Constitutional Law Commons^™

Brief Of Amici Curiae Scholars For The Advancement Of Children’S Constitutional Rights In Support Of Respondents: St. Mary Catholic Parish V. Roy, Catherine Smith, Tanya Washington, Robin Walker Sterling, Suzette Malveaux, Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, Sara S. Hildebrand, Abigail L. Fleming, Jeremiah Chin

Scholarly Articles

This Court should consider those most directly impacted by the decision in this case: the intended beneficiaries of Colorado’s Universal Preschool Program (“UPK”), Colorado’s children. To paraphrase Shakespeare, though they be but little, they are constitutional rights-bearers and are thus entitled to be free from state-funded discrimination.

Amici are scholars of children and the law, education law, family law, and anti-discrimination law. Amici draw this Court’s attention to the significant harms children in the LGBT community would bear should Colorado be compelled to allow state-funded religious schools to discriminate against preschoolers. Exempting religious schools from the State’s equal-opportunity and antidiscrimination …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Children's Rights Scholars And Advocates In Support Of Appellants' Opening Brief: Lighthiser V. Trump, Abigail L. Fleming, Douglas A. Ruley, Catherine Smith

Scholarly Articles

For decades, constitutional doctrine has recognized that children possess enforceable constitutional rights and that their developmental, physical, and social differences from adults are important considerations in constitutional analysis. Courts may not impute adult capacities, privileges, or political agency to children when determining whether their rights may be vindicated, leaving them no democratic mechanism to alleviate their injuries.

The district court’s dismissal of the youth plaintiffs’ claims rests on precisely that error. Although the court recognized that the children alleged concrete, severe, and escalating harms caused by the challenged executive actions, it concluded that relief must come from the political branches …

Feudal Is Fine Because Property Is Sovereignty: Rational Basis Equal Protection And The New Noncitizen Land Laws, Jill M. Fraley

Scholarly Articles

States are enacting a new wave of land laws restricting noncitizens’ ownership of real property, prompting immediate constitutional challenges grounded in equal protection and federal preemption. Most commentators assume these laws are unlikely to survive modern scrutiny. This Article argues that these land laws rest on a constitutional logic that remains both doctrinally intact and normatively compelling: the treatment of real property as an incident of state sovereignty rather than an ordinary site of economic regulation.

Against prevailing accounts, this Article shows that the Court’s jurisprudence has never subjected all citizenship-based classifications to heightened scrutiny. Instead, the Court has consistently …

In Defense Of Substantive Due Process, Maureen A. Edobor

Scholarly Articles

The Originalism Trap is a book for everyone—and it should be required reading for anyone trying to make sense of the seismic shifts in constitutional law on democracy, guns, and reproductive rights, even as the Constitution’s text has remained unchanged. Dennie’s sweeping and incisive defense of substantive due process raises a fundamental question: what better reflects democratic legitimacy—judicial doctrine shaped through decades of engagement between advocates, communities, judges, and lawmakers, or a narrow search through centuries-old texts for fragmented glimpses of “original public meaning” drawn from eras that excluded most people from citizenship, personhood, and power? Dennie forcefully answers: the …

The People, The Branches, And The Pearl Of Independence, Brian C. Murchison

Scholarly Articles

What will be the fate of the independent agencies?  Since 1887, Congress has seen fit to address an array of contemporary issues by creating expert federal agencies, such as the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, and others.  The principal officers of these agencies are appointed by the President on advice and consent of the Senate, serve limited staggered terms, are bipartisan in the sense that only a bare majority of the agency’s officers can be members of the same political party, and are “independent” in the sense that the officers are removable only …

Constitutional Structures In Private Law And The Example Of Waste Law, Jill M. Fraley

Scholarly Articles

This Article proposes three criteria for when a private law mechanism performs a structural constitutional function: when it constrains present authority in the name of future stability, when it disperses enforcement to avoid centralized authority, and when it has structural entrenchment to avoid ordinary displacement. While many private law doctrines contain constitutional resonances or echo rights, the core of constitutional law is the power structure—a precondition for the protection of those rights. Constitutional structures have three key components: self-binding through time, separation and diffusion of power, and entrenchment beyond ordinary politics. For a private law doctrine to do more than …

The Unmaking Of Section Two, Maureen Edobor

Scholarly Articles

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act now stands at a paradoxical crossroads. Though it remains the statute’s central protection against racial vote dilution after Shelby County v. Holder, it is increasingly undermined by a constitutional framework that treats race-conscious remedies as suspect rather than necessary under Section 2. This Essay argues that Section 2 is being quietly unmade—not through direct invalidation, but through the convergence of Equal Protection Doctrine, racial-gerrymandering jurisprudence, and an ascendant commitment to colorblind constitutionalism. Tracing the Fifteenth Amendment’s original design and Congress’s expansive enforcement authority, the Essay situates Section 2 within a constitutional tradition …

In The Beginning There Was Positive Law: Section 25, Calder V. Bull, And Constitutional Continuity, Kevin C. Walsh

Scholarly Articles

From the beginning of its operation as fundamental law for the government of the United States, the Constitution has continually operated as supreme and judicially enforceable positive law. This is the principal claim I offer as an “original-law originalist” in response to contrary claims advanced by Professor Jonathan Gienapp in Against Constitutional Originalism: A Historical Critique. Gienapp argues in Against Constitutional Originalism that “[h]istoricizing the original Constitution . . . poses a foundational challenge to originalism as it has long been conceived.”2 Constitutional originalism depends on perceived continuity with the past. But the perception of constitutional continuity turns out to …

Qui Tam Relators As Article Iv Officials, Chad Squitieri

Scholarly Articles

Since the earliest days of the republic, Congress has empowered private plaintiffs—called qui tam relators—to bring claims in court on behalf of the United States. Today, qui tam litigation accounts for billions of dollars in judgments and settlements each year. But despite qui tam’s modern significance and historical pedigree, its constitutionality has recently been questioned. To wit, several sitting Supreme Court Justices have suggested that qui tam violates the President’s Article II authority because it empowers private relators—who are neither appointed nor supervised by the President—to enforce federal law. Following similar logic, a lower federal court recently ruled a prominent …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Scholars For The Advancement Of Children’S Constitutional Rights In Support Of Defendants-Appellants: Roy V. Darren Patterson Christian Academy, Catherine Smith, Tanya M. Washington, Robin Walker Sterling, Jeremiah Chin, Sara S. Hildebrand

Scholarly Articles

Amici are scholars of children and the law, education law, family law, and anti-discrimination law. Amici draw this Court’s attention to the harms that four-year-olds in the LGBT community – LGBT children and children with LGBT parents – would bear should state-funded religious schools be granted a license to discriminate against them. An exemption to the Colorado Universal Preschool Program’s equal opportunity requirement would allow plaintiffs to discriminate against these children and raise unfair barriers in their paths to a high-quality education. An exemption would also inflict dignitary, psychological, and familial harms upon an entire class of young people – …

Foreword: 2024 Ira C. Rothgerber Jr. Conference: Artificial Intelligence And The Constitution, Suzette Malveaux

Scholarly Articles

For the first time, the Byron R. White Center for the Study of American Constitutional Law and the Silicon Flatirons Center for Law, Technology, and Entrepreneurship came together to hold a joint conference on Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Constitution. We decided to merge our annual conferences to explore one of the most important and consequential intersections of our time: AI and the Constitution—topics we study and deeply care about. During this time of rapid and profound technological transformation, it is even more imperative that we come out of our academic silos and work together.

The partnership was destined. The …

The Eighth Amendment’S Paper Tiger: Pain, Executions, And The Cruel And Unusual Punishment Clause, Alexandra L. Klein

Scholarly Articles

The Eighth Amendment prohibits “cruel and unusual punishments.” This prohibition applies to the way states carry out executions: states may impose capital punishment but may not do so in a way that is unconstitutionally cruel. Over a trilogy of cases that began with Baze v. Rees in 2008, the Court developed a test for analyzing whether a state’s proposed method of execution violated the Eighth Amendment. Under Baze/Glossip/Bucklew, a person challenging a state’s method of execution must show that the method of execution poses a severe risk of “superadded” pain and suffering that can be alleviated by a readily …

Policing As General Warrants, Warren Buff, Brandon Hasbrouck

Scholarly Articles

The drafters of the Bill of Rights and its proponents envisioned a document constitutionalizing protections against some of the worst abuses they had experienced under English rule. Prominent businessmen—many of them engaged in smuggling— found their homes ransacked in search of contraband on flimsy evidence and without any reason given for the disruption of their business and consequent enrichment of government agents. The Fourth Amendment addressed the use of general warrants and writs of assistance to allow government agents to conduct broad searches with limited scrutiny. In the early years of the Constitution, this had little practical effect, because public …

Religious Exemptions To Anti-Discrimination Law: Children's Rights In The Constitutional Calculus, Tanya Washington, Catherine Smith, Robin Walker Sterling

Scholarly Articles

Increasingly, religious actors in the public sphere--whether in the provision of goods and services (Masterpiece Cakeshop) or in government contracting (Fulton)--are simply invoking a person's sexual orientation as inconsistent with their religious tenets to benefit from a legal doctrine that shields them from the requirement that they offer an underlying rationale for LGBTQ discrimination. Over the past decade, we have filed amicus briefs in United States Supreme Court cases advancing children's constitutional rights, including briefs providing a check on these religious-based arguments when they adversely impact children's rights in the familial and child regulation contexts and …

Dobbs And The New Doctrine Of Stare Decisis, Russell A. Miller

Scholarly Articles

Alongside the historic and troubling annulment of the half-century-old Substantive Due Process right to abortion, Dobbs produced another significant outcome. To get its substantive constitutional law result, the Court’s majority also had to reconceive—and significantly weaken—the doctrine of stare decisis. This was necessary because, following Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, the constitutional right to abortion largely depended on respect for precedent as the basis for its survival. To overturn Roe, the Dobbs majority had to blast through the established practice of precedent and articulate a new doctrine of stare decisis. It seems that precedent was meant to …

Kennedy V. Louisiana And The Future Of The Eighth Amendment, Alexandra L. Klein

Scholarly Articles

In 2023, Florida passed a law permitting the imposition of the death penalty for the rape of a child under twelve. Tennessee enacted a similar law in 2024. These laws conflict with Kennedy v. Louisiana, a 2008 decision in which the Supreme Court held that imposing the death penalty for the rape of a child violated the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause because it was inconsistent with the evolving standards of decency. Legislators in Florida and Tennessee have expressed their hope that the Supreme Court will overrule Kennedy v. Louisiana. These laws, which resemble state attempts …

Navahine V. Hawai'i Dept. Of Transportation: The Keiki Will Lead Us, Catherine Smith

Scholarly Articles

The author analyzes the landmark case Navahine v. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation, which culminated in the world’s first constitutional climate settlement. Catherine Smith, serving as an expert for the youth plaintiffs, situates the case within Hawaiʻi’s legal tradition of prioritizing children’s rights and intergenerational equity. She explores the evolution of children’s constitutional protections, contrasting Hawaiʻi’s progressive jurisprudence with the dominant adult-centric legal framework on the mainland. She critiques four recurring analytical missteps in U.S. courts that marginalize children’s interests and highlights Hawaiʻi’s public trust doctrine and cultural values, such as the Aloha Spirit, as models for addressing climate-related harms. …

Constitutional Theory And The Problem Of Disagreement, J. Joel Alicea

Scholarly Articles

For decades, constitutional theory has been haunted by the problem of disagreement: the reality that we are deeply divided on fundamental questions of justice and the good society. Theorists have generally responded to the problem of disagreement in one of two ways. One approach minimizes the extent to which constitutional theories rely on controversial moral premises and instead grounds constitutional theories in widely endorsed social practices. The other generally discards any social practices that reflect disagreement with the controversial moral views that the theorist holds.

Neither approach is sound. Constitutional theory requires both controversial moral claims and attention to social …

The Natural Law Moment In Constitutional Theory, J. Joel Alicea

Scholarly Articles

Something new is happening in American constitutional theory. Never before have so many legal scholars sought to ground constitutional theory in the natural-law tradition. Indeed, we can truly say that we are living through a natural-law moment in constitutional theory, a period of unprecedented interest in natural law among constitutional theorists. This immediately calls to mind three questions. First: how, if at all, are the theorists of this moment different from prior theorists who sought to ground constitutional theory in natural law? Second: what explains the rise of natural law in American constitutional theory? Third: what are the implications for …

Originalism And Truth-Telling: A Reply To Stephen Sachs, J. Joel Alicea

Scholarly Articles

Sachs focuses on my claim that a theory of constitutional adjudication needs to make a moral argument that justifies telling judges why they ought to decide constitutional disputes in a particular way rather than in some other way. Why be an originalist, for example, rather than a common-law constitutionalist? In answering that question, a theory of constitutional adjudication cannot depend exclusively on a positivist, descriptive account of what the law is—even if Sachs correctly identifies originalism as the law— because knowing that originalism is the “law” (in a positivist sense of “law”) does not tell us why anyone ought to …

The Right To Truth, Maureen Edobor

Scholarly Articles

This Article argues that today’s anti-CRT statutes, book bans, and “divisive concepts” laws are not isolated culture-war skirmishes but the latest chapter in a long campaign—dating back to the Lost Cause and the United Daughters of the Confederacy—to legislate white innocence as national identity. By sanitizing slavery, suppressing discussions of systemic racism, and threatening educators with punitive ambiguity, these laws flatten historical truth and convert classrooms into zones of anticipatory obedience. The result is a state-engineered amnesia that undermines the core First and Fourteenth Amendment protections the Supreme Court has recognized for more than a century, from Meyer and Barnette …

Bruen Was Right, J. Joel Alicea

Scholarly Articles

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen is one of the most methodologically significant—and widely maligned—constitutional law decisions of the last several decades. By rejecting the tiers of scrutiny that have loomed large in rights jurisprudence since the 1960s and substituting a text-and-history test for Second Amendment cases, Bruen signals a potential transformation of American constitutional law far beyond the Second Amendment context. Given Bruen’s methodological significance and the text-and-history approach it represents, one might have expected that the debate over Bruen would break down along familiar lines, with originalists defending Bruen and non-originalists critiquing it. Yet, the …

Constitutional Theory At A Catholic University, J. Joel Alicea

Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

In Loco Reipublicae And The Parental Duty To Expose Children To Ideas Outside The Home, Catherine Smith

Scholarly Articles

In Loco Reipublicaie boldly centers children’s rights and adeptly fills an existing jurisprudential gap by infusing parental rights with important duties to respect and facilitate children’s exercise of their own citizenship rights. It is a children’s-rights-forward shot across a heavily prioritized parents’ rights bow. It’s about time.

Brief Of Children’S Rights Advocates In Support Of Appellees: Held V. Montana, Asha Brundage-Moore, Wyatt Sassman, Catherine Smith

Scholarly Articles

Amici Curiae are members of the Consortium for the Advancement of Children’s Constitutional Rights and Healthy Mothers, Heathy Babies: The Montana Coalition who are children’s rights advocates and legal scholars. Amici submit this brief to: (1) highlight Montana’s Constitution as a leader in advancing children’s constitutional rights; (2) draw this Court’s attention to the Montana Constitution’s text and history recognizing children’s right to a clean and healthful environment; and (3) explain that a decision not to safeguard children’s right to a clean and healthful environment in reliance on adult-centric analytical missteps advanced by Appellants (and supporting Amici) would deny Montana’s …

1983, Brandon Hasbrouck

Scholarly Articles

This Piece embraces a fictional narrative to illustrate deep flaws in our legal system. It borrows its basic structure and a few choice lines from George Orwell’s classic novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. Like Orwell’s novel, it is set in the not-too-distant future to comment on problems already emerging in the present. The footnotes largely provide examples of some of those problems and how courts have treated them in a constitutional law context. The title (itself quite close to Orwell’s own title) is a reference to our chief civil rights statute, while the story deals with a critical threat to that …

The Adult Rights-Bearing Archetype And How It Stifles Young People’S Equal Protection, Catherine E. Smith

Scholarly Articles

American constitutional law is defined by a rights-bearing archetype that prioritizes adults—and the Equal Protection Clause is no exception. The Supreme Court has recognized children as constitutional persons and proclaimed that “neither the Fourteenth Amendment nor the Bill of Rights is for adults alone,” but courts mostly see autonomous, rational, individualistic, income-generating grown people as rights-bearers. For the first time, this article reveals six adult-rights-bearing analytical traps that limit children’s equal protection, and proposes jettisoning the rigid Carolene Products test in favor of a nascent youth-based framework. Instead of shoehorning children’s rights into a web of laws and principles designed …

The Purpose And Practice Of Precedent: What The Decade Long Debate Over Stare Decisis Teaches Us About The New Roberts Court, Russell A. Miller

Scholarly Articles

The Supreme Court’s tectonic decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health upended the Doctrine of Substantive Due Process by radically reinterpreting the doctrine of stare decisis. The Court’s established practice regarding stare decisis should have operated to preserve the fifty-year-old abortion jurisprudence. But we should have seen this change coming. Although there has been an intense and involved debate over the purpose and practice of precedent for generations, that debate shifted at the beginning of 2018. Four approaches to stare decisis emerged along a continuum, from complete abandonment of the doctrine and incremental erosion to modernized adherence to precedent. This …

Brnovich: Extratextual Textualism, Maureen A. Edobor

Scholarly Articles

This Article provides a comprehensive analysis of Brnovich v. Democratic National Convention, which purports to create a new standard for Section 2 claims under the Voting Rights Act, by situating the critique in the ratifying-era history and original intentions of the VRA’s constitutional counterpart, the Fifteenth Amendment. Brnovich is necessarily examined through a historical and political framework, identifying throughlines from the Reconstruction Era original intentions for the Fifteenth Amendment, distilled from Congressional debates, the VRA’s initially expansive Supreme Court interpretation in South Carolina v. Katzenbach, and Congress’ Section 2 amendments in 1982, rebuking the Court’s attempts to erode the legal …

Judicial Power And Potential Unconstitutionality: A Scholastic Perspective, Kevin C. Walsh

Scholarly Articles

There is a fundamental legal distinction between making the law and applying it. All manner of juridical confusion follows from neglect of this distinction, as the Supreme Court’s statutory severability doctrine strikingly illustrates. In this lecture, I diagnose the cause of severability doctrine’s problems and identify a basic framework for replacement doctrine by drawing on that perennial philosophy which “view[s] the history of philosophy as the development of basic doctrines long discerned and taught, a development by way of deepening appreciation as opposed to constant replacement of one worldview by another.”