Constitutional Law Commons^™

Constitution-Talk And Justice-Talk, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Inside the courts, one might distinguish between constitution-talk and justice-talk on the ground that the former, but not the latter, results in enforceable legal judgments. So, inside the courts, we might interpret the Constitution with justice in mind, but what we do is produce legally enforceable judgments. Outside the courts, however, it might seem that all we do is interpret and talk. It is not immediately obvious that cloaking justice-talk as constitution-talk outside the courts has much rhetorical force. As I will argue, the fact that invoking the Constitution outside the courts, in the course of discussing justice, does have …

Rights, Capabilities, And The Good Society, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Part I this essay explores and then criticizes the two major arguments behind the conventional wisdom that rights undermine efforts to secure a state role in ensuring the material preconditions for a good society, and therefore, the material preconditions for the development of those human capabilities essential to a fully human life. I conclude in this part that this understanding of rights is mistaken. In Part II, I urge that the pragmatic argument put forward by rights critics and some welfare advocates for forgoing rights-talk and rights-rhetoric also fails: there are very real costs, both in theory and in …

Defending Congress, Seth P. Waxman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Every year the Solicitor General must decide, one case at a time, what the interests of the United States are with respect to several thousand different cases in the federal and state courts. Should the United States appeal, or seek rehearing, or petition for certiorari, or file a brief amicus curiae, or intervene? What issues should the United States raise, and what arguments should it make? How should the law be interpreted or the doctrine applied? The goal is for the United States to speak with one voice - a voice that reflects the interests of all three branches of …

Open Access And The First Amendment: A Critique Of Comcast Cablevision Of Broward County, Inc. V. Broward County, David Wolitz

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

To what extent does the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment bar the adoption of “open access” regulations? Open access (or “net neutrality”) refers to a policy that would require broadband Internet providers, such as cable and phone companies, to allow competitive Internet Service Providers (ISPs) onto their broadband lines at nondiscriminatory rates. A federal district court in Florida recently held Broward County’s open access ordinance unconstitutional on the grounds that it would force speech – in the form of Internet content – on to the local cable company. If the district court’s analysis is correct, then open access …

Reconstructing The Rule Of Law, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The action taken in Bush v. Gore by the five conservative Justices on the United States Supreme Court, Bugliosi argued, was not just wrong as a matter of law, but criminal: It was a malem in se, fully intended, premeditated theft of a national election for the Presidency of the United States. Now, as Balkan and Levinson would argue, this seventh, "prosecutorial" response -- that the Court's action was not just wrong but criminal -- is also not available to a devotee of either radical or moderate indeterminacy. Even assuming both criminal intent and severe harm-a wrongful, specific intent to …

Subconstitutional Constitutional Law: Supplement, Sham, Or Substitute?, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this brief Comment I make two points. First, the subconstitutional doctrines appear to have the advantage of allowing elected lawmakers to pursue whatever course they wish, as long as they satisfy the requirements of these subconstitutional doctrines. In practice, however, what appears to be a provisional invalidation based on subconstitutional law turns out to be - and, indeed, might be expected at the moment of decision to be - a final, unrevisable decision. Further, courts might strategically deploy these sub constitutional doctrines to avoid the sting of the charge that they are foreclosing legislative choice while effectively doing so. …

The Bakaly Debacle: The Role Of The Press In High-Profile Criminal Investigations, Julie R. O'Sullivan

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Others have examined why prosecutors or law enforcement agents may be inclined to "leak" information regarding ongoing criminal investigations, documented the rules that govern federal prosecutors' interaction with the press in such circumstances, outlined the difficulties encountered in enforcing those rules, and critiqued the performance of Mr. Starr's office in this regard. In other words, the dynamic as it flows from governmental actors to the press has been scrutinized. I would like to suggest that a more searching examination be conducted of the press's role, and perhaps its responsibilities, in this context. Because I am neither a journalist nor a …

Legislative Constitutional Interpretation, Neal K. Katyal

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This is an Essay about "the how" of constitutional interpretation. Much attention has been devoted to the question of how the Constitution is interpreted in courts. Rather little attention has been devoted to the question of how the Constitution is interpreted elsewhere in the government. The Constitution tells us that Congress, the President, and state legislators and courts must adhere to its terms, but it does not tell us how much interpretive power each actor should have, nor does it prescribe rules for each actor to use when interpreting the text. I argue that constitutional interpretation by Congress is, and …

W(H)Ither Zschernig?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The author argues here that a declaration of victory by the critics of the dormant foreign affairs doctrine would be premature. Notwithstanding the Court's citation of Ashwander v. TVA, the actual grounds of the decision in Crosby were in no meaningful sense less "constitutional" in nature than a decision based on the dormant foreign affairs power would have been. Moreover, even though the Court said that its decision was based on a straightforward application of "settled ... implied preemption doctrine," the Court's preemption analysis was anything but ordinary. Indeed, Crosby's version of preemption analysis is subject to the …

"Shut Up He Explained", Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Part I of this Commentary examines the conversational model of politics. I argue that the virtues Bennett finds in the conversational model exist only when, and to the extent that, participants in civil and political society can engage in undominated conversation. The requirement that conversation be undominated generates a substantial set of social prerequisites, mostly dealing with equality. And yet, determining what social arrangements actually satisfy those prerequisites is itself a matter of constitutional controversy. Resolving such controversies through politics is no solution, because the political arena is where we seek to ensure that nondomination prevails in civil society, and, …

The Original Meaning Of The Commerce Clause, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The U& Supreme Court, in recent cases; has attempted to define limits on the Congress's power to regulate commerce among the several states. While Justice Thomas has maintained that the original meaning of "commerce" was limited to the "trade and exchange" of goods and transportation for this purpose, some have argued that he is mistaken and that "commerce" originally included any "gainful activity." Having examined every appearance of the word "commerce"in the records of the Constitutional Convention, the ratification debates and the Federalist Papers, Professor Barnett finds no surviving example of this term being used in this broader sense. In …

Federalism And International Human Rights In The New Constitutional Order, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This Essay examines the contours of what I have elsewhere called the new constitutional order with respect to international human rights and federalism. The background is my suggestion that the U.S. political-constitutional system is on the verge of moving into a new constitutional regime, following the end of the New Deal-Great Society constitutional regime. The Supreme Court's innovations in the law of federalism in connection with Congress's exercise of its powers over domestic affairs has provoked speculation about the implications of those innovations for the national government's power with respect to foreign affairs. Most of the speculation has been that …

Eleventh Amendment Schizophrenia, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article argues that conflicting analytical strains run through the Supreme Court's recent majority opinions in the area of state sovereign immunity. The "supremacy" strain stresses that, despite the Eleventh Amendment, the states remain obligated to comply with federal law, and that the Constitution envisions the "necessary judicial means" to enforce these obligations against the state. These means include suits by the federal government, private suits for injunctive relief, and suits seeking damages from state officials in their individual capacities. Thus, according to the supremacy strain, state sovereign immunity is unimportant because it merely bars unnecessary means of enforcing the …

Second Amendment Symposium: Commentary, Randy E. Barnett

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Commentary on the Second Amendment given as part of the “Symposium on the Second Amendment.”

Sovereign Immunity, Due Process, And The Alden Trilogy, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Alden v. Maine, the Court held that the principle of sovereign immunity protects states from being sued without their consent in their own courts by private parties seeking damages for the states' violation of federal law. The Court thus rejected the "forum allocation" interpretation of the Eleventh Amendment, under which the Amendment serves merely to channel suits against the states based on federal law into the state courts, which are required by the Supremacy Clause to entertain such suits. The Court held instead that the Eleventh Amendment protects the states from being subjected to private damage liability by …

Damage Control? A Comment On Professor Neuman’S Reading Of Reno V. Aadc, David Cole

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This comment responds to an article by Professor Gerald Neuman on the Supreme Court's recent decision in Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (AADC). The Court in AADC rejected a selective prosecution claim by immigrants targeted for deportation based on First Amendment-protected activities, finding that Congress had stripped the federal courts of jurisdiction over such claims, and that in any event the Constitution does not recognize a selective prosecution objection to a deportation proceeding. Professor Neuman argues that the decision should not be read as implying that aliens have less First Amendment protection than citizens, and that the decision can …

A Report Card On The Impeachment: Judging The Institutions That Judged President Clinton, Susan Low Bloch

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Now that we have lived through one of the most unusual events in American history-the impeachment and trial of the President of the United States-it is appropriate, indeed essential, that we assess how the process worked and learn what we can from it. Specifically, I want to address two questions: First, how well did the impeachment process work? In good academic fashion, I will grade each of the governmental institutions involved – giving them, if you will, a report card. Second, what did we learn from the experience to guide us if, in the future, we face the impeachment of …

The Value Of Dissent, Lawrence B. Solum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay reviews Dissent, Injustice, and the Meanings of America by Steven H. Shiffrin (1999).

Theorizing about the freedom of speech has been a central enterprise of contemporary legal scholarship. The important contributions to the debate are simply far too numerous to categorize. One ambition of this theorizing is the production of a comprehensive theory of the freedom of expression, a set of consistent normative principles that would explain and justify First Amendment doctrine. Despite an outpouring of scholarly effort, the consensus is that free speech theory has failed to realize this imperial ambition. Rather than searching for the global …

The Constitution Of Civil Society, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This Article . . .sketches how the free expression, freedom of religion, and substantive due process provisions of the U.S. Constitution have been interpreted to define and protect families, religious institutions, non-political associations, and political parties. I have organized the discussion by topics rather than by institutions. The next section examines the ways in which constitutional law defines civil society's institutions, and Section III examines the extent to which it allows government to regulate them. Section IV deals with the constitutional restrictions on government's power to give unconditional or conditional grants to civil society's institutions. The Conclusion returns to the …

Globalization And Federalism In A Post-Printz World, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This Article uses the recent Supreme Court decision in Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council as the vehicle for examining the way in which the U.S. constitutional law of federalism might be responding to globalization. Part II develops the argument that globalization as such has no strong implications for domestic constitutional law. The remainder of the Article examines the U.S. constitutional response to the aspect of globalization revealed in Crosby, and argues that the Court's decision in Crosby is in tension with its other federalism decisions. But, the Article argues, that tension arises not from the fact that Crosby arises …

Regulatory Takings And "Judicial Supremacy", J. Peter Byrne

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The thesis of this Article is that the Court of Federal Claims and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have become exposed to this classic critique of constitutional decision-making through the recent expansions of the regulatory takings doctrine. Though the chief agent for this expansion has been the Supreme Court, these lower courts have made their own prominent contributions to broadening regulatory takings, and they are far more vulnerable to political reprisals. Like the Due Process Clause in the gilded age, the Takings Clause today can easily be and has been seen as an avenue for inappropriate judicial …

The Canon(S) Of Constitutional Law: An Introduction, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Any discipline has a canon, a set of themes that organize the way in which people think about the discipline. Or, perhaps, any discipline has a number of competing canons. Is there a canon of constitutional law? A group of casebook authors met in December 1999 to discuss the choices they had made - what they had decided to include, what to exclude, what they regretted excluding (or including), what principles they used in developing their casebooks. Most of the authors were affiliated with law schools, but some had developed coursebooks for use in undergraduate political science and constitutional history …

Should Lucas V. South Carolina Coastal Council Protect Where The Wild Things Are? Of Beavers, Bob-O-Links, And Other Things That Go Bump In The Night, Hope M. Babcock

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council is one of several recent Supreme Court decisions in which the Court used the Just Compensation Clause as a "weapon of reaction" to strike down an offending land use restriction. In Lucas, the target of the Court's animus was a state law prohibiting a landowner from developing two beachfront lots. The South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the law as a legitimate exercise of the State's police power to protect the public from harm in the face of a takings challenge by the landowner. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected the South Carolina court's talismatic …

Escaping The Expression-Equality Conundrum: Toward Anti-Orthodoxy And Inclusion, Nan D. Hunter

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In this article, Professor Hunter questions the naturalness and inevitability of the dichotomy in constitutional law between freedom of expression and the right to equality. She places the origin of this doctrinal divergence in the history of American social protest movements in the first half of the twentieth century, which began with ideologically-based claims and shifted to a primary emphasis on identity-based equality claims. During the interim period between World War I and World War I, the wave of seminal First Amendment cases was ebbing and the wave of equality claims was beginning to swell. Close examination of the constitutional …

Expressive Identity: Recuperating Dissent For Equality, Nan D. Hunter

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Constitutional law has made a mess of the relationship between expression and equality. Much of the time, the two claims exist in sharp conflict, as in recent Supreme Court cases involving hate speech' and the effort by a gay and lesbian group to march in a St. Patrick's Day parade. In those cases, equality claims collided head-on with defenses based on a First Amendment right to express anti-equality values. In other instances, such as debates about whether viewpoint diversity can serve as a justification for affirmative action, or whether race-conscious redistricting can serve as a proxy for political interests under …

Impeachment As Congressional Constitutional Interpretation, Neal K. Katyal

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Constitutionalists have assumed, too quickly in my view, that symmetry should exist between the interpretive styles of the courts and Congress. This assumption, which I shall call the myth of interpretive symmetry, slights the many reasons why an interpretive method may work well in one area and not work as well in another. Instead of mapping out all these possible divergences, I illustrate the point with three examples: the roles of history, precedent, and moral philosophy. I show how, in each instance, arguments can be made to suggest that divergent institutional roles should be taken into account in formulating a …

The Public And Private Lives Of Presidents, Neal K. Katyal

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Focusing on a frequent theme in the executive privilege arguments advanced by the Clinton Administration, Neal Kumar Katyal explores the distinction drawn between the public and private lives of the President, particularly in the Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky cases. He argues that the Administration's difficulties in asserting executive privilege claims following these cases demonstrate that the public/private distinction is not entirely valid He asserts that, unlike members of Congress who have time when they are not in session, the President is unique in that he is in office twenty-four hours a day. He argues that this special constitutional status …

Thinking About The Constitution At The Cusp, Mark V. Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

What do I mean in saying that we need to think about the Constitution "at the cusp?" I have in mind an image in which we have one way of thinking about the Constitution on one side of a line, and another way of thinking about the Constitution on the other. My sense is that we may have crossed such a line quite recently. I believe that we may be in a new constitutional order, different from the New Deal-Great Society constitutional order that existed from 1937 to sometime in the 1980s. If so, those of us who have been …

Writing Off Race, Girardeau A. Spann

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The constitutionality of affirmative action has now become one of the central topics in the politics of race. Ironically, the United States Constitution says absolutely nothing about affirmative action. The text never mentions the term, and the equal protection language in the Fourteenth Amendment simply begs the question of whether equality requires or precludes the use of affirmative action. The intent of the Framers is similarly unhelpful. We know that the drafters of the Fifth Amendment owned slaves, and the drafters of the Fourteenth Amendment envisioned a racially stratified society. But the Fourteenth Amendment was itself an affirmative action measure, …

Are There Nothing But Texts In This Class? Interpreting The Interpretive Turns In Legal Thought, Robin West

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Allan Hutchinson remarks at the beginning of his interesting article that Gadamer's writings have had only a peripheral influence on legal scholarship -- only occasionally cited, and then begrudgingly so, and never given the serious attention they deserve or require. Nevertheless, Hutchinson acknowledges, Gadamerian influences can be noted -- particularly in the now widely shared understanding that adjudication is, fundamentally, an interpretive exercise. Even with this qualification, though, I think Hutchinson understates Gadamer's impact. Whatever may be true of Gadamer's influence in other disciplines, his influence in law has been unambiguously both broad and deep -- although it has come …