Constitutional Law Commons^™

How State Supreme Courts Take Consequences Into Account: Toward A State-Centered Understanding Of State Constitutionalism, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Federalism At The Cathedral: Property Rules, Liability Rules, And Inalienability Rules In Tenth Amendment Infrastructure, Erin Ryan

Faculty Publications

This Article explores the consequences for good governance of poorly constructed legal infrastructure in the Tenth Amendment context, and recommends a simple jurisprudential fix: exchanging a property rule for the inalienability remedy rule that the Supreme Court used to protect the anticommandeering entitlement in New York v. United States. Grounded in a values-based theory of American federalism, it shows how the New York inalienability rule unnecessarily removes tools for resolving interjurisdictional quagmires - exemplified by the radioactive waste capacity problem at the heart of the New York litigation - by prohibiting novel forms of state-federal bargaining. In New York, the …

Summum, The Vocality Of Public Places, And The Public Forum, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Territoriality And The First Amendment: Free Speech At - And Beyond - Our Borders, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court, Social Psychology, And Group Formation, Neal Devins, William Federspiel

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Clashing Visions Of A "Living" Constitution: Of Opportunists And Obligationists, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

From Privacy To Liberty: The Fourth Amendment After Lawrence, Thomas P. Crocker

Faculty Publications

This Article explores a conflict between the protections afforded interpersonal relations in Lawrence v. Texas and the vulnerability experienced under the Fourth Amendment by individuals who share their lives with others. Under the Supreme Court's third-party doctrine, we have no constitutionally protected expectation of privacy in what we reveal to other persons. The effect of this doctrine is to leave many aspects of ordinary life shared in the company of others constitutionally unprotected. In an increasingly socially networked world, the Fourth Amendment may fail to protect precisely those liberties-to live in the company of others free from state surveillance and …

The Constitutional Right To A Treaty Preemption Defense, David Sloss

Faculty Publications

The Constitution includes several provisions specifically designed to protect criminal defendants. For example, the Fourth Amendment prohibits "unreasonable searches and seizures," the Sixth Amendment guarantees that criminal defendants have a right to legal representation, and the Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishments. The Constitution' s Founders recognized that state power is at its apex when the state threatens individuals with criminal sanctions. Accordingly, they adopted special constitutional rules to protect "the individual defendant from the awesome power of the State."

The Due Process Clause provides critical protection for criminal defendants; it stipulates that no State shall "deprive any person …

Not Very Collegial: Exploring Bans On Illegal Immigrant Admissions To State Colleges And Universities, Marcia A. Yablon-Zug, Danielle R. Holley-Walker

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Standing As An Article Ii Nondelegation Doctrine, Tara Leigh Grove

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Religion In The Workplace: A Report On The Layers Of Relevant Law In The United States, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Public's Domain In Trademark Law: A First Amendment Theory Of The Consumer, Laura A. Heymann

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Presidential Unilateralism And Political Polarization: Why Today's Congress Lacks The Will And The Way To Stop Presidential Initiatives, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court’S Controversial Gvrs – And An Alternative, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Faculty Publications

This Article addresses a relatively neglected portion of the Supreme Court's docket: the "GVR"-that is, the Court's procedure for summarily granting certiorari, vacating the decision below without finding error, and remanding the case for further consideration by the lower court. The purpose of the GVR device is to give the lower court the initial opportunity to consider the possible impact of a new development (such as a recently issued Supreme Court decision) and, if necessary, to revise its ruling in light of the changed circumstances. The Court may issue scores or even hundreds of these orders every year

This Article …

Searching Cell Phones Incident To Arrest: Can Courts And Legislatures Impose Limits On A Bright Line Rule?, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Orwell’S Vision: Video And The Future Of Civil Rights Enforcement, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Protestant Dissent And The Virginia Disestablishment, 1776-1786, Carl H. Esbeck

Faculty Publications

In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), the Supreme Court elevated the events surrounding the disestablishment of the Anglican Church in Virginia during and soon after the American Revolution as a principal guide for the meaning of the Establishment Clause. The rule to come out of the Virginia experience is that support for religion should be voluntary thus, no active support by the government. An in-depth examination of James Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance opposing Patrick Henry's Assessment Bill is undertaken here not only because of its role in the Virginia disestablishment, but because it is the most important document on …

Nobody's Fools: The Rational Audience As First Amendment Ideal, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

Assumptions about audiences shape the outcomes of First Amendment cases. Yet the Supreme Court rarely specifies what its assumptions about audiences are, much less attempts to justify them. Drawing on literary theory, this Article identifies and defends two critical assumptions that emerge from First Amendment cases involving so-called "core" speech. The first is that audiences are capable of rationally assessing the truth, quality, and credibility of core speech. The second is that more speech is generally preferable to less. These assumptions, which I refer to collectively as the rational audience model, lie at the heart of the "marketplace of ideas" …

A Radically Immodest Judicial Modesty: The End Of Facial Challenges To Abortion Regulations And The Future Of The Health Exception In The Roberts Era, B. Jessie Hill

Faculty Publications

If there is anything as strongly associated in the public mind with Chief Justice John Roberts as his black robe and judicial temperament, it is surely his claim to judicial modesty. And indeed, some commentators have suggested that there are signs of newfound judicial restraint in the Roberts Court. One example of this purported restraint is the Roberts Court’s expressed preference for narrower, as-applied decisionmaking in constitutional cases, as opposed to striking down statutes on their face. The Roberts Court has turned away facial challenges or otherwise expressed a preference for making decisions on an as-applied basis in a number …

Safford Unified School District No. 1 V. Redding, And The Future Of School Strip Searches, Lewis R. Katz

Faculty Publications

Each year in America an unknown number of children in primary and secondary schools are strip searched by teachers and/or school administrators, forced to remove pants and shirts down to their underwear and sometimes forced to expose their breasts and genitals. In Safford Unified School District No. 1 v. Redding, 129 S.Ct. 2633 (29), the Supreme Court weighed in on the issue, finding that school officials violated the child’s Fourth Amendment rights during a strip search but reversing the Ninth Circuit and awarding the school officials qualified immunity not withstanding the ineptitude of the investigation. The Court purported to apply …

Old W(H)Ine, Old Bottles: A Reply To Professor Paulsen, Margaret E. Mcguiness

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

International law is “everywhere” in the United States: informing state CO2 emissions standards; providing inspiration for local civil rights codes; and overseeing the more than three trillion dollars in annual trade in goods, to name just a few examples. A reader of Professor Michael Stokes Paulsen’s essay, The Constitutional Power To Interpret International Law, might be forgiven for missing these important trends, because rather than focus on the ubiquity of international law and the myriad ways in which it has permeated U.S. legal, social, economic, and political life, Paulsen returns us to old arguments over whether international law …

The Hidden Legacy Of Holy Trinity Church: The Unique National Institution Canon, Anita S. Krishnakumar

Faculty Publications

This Article explores an underappreciated legacy of the Supreme Court's (in)famous decision in Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States. Although Holy Trinity has been much discussed in the academic literature and in judicial opinions, the discussion thus far has focused almost exclusively on the first half of the Court's opinion—which declares that the "spirit" of a statute should trump its "letter"—and relies on legislative history to help divine that spirit. Scholars and jurists have paid little, if any, attention to the opinion's lengthy second half. In that second half, the Court tells a detailed narrative about the country's …

The President, Congress And The Security Council: Counterterrorism And The Use Of Force Through The Internationalist Lens, Margaret E. Mcguiness

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

This symposium is focused on the powers of the U.S. presidency, a topic that typically implies questions of constitutional law. More narrowly, the topic of presidential powers in the area of counterterrorism typically raises questions of how the Constitution addresses the shared war powers of the President and Congress. U.S. legal scholars have generally not framed the question of presidential power to use force against transnational terrorist groups as one of international law or international institutions. Rather, the separation of powers question has focused on historical and functional views of the President's war powers and whether and to what …

Queer Legal Victories: Intersectionality Revisited, Darren Rosenblum

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In my 1995 article "Queer Intersectionality and the Failure of Lesbian and Gay ‘Victories,’” I merged queer and intersectionality theories to critique four lesbian and gay legal “victories.” I argued that queer identity intersected with other identity characteristics, yielding queer communities whose diverse needs reflect their various class, race, gender, and sex identifications. This intersectional perspective led me to view these decisions as victories for only a privileged subset of queer communities that, "but for" their gay or lesbian identity, conform to the "American dream" (De Lauretis 1991; Robson 1992). The United States' juridical heterosexism stifled the progressive potential …

Business, The Roberts Court, And The Solicitor General: Why The Supreme Court's Recent Business Decisions May Not Reveal Very Much, Sri Srinivasan, Bradley W. Joondeph

Faculty Publications

This essay presents an empirical examination of the full universe of the Roberts Court’s decisions affecting the interests of business from January 2006, when Justice Alito joined the Court, to January 2009. As a purely descriptive matter, we find that the Court tended to reach results favorable to business interests, and that it tended to adopt the positions urged by the Bush administration. Moreover, when those two positions diverged-most saliently, in cases where the United States and the United States Chamber of Commerce filed opposing amicus briefs-the Roberts Court overwhelmingly sided with the government.

While these findings are interesting, our …

Specific Performance And The Thirteenth Amendment, Nathan B. Oman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

"Duty-Defining Power" And The First Amendment's Civil Domain, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

In Rethinking Free Speech and Civil Liability,1 Daniel Solove and Neil Richards attempt something truly ambitious. The authors seek to map coherent boundaries for the First Amendment’s vast civil domain. Their project merits serious attention. Currently, different rules apply to civil liability for speech depending on whether the liability arises in tort, contract, or property. Solove and Richards claim that these boundaries are unworkable, under-theorized, and in some cases destined to collide. They develop a framework for mapping the First Amendment’s civil domain that is based upon a distinction regarding the type of power the state exercises in various civil …

How Planned Parenthood V. Casey (Pretty Much) Settled The Abortion Wars, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

More than twenty-one years after Robert Bork's failed Supreme Court nomination and seventeen years after Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, the rhetoric of abortion politics remains unchanged. Pro-choice interests, for example, argue that states are poised to outlaw abortion and that Roe v. Wade is vulnerable to overruling. In this Essay, I will debunk those claims. First, I will explain how Casey's approval of limited abortion rights reflected an emerging national consensus in 1992. Second, I will explain why the Supreme Court is unlikely to risk political backlash by formally modifying Casey- either by restoring the trimester test …

Preaching To The Court House And Judging In The Temple, Nathan B. Oman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

What The Hein Decision Can Tell Us About The Roberts Court And The Establishment Clause, Carl H. Esbeck

Faculty Publications

This extended essay plays off the Supreme Court's recent decision in Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc., 127 S. Ct. 2553 (2007) (plurality opinion), rejecting taxpayer standing where the claim on the merits challenges discretionary actions by officials in the executive branch said to violate the establishment clause. While the matter directly at hand is the scope of taxpayer standing first permitted in Flast v. Cohen (1968), the essay uses the "injury in fact" requirement for standing to delve into the manner by which the four opinions in Hein give us insight into how the Roberts Court will approach …