Constitutional Law Commons^™

Presidents, Opinions, And Independent Officers, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

The Opinions in Writing Clause is a persistent textual problem for the claim that Article II implies an indefeasible removal power: If the Framers believed they had given the president an unconditional removal power, why would they also specify a lesser power merely to ask for opinions? New historical research confirms this textual problem was also contextual: early state constitutions, the Ratification debates, and the First Congress indicate that the Opinions Clause’s original public meaning signaled independence of department heads, or at least the possibility of congressional requirements like good cause.

Legal scholars have already shown that the texts of …

Book Review: Robert J. Jarvis, The Neglected Amendments Of The U.S. Constitution: Text, History, And Interpretation, Jonathan E. Moore

ConLawNOW

This essay offers an engaging review of the casebook, The Neglected Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, by Professor Robert Jarvis. While most lawyers, and many nonlawyers, could readily identify many of the “big twelve” constitutional amendments, few are familiar with the other fifteen. This book focuses on the neglected fifteen, arguing they deserve sustained attention as historically and politically important today. Topics include several amendments potentially going in play, such as the Twenty-second limiting the president to two terms, Twenty-fifth on presidential succession and disability, Twenty-seventh on congressional pay raises, and the Ninth on rights retained by the people. …

Fcc V Consumers' Research: The Non-Delegation Doctrine And The Power To Tax, Bernard W. Bell

ConLawNOW

This Essay examines the 2025 Supreme Court case of Federal Communications Commission v. Consumers’ Research which seemingly involved an esoteric question of telecommunications law, but instead provided the Court with an opportunity some Justices have long sought to prune a foundational doctrine of the administrative state—the nondelegation doctrine. The nondelegation doctrine has garnered considerable judicial and academic attention, especially in comparison to the paucity of cases invalidating federal statutes on such grounds. The Court could have abandoned the forgiving “intelligible principle” test applied to congressional delegations for almost one hundred years, or, more cautiously, could have crafted a special rule …

Getting Our House In Order: Mapping The Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine Onto Washington’S Inclusionary Zoning Policies After Sheetz V. County Of El Dorado, John “Jack” Haskins

Washington Law Review

The unconstitutional conditions doctrine dictates what a government can and cannot do when exercising its police powers to promote community interests. Recent Supreme Court jurisprudence highlights a special application of the doctrine in the land use context, with Sheetz v. County of El Dorado recognizing constitutional scrutiny of legislative decisions. After decades of using its own analysis, Washington courts now use the federal approach in these cases. Land use exists at the forefront of Washington policies and the state maintains a sharp focus on the affordable housing crisis. One approach enacted at the local and state level is mandatory inclusionary …

The Section 32(1) Analysis: Clarifying Eldridge In Light Of York Region District School Board, Kate Glover Berger

All Papers

The Eldridge framework, a stable feature of Canadian Charter jurisprudence for decades, sets out part of the framework for determining when entities or activities qualify as “government” under section 32(1), the Charter’s application section. In light of this stability, the Supreme Court of Canada’s analysis of the section 32(1) issue in York Region District School Board v Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario was surprising. It raised the question: Why did the Court in York Region deviate from well-settled law on the Eldridge framework and, in the process, seemingly change the framework’s thresholds? This question arises because the Court in …

Statelessness As An Academic Concern: The Indian Supreme Court’S Engagement With Citizenship Policy In In Re: Section 6a Of The Citizenship Act, 1955, Aishwarya Birla

Articles

In October 2024, the Supreme Court of India (‘Court’) made a significant ruling regarding citizenship laws in Assam, a state in the north-east of the country. The case In Re: Section 6Aof the Citizenship Act, 1955(‘In Re: s 6A’)centred on s 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955(‘Citizenship Act’), which pertains to granting citizenship to a specific class of migrants who entered Assam before ‘the 1stday of January, 1966’.The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of s 6A in a 4:1 majority. In doing so, the Court also engaged with a multitude of important issues for constitutional law and citizenship in …

Book Review: Jonathan Gienapp, Against Constitutional Originalism: A Historical Critique, Timothy Smith

ConLawNOW

This essay reviews the new book, Against Constitutional Originalism by Professor Jonathan Gienapp. It shows how this important book complicates the legal theory of originalism and its understanding of the Constitution. Gienapp convincingly shows that Founding-era Americans had a very different understanding of the nature of constitutions—what they are and how they worked. The conception of the Constitution that feels natural to modern Americans actually developed gradually in the decades and centuries after the Founding and was not the original meaning. Gienapp contends that this creates foundational problems for the originalist approach to Constitutional interpretation. It exposes the fundamental misunderstanding …

Police Officer Use Of Force And Officer-Created Jeopardy After Barnes V. Felix: The Supreme Court's Important (Albeit Incomplete) Step In The Right Direction, Cynthia Lee

ConLawNOW

This essay analyzes the Supreme Court’s 2025 unanimous decision in Barnes v. Felix rejecting the moment of threat doctrine that limited courts assessing the reasonableness of a law enforcement officer’s use of force. Under this narrow time-framing approach, courts were limited to considering only those facts and circumstances known to the officer at the moment of the threat, and acts occurring before the officer seized the individual that may have contributed to the dangerous situation could not be considered. Rejecting this narrow approach, the Court reaffirmed its longstanding rule that in assessing the reasonableness of an officer’s use of force …

Using The Maine Constitution To Expand The Civil Rights And Civil Liberties Of Unhoused People, Heather L. Zimmerman

Maine Law Review

In recent years, homelessness has surged, and there has been a substantial increase in the number of people staying unsheltered in public places. In response to this rise in visible homelessness, municipalities have turned to criminalization, enacting and enforcing laws that ban, punish, fine, and ultimately seek to banish unhoused people from public places. Litigation has provided an important tool to fight criminalization and protect the fundamental rights of unhoused people. Legal advocacy for homeless rights suffered a major blow, however, in June 2024 with the United States Supreme Court decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson. In Grants …

Exploring Due Process Rights And Litigation Strategies For Homeless Youth Under Federal Law, John A. Salois, Liz Harding Chao

Maine Law Review

Over fifty years after the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act, this Article explores the due process rights youth have in shelter and other transitional housing covered under the Act. Further, this Article explores whether youth have a property interest under the Act’s recent reauthorization under the Reconnecting Homeless Youth Act of 2008. This Article also discusses the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act and the due process rights youth have in shelter and other housing options covered under the HEARTH Act’s extensive funding of homeless programs. Additionally, this Article explores litigation strategies that youth and advocates …

A Seventh Amendment Remedy For Housing Instability, Gregory M. Zlotnick

Maine Law Review

After the 2023–2024 Supreme Court term, housing advocates despaired over the expected, yet still unwelcome, decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson. While focusing on this case is understandable, this Article suggests that scholars, policymakers, and advocates should train their focus on another, perhaps less-expected case from the previous Supreme Court term: SEC v. Jarkesy. In Jarkesy, the Court affirmed a defendant’s constitutional right to a jury trial in an administrative proceeding that sought to enforce a right similar to one found at common law. The Court’s capacious interpretation of the Seventh Amendment in Jarkesy has implications for state-law …

What Is The Distribution Of National Historical Parks?, Randall K. Johnson

Faculty Works

In an increasingly polarized nation, which no longer can reach any consensus about what is meant by the term “common good,” it might be wise to extend additional protections to national monuments from executive branch interference. But prior to doing so, the U.S. Congress may want to undertake some additional research work. Such research could build on the existing charge of the National Park Service as well as other interested parties. By doing so, Congress gains insight into whether and how this federal legislature should expand protections for national historical parks.

My article explains, at least in part, how Congress …

A Historical Case For A Robust But Non-Remedial Seventh Amendment, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

In Jarkesy, the Supreme Court rightly held that the Seventh Amendment required a jury trial for a case fundamentally similar to common law fraud, and it rightly limited the scope of the “public rights” exception to the Seventh Amendment. Grounded in historical and originalist methods, this essay makes four suggestions after Jarkesy:

1. Following Jarkesy, the judiciary should continue a more robust enforcement of the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. The courts should eliminate the “public rights” exception to the Seventh Amendment, which does not appear to have an original link to the Seventh Amendment. The …

The Gift Of Public Funds Bogeyman, Noah Purcell, Michelle Saperstein

Washington Law Review

Washington’s “gift of public funds” doctrine is frequently misunderstood in ways that impede innovative ideas aimed at remedying some of our state’s most intractable problems. This doctrine arises from article VIII, sections 5 and 7 of the Washington Constitution, which prohibit state and local governments from gifting assets or loaning credit. While the Washington State Supreme Court historically applied these provisions in restrictive and confusing ways, the Court’s modern jurisprudence recognizes that the doctrine is inapplicable to funding expended for any of the many “fundamental purposes” of government. Even where a government program does not fall under this broad category, …

The Right To Exit Religion, Zalman Rothschild

Articles

This Article argues that just over fifty years ago, in Wisconsin v. Yoder, the Supreme Court recognized what might be called a right to exit religion. In this decision, the Court expressed appreciation for preserving insular religious communities, while simultaneously articulating the principle that accommodations for such communities must not unduly restrict community members’ ability to exit should they wish to do so. Yet courts and scholars have largely overlooked Yoder’s recognition of a right to exit religion. To make this “right” more concrete, the Article examines impediments to it through a case study of one large insular religious community—the …

The President's Orders Targeting Law Firms As Unconstitutional Bills Of Attainder-- Damning Lessons From The Past, Gary Simson

Articles

“Sentence first, verdict afterwards,” the Queen in Alice in Wonderland insisted at the trial of the Knave of Hearts for stealing the Queen’s tarts. Such an upsidedown process obviously leaves quite a bit to be desired, but compared to the process provided by President Donald Trump’s executive orders announcing and inflicting debilitating penalties on particular law firms, it’s not all that bad. After all, the Knave of Hearts, unlike the targeted firms, at least got some sort of trial before punishment was announced.

Also, it’s one thing to be punished for stealing the Queen’s tarts—something that any law-abiding citizen of …

The Embodied Nature Of Representation: Reframing "Best Candidate" Narratives In Supreme Court Nominations, Susan Tanner

ConLawNOW

This Essay explores how discourse surrounding Supreme Court nominations reflects broader societal debates about merit, representation, and inclusion. Through analysis of the controversy surrounding President Biden’s commitment to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court, this piece examines three interconnected themes: the embodied nature of representation, the relationship between diversity and judicial legitimacy, and the problematic nature of “best candidate” narratives. It challenges traditional conceptions of merit in judicial nominations and argues for a more nuanced understanding that recognizes the value of diverse lived experiences on the bench.

Beyond The Ivy League: Stopping The Spread Of Antisemitism On American Campuses: Hearing Before The H. Comm. On Educ. & The Workforce, 119th Cong., May 7, 2025 (Statement Of David D. Cole), David Cole

Testimony Before Congress

In this testimony, submitted to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce for a hearing on antisemitism on campus, I sought to offer a legal framework for considering antisemitic speech on campus. The testimony cautions against equating criticism of Israel with antisemitism. But more importantly, it notes that even where speech is actually antisemitic, it is generally protected by the First Amendment (and therefore also protected by private university policies that protect free speech on campus). Title VI of the Civil Rights Act does not prohibit antisemitic speech, even virulently antisemitic speech. It prohibits discrimination on the basis of …

Bostock And The Limits Of Textualism: A Doctrinal Structuralist Approach, Martin J. Katz

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

In Bostock v. Clayton County, the Court held that Title VII prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. This result, the majority claimed, was required by the interpretive theory called textualism. But textualist justices in the dissent vehemently disagreed. This split, and the controversy that has followed it, has had two consequences. First, it added fuel to the ongoing debate about the value of textualism. Second, it opened the door for lower courts to decline to apply Bostock to similar antidiscrimination laws, such as Title IX in education or the Equal Protection Clause (such as the Skrmetti case, …

Privacy In The Age Of Platforms: How Digital Advancements Are Outrunning Our Constitution, Haleigh Fagundes

Capstone Projects and Master's Theses

This project analyzes the procedural history of Fourth Amendment doctrine in the Supreme Court. This timeline begins with the 1928 case of Olmstead v. United States and proceeds with recent cases that resolve more modern concerns such as location tracking via cell-cite information, as seen in Carpenter v. United States (2018). Prevalent cases are analyzed through both majority and dissenting opinions to demonstrate the entire Courts’ attitude towards the interpretation. Though more recently the Court has moved towards expanding the expectation of privacy that one can assume from the Fourth Amendment, digital privacy has yet to be incorporated. The research …

Black Women Are Supreme: An Empirical Examination Of Black Women's Evaluations Of Ketanji Brown Jackson, Christine M. Slaughter, Camille Burge-Hicks, Nadia E. Brown

ConLawNOW

This article discusses research on the nomination of the first Black woman Supreme Court Justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson. The study examines how emotions and feelings of connectedness to racial and gender groups shaped evaluations of the historic nomination. The research finds that Black women were overwhelmingly enthusiastic about Jackson’s nomination, but that enthusiasm was attenuated by a wide range of variables like interest in politics and the interplay between racial and gender identity. It analyzes how linked fate, a sense of connection to one’s racial group, is associated with the evaluations of the Jackson nomination. The study finds that Black …

Book Review: Jill Elaine Hasday, We The Men: How Forgetting Women's Struggles For Equality Perpetuates Inequality, Taylor King

ConLawNOW

This essay reviews Jill Elaine Hasday’s book, We the Men. It explains how Hasday traces key historical cases and stories of women’s demand for equality that have been forgotten. These important histories include the Nineteenth Amendment, Title VII equal employment, and the Equal Rights Amendment, among others. The book makes the claim that erasing women’s history is problematic for protecting gender equality in the future.

Project 2025 And Due Process After Dobbs, Tracy Turner

ConLawNOW

Project 2025 supporters have been appointed to prominent federal offices in the second Trump Administration. This includes, most notably, the Office of Management and Budget, for a key strategy of implementing the Project’s goals is manipulation of federal funding. This Essay explores what this might mean for women’s rights and suggests a legal theory with which to challenge Project initiatives. Project 2025 repackages a platform that is fully anti-feminist. It is not a new platform. It is the same set of tools that has been used against feminism since the movement’s inception. It expansively seeks policy changes for abortion, contraception, …

Is There A Gender Gap In Campaign Spending Strategies?, Paul S. Herrnson, Charles Hunt, Jaclyn Kettler

ConLawNOW

Women politicians have traditionally faced greater challenges when running for office than their male counterparts. These include less encouragement from political gatekeepers, fundraising obstacles, and voter skepticism about their abilities—particularly among men. Nevertheless, women have made substantial advances in the electoral arena, including increasing their numbers in Congress. Some of these gains can be attributed to changing voter attitudes, the mobilization of female campaign contributors, and recent female politicians learning from the successes of their predecessors. Studies have documented the similarities and differences in how men and women candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives raise money, staff campaign organizations, …

The Myth Of The Fourteenth Amendment And The Civil Rights Act Of 1866, Earl M. Maltz

ConLawNOW

Although legal scholars who focus on the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment disagree about many things, almost all agree that John Bingham proposed what was to become Section One of the amendment in order to definitively establish the constitutionality of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. In fact, however, the Joint Committee on Reconstruction chose to insert the Bingham formulation in place of a provision that would have explicitly constitutionalized the Civil Rights Act. This Essay describes the circumstances that provided the backdrop for the consideration of the Bingham proposal and the implications that this context has for our …

The Final Frontier Of Federal Power: Understanding, Defining, And Enforcing “Necessary And Proper” To Enhance The General Welfare And Limit Federal Power, Thomas Ralph

Catholic University Law Review

This comment explores the long and inconsistent history of the Necessary and Proper Clause and its unique role as both a grant of power to Congress and a limit on the outer reach of the federal government. The federal government is in theory one of limited powers; however, this promise of the Constitution cannot be truly recognized without developing a robust framework for applying the Necessary and Proper Clause as a reliable source of federal power. After establishing the need for a framework, this comment provides five judicial decision rules that can be applied by trial and appellate courts to …

Pipelines & Presidential Candidates: The Dynamics Of Women Running For Public Office In Ohio, Irene Jayapandian, Barbara Palmer

ConLawNOW

Over one hundred years ago, Ohio was at the forefront of women’s political participation. In 1872, Victoria Woodhull became the first woman to run for president. In 1922, six women were elected to the Ohio state legislature for the first time, and Florence Allen was elected to the Ohio Supreme Court, making her the first woman to be elected to any state supreme court in the nation. This research looks at where the state stands now in the number of women running for office, their success rates, and the impact of having a woman at the top of the ticket. …

Is Wisconsin V. Yoder Limited To Its Facts?, Chad Flanders

ConLawNOW

Although Wisconsin v. Yoder is over fifty years old and clearly part of the canon of free exercise law, its meaning is surprisingly contested in a case the Supreme Court decided to hear in early 2025, Mahmoud v. Taylor. In Mahmoud, the plaintiffs are parents who balked at their children being exposed to readings and lessons during the school day that ran counter to their religious views on sexual morality. Their main argument is that they should win because Yoder is directly on point. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected this argument holding that Yoder is basically a …

James Baldwin And What U.S. Governments Owe Every American, Randall K. Johnson

Faculty Works

This book review looks at the life, work and impact of James Baldwin, a famous writer and civil rights activist that was born one hundred (100) years ago. It does so, for one of the first times in the field of law, by examining Baldwin’s influence on the legal system. The book review carries out its work by identifying Baldwin’s impacts upon U.S. law: before, during and after his public service career. In the process, this book review describes how governments can build on Baldwin's writings and advocacy work.

Dangerous And Unusual: How Heller’S Ahistorical Assumption Violates The Founders’ Original Intent, Oliver Krawczyk, Gilbert Ambler

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

When the U.S. Supreme Court ended its generational silence on the Second Amendment in District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court held that “a prohibition of an entire class of ‘arms’ that is overwhelmingly chosen by American society” is “invalid.” In so holding, the Court suggested that the Constitution protects only those weapons “in common use at the time,” a limitation thought to be “fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’” The Court defined none of these terms then, and it has not since.

Over a decade of constitutional infidelity ensued. …