Constitutional Law Commons^™

Regulating Deregulation: Why States Should Preempt Mandatory Inclusionary Housing Programs, Anna Bailey

BYU Law Review

Instead of easing the housing crises that exist across the country as intended, mandatory inclusionary housing programs burden development, impeding smaller projects and stunting development that in the aggregate could alleviate housing shortages. In this Note, I argue that states should preempt local governments from imposing burdensome mandatory inclusionary housing programs because they interfere with property rights and are counterproductive in their results. The Nollan-Dolan rough proportionality test requires that land-use conditions must be related to and proportional to the problem created by the land development project. The Supreme Court’s recent holding in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado clarified …

Private Disestablishment, Gaurav Mukherjee

BYU Law Review

Should public funds support religious schools? The Supreme Court’s 4–4 decision in St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School v. Drummond may have blocked America’s first religious charter school but set no precedent, leaving core constitutional questions unanswered. This Article argues that St. Isidore illustrates “private disestablishment,” where religious institutions claim private status while exercising public power—allowing them to access public benefits without accepting public constraints. Blurring the boundary between private and public allows these entities to secure public benefits like funding and regulatory advantages while avoiding obligations that typically constrain public institutions, such as non-discrimination or religious neutrality.

The …

The Once And Future Freedom Of The Church: Three Stories, Steven D. Smith

BYU Law Review

This Essay, prepared to be delivered as a lecture at Brigham Young University, discusses three historical stories as a vehicle for suggesting that the concept of “freedom of the church” (or libertas ecclesiae) has not only a colorful and momentous past but an important future as well. Part I discusses how the Supreme Court’s decision in Hosanna Tabor v. Evangelical Lutheran Church helped to revive the venerable theme of freedom of the church. Part II considers the relation between freedom of the church and political authority during the centuries between the collapse of the Western Roman Empire and modernity. Part …

Slavery And The Myth Of Religious Liberty, Audra Lyn Savage

BYU Law Review

This is a story about two ships. One is semi-mythical. The other is half-forgotten but brutally real. The first ship is the story of early settlers who sailed from Europe to escape religious persecution and—through hard work, perseverance, and righteous rebellion—built a nation upon the fundamental freedom of religious liberty for all. The second ship represents the painful history of America, with its millions of Africans stolen from their homeland, placed in unimaginable conditions, and stripped of their language, heritage, and most significantly, their beliefs. Current religious liberty jurisprudence centers around the historical understanding of the creation and ratification of …

Popular Constitutionalism In A Populist Age, Thomas G. Donnelly

BYU Law Review

Popular constitutionalism burst onto the scene as a challenge to the constitutional authority of the Supreme Court. Decades later, popular constitutionalists remain susceptible to one of the earliest (and most potent) critiques of their project—the charge that they have done far too little to explain how their theory might work in practice. With the rise of modern populism, it’s also fair to ask whether popular constitutionalism is an approach that’s capable of meeting the challenges of the current constitutional moment. In this Article, I offer a new vision for popular constitutionalism—one that shows how the theory might work in practice, …

Religious Employment And The Tensions Between Liberty And Equality, R. Shawn Gunnarson, James C. Phillips, Christopher A. Bates

BYU Law Review

Located in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is an exemption for religious employers that is often misunderstood. Often courts and commentators mischaracterize it as a narrow privilege for religious employers to hire people of the same religion. But the statute’s text says otherwise. This article resolves interpretive debates about the meaning and application of the religious employer exemption through a close textualist reading that discovers a new understanding of the structure of Title VII. Our approach applies the tools of textualism, the prevailing theory of statutory interpretation. Paying attention to the text and structure of Title …

The Inconvenience Doctrine, Alexi Pfeffer-Gillett

BYU Law Review

In a nation of stark inequalities, the Roberts Court is often portrayed as siding with the wealthy and powerful. Many scholars argue that the Court has abandoned legal principles altogether and instead simply chooses winners and losers based on the conservative majority’s political agenda. Meanwhile, scholarly examinations of the legal reasoning underlying the Court’s most impactful decisions are largely confined to specific subject areas. Such compartmentalized analyses, though, overlook broader patterns in the Court’s rulings that transcend substantive legal boundaries.

This Article bridges the gap in these parallel conversations by connecting the Roberts Court’s reasoning across many legal fields with …

The Rise And [?] Of Anti-Administrativism, Gary Lawson

BYU Law Review

Scholars have proclaimed the administrative state to be “Under Siege” or subject to a “Never-Ending Assault.” Was the election of President Donald Trump on November 5, 2024, the sixth, if not yet the seventh, day around the walls?

This seems an appropriate time to consider the present and future of opposition to the administrative state—something that has come to be dubbed “anti-administrativism.” The first task, as is usually the case when one seeks intellectual clarity, is to figure out what one is talking about. What is this “anti-administrativism”? Without knowing the answer to that seemingly simple question, one cannot accurately …

Textualist Reasoning And The Open Fields Doctrine: A Survey Of State-Constitutional Decisions, Ariel Krogue

BYU Law Review

State constitutions can, and often do, provide more extensive individual rights than the Federal Constitution affords. When this occurs, state courts frequently cite textual differences between the Federal Constitution and their own state constitutions to explain their departures from federal norms. But do textual differences between the Federal Constitution and state constitutions actually explain why some states offer more constitutional protection than the federal government does? When it comes to the Fourth Amendment’s open fields doctrine, the answer is no.

This Note provides a fifty-state survey of state-constitutional search and seizure provisions; it also identifies those states that have rejected …

Popular Originalism, Thomas G. Donnelly

BYU Law Review

Scholars are obsessed with the Roberts Court’s recent turn to history and tradition. But another source of authority has also emerged as an important feature of the Roberts Court’s approach to constitutional cases. In previous work, I have referred to this source of authority as popular meaning. While original meaning identifies the best reading of the Constitution’s text at the time of its ratification, popular meaning draws on sources of authority outside the courts to capture the constitutional views of the American people today. In this Article, I demonstrate how interpreters might draw on the Constitution’s popular meaning to help …

Religious Freedom As Freedom, Helen M. Alvaré

BYU Law Review

In recent decades, the exercise of religious freedom is increasingly associated with oppression. This is not only due to the disagreement between religions and some governments concerning sexual expression matters—contraception, abortion, same-sex relations, and transgender identity—but is also due to diverging convictions about the substance and sources of freedom. This Article will examine a current and highly visible set of convictions about the contents of human freedom, which together suggest that a thriving religious witness threatens freedom itself. These convictions often surface in the context of laws touching upon sexual expression. It will then contrast these convictions with those found …

Agreeing To Disagree: Abortion Jurisprudence In Jewish And Islamic Law, Rabea Benhalim

BYU Law Review

This Article challenges the prevailing perception that religious people and religious legal traditions are anti-abortion. While this may be true within certain conservative Christian perspectives, this perception is an inaccurate representation of Jewish and Muslim Americans and their respective legal traditions. Both the Jewish and Islamic legal traditions offer a range of nuanced positions on abortion. Furthermore, diverse opinions of Jewish and Islamic abortion jurisprudence inform a variety of topics salient to the current legal debate in the United States. This range of opinions includes strict limitations on abortion, circumstantial legality, and general permissibility. Scholars from both traditions engaged in …

Two Concepts Of Judicial Deference To Religious Claims, Chagai Schlesinger

BYU Law Review

Religious exemptions from general laws are everywhere. The U.S. Supreme Court is expanding its exemption doctrine, systemically preferring religious needs over conflicting considerations. This ignites an ongoing debate between those celebrating religious liberties and those fearing their societal costs. Assessing this judicial trend, as this Article highlights, requires noticing how it is facilitated by a broad deferential approach to religious claims, refraining from evaluating their content.

This Article argues that this broad expression of judicial deference is analytically flawed and normatively implausible. The problem lies in the failure to distinguish between two types of religious claims when deferring to them: …

Valuation Procedure For Condemnation: A Fifty State Survey, David Griffiths

BYU Law Review

The Fifth Amendment requires statutorily authorized condemnors to provide just compensation to landowners for all takings. The procedural method used by states to determine just compensation varies widely among states and is often separate from the more standard procedures existing in traditional civil litigation. Regardless of their method, all fifty states and the District of Columbia each have their own unique procedure for determining just compensation. This Note distinctly classifies the procedural schemes currently used by states to initially value just compensation of condemned property into three general categories: (1) schemes that rely on commissioners to determine just compensation, (2) …

“Absolute And Arbitrary”: How The Supreme Court’S Certiorari Power Violates The Nondelegation Doctrine, Dinis Cheian

BYU Law Review

The Exceptions Clause of Article III of the Constitution is clear that “Congress” “shall make” the rules prescribing the Court’s “appellate jurisdiction.” And so Congress did for almost 150 years. But in the twentieth century, Congress delegated its power to the Supreme Court in the form of—as Chief Justice Taft demanded—”absolute and arbitrary” discretion to pick its appellate cases. Today, under the resulting certiorari regime, the Court enjoys that unbridled discretion in selecting its cases.

Because Congress delegated its power to the Court without articulating “an intelligible principle,” certiorari jurisdiction violates the nondelegation doctrine and is unconstitutional. This Article is …

Codetermination’S Moment Of Truth: Overseas Workers, Jens Dammann

BYU Law Review

The idea that employees of large corporations should be entitled to representation on corporate boards, a concept known as codetermination, is gaining ground. Progressive politicians Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have proposed codetermination regimes that would allow employees to elect between 40% and 45% of board members. Moreover, an increasing number of corporate law scholars are embracing the idea of giving employees a voice in corporate governance.

However, anyone endorsing codetermination must confront a critical dilemma: whether to limit representation to U.S.-based employees or whether to extend it to overseas workers as well. The question’s practical importance is obvious given …

Artificial Intelligence, Autonomous Creation, And The Future Path Of Copyright Law, Peter K. Yu

BYU Law Review

Most literature at the intersection of copyright and artificial intelligence (AI) has focused primarily on what copyright law is or ought to be. Frequently overlooked is the question of what copyright law will be in the AI space. Understanding this question is crucial because the path of copyright law chosen by the United States will have a major impact on the country’s economic and technological future. This Article begins by scrutinizing two lines of arguments that have been advanced to deny copyright protection to AI-generated works: constitutional and incentivebased. The Article then discusses a third line of arguments— harmonization-based arguments—and …

Innocence And Habeas Corpus: A Call For Equitable Reforms, Paige Skousen Nelson

BYU Law Review

Congress intended the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) to codify the Burger and Rehnquist Courts’ habeas corpus jurisprudence, which aimed to establish finality and innocence as gatekeepers to the “Great Writ.” But in practice, AEDPA hinders innocence claims, particularly claims of legal innocence.

This Note agrees that innocence should be one of the most important considerations in granting writs but argues that it is not as valued as Congress intended. This Note proposes two congressional reforms to reinstate innocence to its paramount role without compromising finality: first, amending the federal habeas petition rule to allow petitioners …

What Is Deeply Rooted In The Constitution?, Thomas P. Crocker

BYU Law Review

In a series of cases stretching over a century, the Court made a right’s roots a constitutive feature of its identity. Highlighting the analytic centrality of deep roots to the recognition of rights, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health withdrew prior judicial recognition of a woman’s right to reproductive choice, arguing that such a right was not properly rooted in the American legal tradition. But what does it mean for a right to have deep roots? A surprising feature of American constitutionalism is that there is no single answer to the basic analytic question of what it means for a right …

Corpus Linguistics And The Original Meaning Of The Sixth Amendment, Wesley White

BYU Law Review

The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right of an accused to have the assistance of counsel in a criminal prosecution. Put simply, under the U.S. Supreme Court’s current framework, an accused does not enjoy this right until the government has brought a formal charge. Thus, an accused who engages in plea bargaining before being formally charged is not guaranteed the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Many critics of this framework focus on the purpose of the Sixth Amendment to argue that the right to counsel should be guaranteed in pre-charge plea bargaining. Others point to policy concerns.

This Note is among …

Stand-Ins: Causes And Consequences Of Temporary Leadership, Anne Joseph O’Connell

BYU Law Review

Hafen Lecture, BYU Law School, September 13, 2023.

Where Do Families Come From? The Law Of Family Definition, Katharine Baker

BYU Law Review

Why does the law recognize families? Sometimes family recognition serves to foster cooperative communities in which sharing norms, more than the market or the government, determine rights and obligations. These communities often take care of dependents and serve as important sources of individual self-determination and pluralism. At other times, family delineation serves a corrective purpose, when it forces family members who are not sharing with each other to do so. At still other times, family delineation serves a distributive purpose, as when the law uses “family” definition to distribute resources to determine an intended beneficiary. This use of “family” for …

Navigating Section Three From Griffin’S Case To The Case Of Couy Griffin: Who Should Decide Its Longstanding Questions?, Austin Carpenter

BYU Law Review

Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment was a long-dormant constitutional provision enacted to bar former Confederates from political office. Then, as a result of the shocking political violence at the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021, Section Three suddenly found itself resurrected into the national political discussion. Scholars and courts are now grappling with Section Three’s original meaning and modern application to those politicians and office holders whose conduct led to the events on January 6 — events that interrupted the peaceful transfer of power and left a stain on the United States’ democratic tradition.

Yet, use of Section …

Expectation V. Reality: Practical Problems With The Right Of First Refusal As A Defense Against Eminent Domain, Aerin Christensen

BYU Law Review

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo v. New London, many states enacted new laws to protect property owners from eminent domain. One possible defense for property owners is a statutory right of first refusal. In theory, this is a common-sense protection that ensures that if property is not needed for a public use, it is returned to the original owner. Unfortunately, in practice a right of first refusal is not always an effective protection for property owners.

The plaintiff’s experience in the Utah case Cardiff Wales, LLC v. Washington County School District demonstrates Utah’s statutory …

Garrity Immunity And The U.S. Armed Forces, Bretton H. Laudeman, Gabriel J. Chin

BYU Law Review

The U.S. military is one of the nation’s largest and most important public employers. Given the unique nature of military service, the service branches have a strong interest in ensuring the integrity of their ranks. Yet the military lacks a critical force-management tool used by every other public employer to investigate workplace misconduct: the ability to demand answers to potentially incriminating questions under Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 (1967). The Garrity solution, known as “Garrity immunity,” strikes a critical balance between the government’s interests in workplace oversight and accountability with the employee’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination by …

Bill Of Rights Nondelegation, Eli Nachmany

BYU Law Review

Speculation about the “revival” of the nondelegation doctrine has reached a fever pitch. Although the Supreme Court apparently has not applied the nondelegation doctrine to declare a federal statute unconstitutional since 1935, the doctrine may be making a comeback. The common understanding is that the nondelegation doctrine prohibits Congress from “delegating” legislative power to the executive branch. While the nondelegation doctrine may appear to be about limiting Congress, its ultimate target is delegation. But if the nondelegation doctrine is about policing delegation, then the Court has been regularly — and rigorously — applying the doctrine in a different context: In …

Free Exercise Of Abortion, Elizabeth Sepper

BYU Law Review

For too long, religion has been assumed to be in opposition to abortion. Abortions consistent with, motivated by, and compelled from religion have been erased from legal and political discourse. Since the fall of Roe v. Wade, free exercise claims against abortion bans have begun to correct course. Women and faith leaders in several states have filed suit, asserting their religious convictions in favor of abortion. They give form to the reality—as progressive theologians have long argued—that to have a child can be a sacred choice, but not to have a child can also be a sacred choice. And they …

Transforming Natural Religion: An Essay On Religious Liberty And The Constitution, Steven J. Heyman

BYU Law Review

Recent Supreme Court decisions such as Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia raise the fundamental question of what place religion and religious liberty should hold within a liberal constitutional order that is based on a commitment to the freedom, equality, and well-being of all persons. To explore this question, it is natural to begin with an inquiry into what founding–era Americans thought when they incorporated the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause into the constitutional order that they were creating. Contrary to the views taken by many judges and scholars, …

The Trouble With Time Served, Kimberly Kessler Ferzan

BYU Law Review

Every jurisdiction in the United States gives criminal defendants "credit" against their sentence for the time they spend detained pretrial. In a world of mass incarceration and overcriminalization that disproportionately impacts people of color, this practice appears to be a welcome mechanism for mercy and justice. In fact, how ever, crediting detainees for time served is perverse. It harms the innocent. A defendant who is found not guilty, or whose case is dismissed, gets nothing. Crediting time served also allows the state to avoid internalizing the full costs of pretrial detention, thereby making overinclusive detention standards less expensive. Finally, crediting …

Searches Without Suspicion: Avoiding A Four Million Person Underclass, Tonja Jacobi, Addie Maguire

BYU Law Review

In Samson v. California, the Supreme Court upheld warrantless, suspicionless searches for parolees. That determination was controversial both because suspicionless searches are, by definition, anathema to the Fourth Amendment, and because they arguably undermine parolees’ rehabilitation. Less attention has been given to the fact that the implications of the case were not limited to parolees. The opinion in Samson included half a sentence of dicta that seemingly swept probationers into its analysis, implicating the rights of millions of additional people in the United States. Not only is analogizing parolees and probationers not logically sound because the two groups differ in …