban Circumcision Under Both A Parental Rights Theory And Child-Centered Perspective In The Specific Context Of Jewish And Muslim Infants, Andrew E. Behrns

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Remedies And Public Interest Balancing, John M. Greabe

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The conventional account of our remedial tradition recognizes that courts may engage in discretionary public interest balancing to withhold the specific remedies typically administered in equity. But it generally does not acknowledge that courts possess the same power with respect to the substitutionary remedies usually provided at law. The conventional account has things backwards when it comes to constitutional remedies. The modern Supreme Court frequently requires the withholding of substitutionary constitutional relief under doctrines developed to protect the perceived public interest. Yet it has treated specific relief to remedy ongoing or imminent invasions of rights as routine, at least when …

Crossing The Final Border: Securing Equal Gender Protection In Immigration Cases, Michelle L. Sudano

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Dodd-Frank's Title Ii Authority: A Disorderly Liquidation Of Experience, Logic, And Due Process, Chadwick Welch

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Knowledge Is Power: The Fundamental Right To Record Present Observations In Public, Travis Gunn

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court's Theory Of Private Law, Nathan B. Oman, Jason M. Solomon

Faculty Publications

In this Article, we revisit the clash between private law and the First Amendment in the Supreme Court’s recent case, Snyder v. Phelps, using a private-law lens. We are scholars who write about private law as individual justice, a perspective that has been lost in recent years but is currently enjoying something of a revival.

Our argument is that the Supreme Court’s theory of private law has led it down a path that has distorted its doctrine in several areas, including the First Amendment–tort clash in Snyder. In areas that range from punitive damages to preemption, the Supreme Court has …

Half Faith And Credit?: The Fifth Circuit Upholds Louisiana's Refusal To Issue A Revised Birth Certificate, Thomas M. Joraanstad

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Sex Segregation In Public Schools: Separate But Equal?, Lily A. Saffer

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

A General Theory Of Governance: Due Process And Lawmaking Power, Louise Weinberg

William & Mary Law Review

This Article proposes a general theory describing the nature and sources of law in American courts. Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins is rejected for this purpose. Better, more general theory is available, flowing from the Due Process Clauses. At its narrowest, the proposed theory is consonant with Erie but generalizes it, embracing federal as well as state law and statutory as well as decisional law in both state and federal courts. More broadly, beyond this unification of systemic thinking, the interest-analytic methodology characteristic of due process extends to a range of substantive constitutional problems. These include problems concerning both the …

Valid Rule Due Process Challenges: Bond V. United States And Erie's Constitutional Source, Kermit Roosevelt Iii

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Structural Constitutional Principle Of Republican Legitimacy, Mark D. Rosen

William & Mary Law Review

Democracy does not spontaneously occur by citizens gathering to choose laws. Instead, representative democracy takes place within an extensive legal framework that determines such matters as who gets to vote, how campaigns are conducted, and what conditions must be met for representatives to make valid law. Many of the “rules of the road” that operationalize republicanism have been subject to constitutional challenges in recent decades. For example, lawsuits have been brought against partisan gerrymandering—which is partly responsible for the fact that most congressional districts are no longer party competitive, but instead are either safely Republican or safely Democratic—and against onerous …

Spandrel Or Frankenstein's Monster? The Vices And Virtues Of Retrofitting In American Law, Michael C. Dorf

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Commentary On Marriage Grants: Article Iii & Same-Sex Marriage, Neal Devins, Tara Leigh Grove

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

The Transformation Of Immigration Federalism, Jennifer M. Chacón

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

A Clarification Of The Constitution's Application Abroad: Making The "Impracticable And Anomalous" Standard More Practicable And Less Anomalous, Jesse Merriam

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.