Constitutional Law Commons^™

The History Of The Constitution Is Our Future., Maggie Blackhawk

Michigan Law Review

The Constitution of the United States establishes a government; it also stands as the fundamental law of a people. It shapes daily life, distributes power, and sets a direction for the future. And yet when we ask about the reach and meaning of the Constitution, we are increasingly told to look backward. The answers to our future are said to lie in the past.

Closing Time?, Aziz Z. Huq

Michigan Law Review

A review of No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States. By Erwin Chemerinsky.

The Court And The Killing State, Eric Berger

Michigan Law Review

A review of Secrets of the Killing State: The Untold Story of Lethal Injection. By Corinna Barrett Lain.

The Young And The Lawless, Sarah Medina Camiscoli

Michigan Law Review

A review of Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes. By Leah Litman.

Expressive Association At Work, Elizabeth Sepper, James D. Nelson, Charlotte Garden

Michigan Law Review

Do employers have constitutional rights of expressive association? Two decades ago, in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, the Supreme Court held that a state law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation could not be applied to a membership organization that wished to exclude a gay leader. Today, courts face a rising tide of claims from employers, who argue that Dale constitutionally insulates their hiring and firing decisions from antidiscrimination law. A narrow majority of courts have denied such claims, holding that Dale does not apply at work. Increasingly, however, courts are siding with these employers, eliding any distinction …

The Imposition Of Constitutional Rights, Alvin Padilla-Babilonia

Michigan Law Review

One of the central principles of constitutionalism is that citizenship stands for equal rights under the law. According to this ideal, a U.S. citizen living in Puerto Rico or Guam should have the same constitutional rights as a citizen living on the mainland. However, throughout U.S. history, constitutional rights have been neither uniform nor centralized. While constitutional rights held importance, they coexisted with ideals of democratic self-governance and legal pluralism. Today, Supreme Court justices and legal scholars argue that all constitutional rights should apply in the territories. This view upholds citizenship, equal rights, and the rule of law. But the …

Democratizing Constitutional Memory, Reva B. Siegel

Michigan Law Review

The Court regularly makes claims on the past—claims that have grown in prominence since conservatives on the Roberts Court invoked “history and tradition” to overrule longstanding case law on religious free exercise, the right to bear arms, and the right to abortion in its 2021 term and to threaten other rights since. The Court claims its historically based approach constrains judges by focusing interpretation on objective and impersonal facts in the past.

Constitutional Iconoclasm, Andrew J. Lanham

Michigan Law Review

A review of The Constitutional Bind: How Americans Came to Idolize a Document That Fails Them. By Aziz Rana.

Some Realism About Originalism, William J. Novak

Michigan Law Review

A review of Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation. By Jack M. Balkin.

Constitutional Failure, Erwin Chemerinsky

Michigan Law Review

A review of The Constitution of the War on Drugs. By David Pozen.

Exorcising Hobbes’S Ghost: A Future For Constitutional And International Law, Monica Hakimi

Michigan Law Review

A review of Law for Leviathan: Constitutional Law, International Law, and the State. By Daryl Levinson.

Retrenchment By Diversion: The New Politics Of Parental Rights, Mary Ziegler, Maxine Eichner, Naomi Cahn

Michigan Law Review

For the past century, the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the importance of parents’ rights to direct their children’s upbringing and education. Yet suddenly the rhetoric of parental rights is being used to ground a broad range of claims on issues such as what can be taught in public schools, when minors can access gender-affirming care, or who will be punished for helping minors travel for abortion care. Why have parental-rights claims surged so visibly in contemporary law and politics? And are all the new arguments made under the banner of parental rights equally rooted in constitutional precedent?

This Article …

After Courts: Democratizing Statutory Law, Ryan D. Doerfler, Samuel Moyn

Michigan Law Review

In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton argued for locating interpretive authority over law separately from those institutions tasked with formulating it. Hamilton’s vision, never accurate as a description of American practice, has not been credible for a long time. To the extent enormous power is still allocated to judges, our legal institutions have been out of step with our legal theory, which has long regarded them as political actors and policymakers. More practically, every term it is clearer and clearer that the role of the Supreme Court in statutory cases (including checking administrative rulemaking and other processes) is, if anything, …

A Republic Of Spending, Jonathan S. Gould

Michigan Law Review

Large-scale spending measures make up many of Congress’s most important recent contributions to national policymaking. Congress has appropriated trillions of dollars to respond to emergencies, fight climate change, expand social safety net programs, spur technological innovation, and strengthen national infrastructure. While the contemporary Congress’s failure to enact landmark regulatory statutes causes many to characterize it as dysfunctional, Congress in fact remains quite active—its policymaking energy is simply concentrated in the spending domain.

Congress’s use of spending rather than regulatory legislation as its primary way of shaping national policy marks a significant shift in American governance. This Article examines the causes …

Standing And Probabilistic Injury, Curtis A. Bradley, Ernest A. Young

Michigan Law Review

Standing to sue often turns on questions of probability. For example, public law plaintiffs must show that they are likely to be affected by allegedly unlawful government surveillance or environmental policies, and consumers may wish to sue private defendants over false credit reporting or data breaches that may or may not cause them financial or reputational harm in the future. This Article offers a framework for resolving a wide range of these “probabilistic standing” issues. Our core claim is that courts and commentators ask too much of standing doctrine in probabilistic cases. First, scholars sometimes seek a unified theory of …

Original Public Meaning And Pregnancy’S Ambiguities, Evan D. Bernick, Jill Wieber Lens

Michigan Law Review

Relying on 1868 abortion statutes, the 2022 Supreme Court held in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that no federal constitutional right to abortion exists. Mere months later, a petition for certiorari asked the Court to determine that “person” in the Fourteenth Amendment includes prenatal existence, which would require criminalization of abortion in all states. The petitioners cited Dobbs and claimed the authority of legal history in 1868 and before. These arguments will be heard again, and they are increasingly framed in terms of the “original public meaning” of the Fourteenth Amendment.

This Article refutes these arguments on their own …

Revocation At The Founding, Jacob Schuman

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court is divided over the constitutional law of community supervision. The justices disagree about the nature of a defendant’s liberty under supervision, the rights that apply when the government punishes violations, and the relationship between parole, probation, and supervised release. These divisions came to a head in 2019’s United States v. Haymond, where the justices split 4–1–4 on whether the right to a jury trial applies to revocation of supervised release. Their opinions focused on the original understanding of the jury right at the time the Constitution was ratified.

This Article aims to settle the debate over …

Is There Anything Left In The Fight Against Partisan Gerrymandering? Congressional Redistricting Commissions And The “Independent State Legislature Theory”, Derek A. Zeigler, Jose Urteaga

Michigan Law Review

Partisan gerrymandering is a scourge on our democracy. Instead of voters choosing their representatives, representatives choose their voters. Historically, individuals and states could pursue multiple paths to challenge partisan gerrymandering. One way was to bring claims in federal court. The Supreme Court shut this door in Rucho v. Common Cause. States can also resist partisan gerrymandering by establishing congressional redistricting commissions. However, the power of these commissions to draw congressional districts is at risk. In Moore v. Harper, a case decided in the Supreme Court’s 2022-2023 Term, the petitioners asked the Court to embrace the “Independent State Legislature …

The Impact Of Post-Dobbs Abortion Bans On Prenatal Tort Claims, Aviva K. Diamond

Michigan Law Review

In June 2022, the Supreme Court revoked Americans’ fundamental right to abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. However, the Court said nothing about how its decision would impact tort claims related to reproductive care. Many states have since adopted near-total or early-gestational- age abortion bans, which has not only diminished access to reproductive care, but has also incidentally impaired the ability of plaintiffs to bring long-recognized prenatal tort claims. Prenatal tort claims—wrongful pregnancy, birth, and life—allow victims to recover when a medical professional negligently performs reproductive or prenatal care. This Note identifies the impact that post-Dobbs …

Allow Me To Transform: A Black Guy’S Guide To A New Constitution, Brandon Hasbrouck

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Allow Me to Retort: A Black Guy’s Guide to the Constitution. By Elie Mystal.

Status Manipulation In Chae Chan Ping V. United States, Sam Erman

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Chae Chan Ping v. United States. By Rose Cuison-Villazor in Critical Race Judgments: Rewritten U.S. Court Opinions on Race and the Law 74, 84. Edited by Bennett Capers, Devon W. Carbado, R.A. Lenhardt and Angela Onwuachi-Willig.

Akhil Amar’S Unusable Past, Gregory Ablavsky

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Words That Made Us: America’s Constitutional Conversation, 1760–1840. By Akhil Reed Amar.

Territoriality In American Criminal Law, Emma Kaufman

Michigan Law Review

It is a bedrock principle of American criminal law that the authority to try and punish someone for a crime arises from the crime’s connection to a particular place. Thus, we assume that a person who commits a crime in some location— say, Philadelphia—can be arrested by Philadelphia police for conduct deemed criminal by the Pennsylvania legislature, prosecuted in a Philadelphia court, and punished in a Pennsylvania prison. The idea that criminal law is tied to geography in this way is called the territoriality principle. This idea is so familiar that it usually goes unstated.

This Article foregrounds and questions …

Federal Pleading Standards In State Court, Marcus Gadson

Michigan Law Review

Most state courts cannot follow both their state constitutions and federal pleading standards. Even if they could, policy considerations unique to states compel state courts to reject federal pleading standards. This is because federal courts have changed pleading standards to allow judges to make factual determinations on a motion to dismiss and to require more factual detail in complaints. While scholars have vigorously debated whether these changes are wise, just, and permissible under the federal rules and the Constitution, they have ignored the even more important questions of whether state courts can and should adopt those pleading standards. The oversight …

Most Favored Racial Hierarchy: The Ever-Evolving Ways Of The Supreme Court’S Superordination Of Whiteness, David Simson

Michigan Law Review

This Article engages in a critical comparative analysis of the recent history and likely future trajectory of the Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence in matters of race and religion to uncover new aspects of the racial project that Reggie Oh has recently called the “racial superordination” of whiteness—the reinforcing of the superior status of whites in American society by, among other things, prioritizing their interests in structuring constitutional doctrine. This analysis shows that the Court is increasingly widening the gap between conceptions of, and levels of protection provided for, equality in the contexts of race and religion in ways that prioritize …

The Politics Of Proportionality, Nelson Tebbe, Micah Schwartzman

Michigan Law Review

A Review of How Rights Went Wrong: Why Our Obsession With Rights Is Tearing America Apart. By Jamal Greene.

Securing Gun Rights By Statute: The Right To Keep And Bear Arms Outside The Constitution, Jacob D. Charles

Michigan Law Review

In popular and professional discourse, debate about the right to keep and bear arms most often revolves around the Second Amendment. But that narrow reference ignores a vast and expansive nonconstitutional legal regime privileging guns and their owners. This collection of nonconstitutional gun rights confers broad powers and immunities on gun owners that go far beyond those required by the Constitution, like rights to bring guns on private property against an owner’s wishes and to carry a concealed firearm in public with no training or background check. This Article catalogues this set of expansive laws and critically assesses them. Unlike …

Disparate Discrimination, Leah M. Litman

Michigan Law Review

This Article explains and analyzes a recent trend in the Supreme Court’s cases regarding unintentional discrimination, where the argument is that a law has the effect of producing a disadvantage on members of a particular group. In religious discrimination cases, the Court has held that a law is presumptively unconstitutional if the law results in a comparable secular activity being treated more favorably than religious activity. Yet in racial discrimination cases, the Court has said the mere fact that a law more severely disadvantages racial minorities as a group does not suffice to establish unlawful discrimination.

The two tracks for …

A Theory Of Constitutional Norms, Ashraf Ahmed

Michigan Law Review

The political convulsions of the past decade have fueled acute interest in constitutional norms or “conventions.” Despite intense scholarly attention, existing accounts are incomplete and do not answer at least one or more of three major questions: (1) What must all constitutional norms do? (2) What makes them conventional? (3) And why are they constitutional?

This Article advances an original theory of constitutional norms that answers these questions. First, it defines them and explains their general character: they are normative, contingent, and arbitrary practices that implement constitutional text and principle. Most scholars have foregone examining how norms are conventional or …

Through A Glass, Darkly: Systemic Racism, Affirmative Action, And Disproportionate Minority Contact, Robin Walker Sterling

Michigan Law Review

This Article is the first to describe how systemic racism persists in a society that openly denounces racism and racist behaviors, using affirmative action and disproportionate minority contact as contrasting examples. Affirmative action and disproportionate minority contact are two sides of the same coin. Far from being distinct, these two social institutions function as two sides of the same ideology, sharing a common historical nucleus rooted in the mythologies that sustained chattel slavery in the United States. The effects of these narratives continue to operate in race-related jurisprudence and in the criminal legal system, sending normative messages about race and …