Constitutional Law Commons^™

A Major Question For Administrative Law: How Are Courts Applying The Major Questions Doctrine Post West Virginia V. Epa?, Christopher Eckhardt

Catholic University Law Review

On June 30, 2022, judicial deference toward actions of administrative agencies took a significant hit. In West Virginia v. EPA, the Court formally recognized—for the first time—the major questions doctrine, which requires agencies to identify clear congressional authorization when claiming the authority to make decisions of vast economic and political significance. Since June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court has utilized the major questions doctrine in decisions of national importance, including topics ranging from environmental protection efforts to cancelling student debt. This note offers a snapshot of how the major questions doctrine has been applied by federal courts across the country …

Brief For Amici Curiae New York State Legal Scholars In Support Of Defendants-Respondents, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii, Michael Pollack

Amicus Briefs

This document presents a legal brief submitted by amici curiae in a case involving prominent Republican plaintiffs challenging the constitutionality of New York State's absentee voting provisions. The brief emphasizes the fundamental importance of voting as enshrined in the New York Constitution, particularly Article II, which guarantees suffrage to all qualified citizens. It argues that the Constitution's democracy principle supports broad access to the electoral process, countering the plaintiffs' claims that the absentee voting provisions are overly restrictive. The amici curiae assert that the legislative authority to expand voting access is consistent with the overarching democratic commitments of the Constitution. …

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

Catholic University Law Review

This essay is an exercise in constructive retrieval of the traditional American understanding of judicial power with respect to judicial disregard of potentially unconstitutional laws when identifying rules of decision in constitutional adjudication.

This retrieval makes use of the act/potency distinction from Scholastic philosophy, Thomas Aquinas’s distinction between ius and lex, and John Marshall’s canonical account of the judicial application of the Constitution as a rule of decision in Marbury v. Madison to diagnose the cause of contemporary severability doctrine’s problems and to identify a basic framework for replacement doctrine.

I contend that the doctrinal pieces for the replacement …

Populists In Power And Constitutional Counternarratives, Giuseppe Martinico

Cardozo Law Review

In this essay I shall comment on A Pluralist Theory of Constitutional Justice by Professor Michel Rosenfeld, by developing three points that have to do with the legacy of Carl Schmitt’s constitutional theory. The first is about the progressive weaponization of constitutional law that characterizes what I call the populist constitutional counternarrative. In particular, I will explore how populists in power use constitutional law. The second point has to do with the notion of constituent power in a context of comprehensive pluralism. The third point is about the relationship between constitutionalism and political theology. The intuition behind this is that …

The Birth Of The Civil Death Penalty And The Expansion Of Forced Adoptions: Reassessing The Concept Of Termination Of Parental Rights In Light Of Its History, Purposes, And Current Efficacy, Chris Gottlieb

Cardozo Law Review

The legal construct of termination of parental rights—the act of permanently severing the legal relationship between parent and child—is deeply embedded in contemporary American child welfare law. Indeed, since the passage of the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA), it can fairly be said that our entire foster care system is structured around the threat of terminating parental rights. From the day a child is taken into state-supervised care, the clock begins ticking toward the possible permanent destruction of the parent-child relationship. In response to the financial incentives in ASFA that reward states for terminating parents’ rights, states …

Creative Jurisprudence: The Paradox Of Free Speech Absolutism, R. George Wright, Chris Rowley

University of Colorado Law Review Forum

Governments often seek to restrict speech on the basis of its content, navigating the ever-complex terrain between constitutional freedoms and regulatory interests. While the United States judiciary has historically endeavored to balance competing constitutional questions and government interests when scrutinizing content-based speech regulations, recent trends signify a troubling shift. The judiciary has recently embraced what this Article refers to as free speech absolutism, whereby it sidesteps the longstanding, intricate process of balancing constitutional values and public interests, in favor of an unequivocal endorsement of speech rights. This simplified judicial strategy proceeds first with an acknowledgment of the paramount importance of …

American Law In The New Global Conflict, Mark Jia

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This Article surveys how a growing rivalry between the United States and China is changing the American legal system. It argues that U.S.-China conflict is reproducing, in attenuated form, the same politics of threat that has driven wartime legal development for much of our history. The result is that American law is reprising familiar patterns and pathologies. There has been a diminishment in rights among groups with imputed ties to a geopolitical adversary. But there has also been a modest expansion in rights where advocates have linked desired reforms with geopolitical goals. Institutionally, the new global conflict has at times …

Horizontal Federalism & The Big State "Problem", Elizabeth Beske

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

California regulates pork; does it offend the Constitution that pork producers in other states must comply with its regulations if they want to sell Californians pork? In National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, the Supreme Court emerged sharply divided in its approach to the practical extraterritorial spillover effect of the in-state regulations of a tantalizing market. Although a fractured majority of the Court upheld California’s Proposition 12 against a dormant Commerce Clause challenge, at least five Justices registered profound discomfort, with one dissenter expressly inviting consideration of the problem through the lens of other clauses. This Article analyzes “the …

What We Pretend To Be: Codifying A Right To A Religious Advisor In The Execution Chamber, Claire R. Jenkins

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

Over the last fifty years, the Supreme Court has moved the pendulum both toward religious accommodation and away from it. After a decade of oscillating Court decisions, multiple attempts at corrective action by Congress, and widespread social activism, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Person’s Act, or RLUIPA, was passed in 2000. RLUIPA was designed to fortify the rights of incarcerated persons and provide clarification to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. As of 2024, the Supreme Court has granted certiorari in only a few RLUIPA cases—and has decided even less about the application of the law to death row inmates. …

Cherry-Picking History: Witchcraft, The Common Law, And The Weaponization Of Substantive Due Process, Sarah E. Bradley

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

In 2021, the Supreme Court sharply altered its substantive due process analysis in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, reversing the 49-year-old decision in Roe v. Wade to establish abortion access as a constitutional right. The Court reframed its substantive due process analysis as a two-step test, requiring a right to be narrowly framed and “deeply rooted in history and tradition” before it could be analyzed as “implicit in the concept of liberty,” instead of its previous balancing test that involved a broad description of the right. In the Dobbs majority opinion, the Court cherry-picked elements of common law …

Navigating The First Amendment In School Choice: The Case For The Constitutionality Of Washington’S Charter School Act, Stephanie Smith

Washington Journal of Social & Environmental Justice

No abstract provided.

Symposium: Gender, Health, And The Constitution: Reforming Clinical Trial Pregnancy Exclusions, Jennifer D. Oliva

ConLawNOW

This essay argues the exclusion of pregnant people from drug and biologic clinical trials is paternalistic, unjust, and counterproductive because the failure to include pregnant people in experimental trials can enhance risks to maternal and fetal health. Bioethicists, legal scholars, and other researchers have pleaded for reform in this context for decades. This article describes pregnancy medical drug use and the genesis and evolution of federal regulations and policies that operate to exclude pregnant people from clinical trials. It argues that the implementation of legal reforms that ensure the inclusion of pregnant people in clinical trials is imperative given Covid, …

Judicial Fidelity, Caprice L. Roberts

Pepperdine Law Review

Judicial critics abound. Some say the rule of law is dead across all three branches of government. Four are dead if you count the media as the fourth estate. All are in trouble, even if one approves of each branch’s headlines, but none of them are dead. Not yet. Pundits and scholars see the latest term of the Supreme Court as clear evidence of partisan politics and unbridled power. They decry an upheaval of laws and norms demonstrating the dire situation across the federal judiciary. Democracy is not dead even when the Court issues opinions that overturn precedent, upends long-standing …

Judicial Review In Public And Private Governance, Tomer S. Stein

Scholarly Works

In Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, the Supreme Court limited judicial deference to universities. In West Virginia v. EPA, the Court reduced deference to administrative agencies. In Coster v. UIP Cos., Inc., the Delaware Supreme Court narrowed deference to boards of directors, proclaimed a new standard of judicial review, and then seemingly retracted it. Common to these constitutional, administrative, and corporate law cases is unpredictability, uncertainty, and incoherence in the use and application of substantive standards of review. The resulting disarray is explicitly acknowledged by the very judges that formulate these standards of …

On Traditionalism In Free Speech Law, R. George Wright

Journal of Legislation

No abstract provided.

Scientific Context, Suicide Prevention, And The Second Amendment After Bruen, Eric Ruben

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The Supreme Court declared in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen that modern gun laws must be “consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation” to survive Second Amendment challenges. Scholarship has shown how this test of historical analogy presents difficulties because of how technological, legal, and social change has shaped policy over the centuries. This Article is the first to assess Bruen as it applies to suicide- prevention laws, and, in doing so, illuminates another form of change that complicates Bruen’s implementation: scientific progress.

As this Article shows, early generations of Americans fundamentally misunderstood mental …

Cognitive Content Moderation: Freedom Of Thought And The First Amendment Right To Receive Subconscious Information, Mason Marks

Scholarly Publications

In the television series Severance, employees of Lumon Industries receive brain implants that divide their memories of work and home life. When employees arrive at work, implants block access to memories of the outside world and unlock memories formed on the job. By manipulating the flow of information in employees' brains, Lumon engages in what this Article calls cognitive content moderation. Though Severance is science fiction, emerging technologies, including drugs and electronic devices, promote cognitive content moderation by influencing thought, memory, and perception. Constitutional law is unprepared. To clarify freedom of thought and make it more useful, this Article presents …

Dobbs And Democracy, Melissa Murray, Katherine A. Shaw

Articles

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Justice Alito justified the decision to overrule Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey with an appeal to democracy. He insisted that it was “time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.” This invocation of democracy had undeniable rhetorical power: it allowed the Dobbs majority to lay waste to decades’ worth of precedent, while rebutting charges of judicial imperialism and purporting to restore the people’s voices. This Article interrogates Dobbs’s claim to vindicate principles of democracy, examining both the intellectual pedigree …

Loper Bright In A Larger Interpretive Perspective: Is This Justice Scalia’S Court Anymore?, Victoria Frances Nourse

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo has left administrative lawyers agog: Could the Supreme Court really reverse the “goliath” known as Chevron deference? For those who study the Court’s interpretive landscape more broadly, however, Chevron reversal may not be as unexpected as administrative lawyers believe. This Article will look at Loper Bright by linking three notable interpretive developments: the major questions doctrine, Chevron skepticism, and strict constructions of statutory text. These developments share the same risk: the Court is imposing a new “clarity tax” on both Congress and administrative agencies. Having said this, others’ grave worries about changes in Chevron are …

American Star Chamber: Online Misinformation, Government Intervention, And The Intellectual Matrix Of The First Amendment, Emily E. Burton

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

Just as monarchs and clerical authorities struggled to respond to seditious and heretical writings enabled by the invention of the printing press, twenty-first century governments are experiencing a similar information revolution as a result of the digital age and a rising tide of what the United States has labeled online misinformation. Like the printing press, the Internet has enabled the spread of information at an exponentially lower cost and an exponentially higher speed as it extends the ability to publish thoughts and opinions to an increasingly diverse array of individuals. Although this was largely celebrated during the first two decades …

The Lawlessness Of Sackett V. Epa, William W. Buzbee

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

When the Supreme Court speaks on a disputed statutory interpretation question, its words and edicts undoubtedly are the final judicial word, binding lower courts and the executive branch. Its majority opinions are the law. But the Court’s opinions can nonetheless be assessed for how well they hew to fundamental elements of respect for the rule of law. In particular, law-respecting versus law-neglecting or lawless judicial work by the Court can be assessed in the statutory interpretation, regulatory, and separation of power realms against the following key criteria, which in turn are based on some basic rule of law tenets: analysis …

Digital Rummaging, Andrew Guthrie Ferguson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The digital world encodes our lives with incriminating clues. How you travel, live, love, and shop are tracked through growing surveillance technologies. Police have recognized this reality and are actively exploiting new surveillance tools for investigative purposes.

The Fourth Amendment—the constitutional protection meant to limit police search powers—has not kept up with the privacy and security threats of these new digital technologies. Current doctrine has remained stymied by legal tests asking all the wrong questions about “reasonable expectations of privacy” and “trespass” searches. While the Supreme Court has acknowledged that “digital is different,” it has not yet provided a coherent …

Judicial Fidelity, Caprice L. Roberts

Journal Articles

Judicial critics abound. Some say the rule of law is dead across all three branches of government. Four are dead if you count the media as the fourth estate. All are in trouble, even if one approves of each branch’s headlines, but none of them are dead. Not yet.

Pundits and scholars see the latest term of the Supreme Court as clear evidence of partisan politics and unbridled power. They decry an upheaval of laws and norms demonstrating the dire situation across the federal judiciary. Democracy is not dead even when the Court issues opinions that overturn precedent, upends longstanding …

Justice William J. Brennan Jr.'S Teleological Jurisprudence And What It Means For Constitutional Interpretation Today, Susan D. Carle

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Observers commonly think of the Warren and Roberts Courts as polar opposites in their modes of constitutional interpretation. But how different are their approaches really? To be sure, the values that underlie the jurisprudence of the Warren and Roberts Courts are dramatically different, but their methodologies for constitutional adjudication are similar in a crucial respect: both Courts frequently employ a teleological approach. They look, in other words, to ends outside of the law to determine the direction in which constitutional law should be heading.

To prove this point, this Article examines the methods and values Justice William J. Brennan Jr. …

Against Gap-Filling, Noah C. Chauvin

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

Legal scholars delight in gap-filling. They frequently claim that their works have identified a gap in the literature and to have filled (or begun filling) that gap. However, all too often, these same papers fail to explain why the gap needed to be filled at all. Indeed, despite a robust tradition of meta-scholarship, the legal literature is largely devoid of a theory of academic gap-filling. This essay fills that gap, arguing that gap-filling for the sake of gap-filling is an error for three interconnected reasons. First, gaps might exist for a good reason. Second, concern with gap-filling is often a …

The Riddle Of Race-Based Redistricting, Travis Crum

Scholarship@WashULaw

The Supreme Court has adopted divergent interpretations of the Equal Protection Clause as applied to race and redistricting. Vote dilution doctrine requires mapmakers to consider race to ensure that racial minorities are not packed or cracked. Congress, moreover, has embraced vote dilution doctrine in Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. By contrast, racial gerrymandering doctrine triggers strict scrutiny if mapmakers subordinate traditional redistricting principles to race, thereby threatening Section 2’s constitutionality.

To resolve this doctrinal riddle, this Essay examines whether, as originally understood, the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendment governed the use of race during redistricting. The Equal Protection Clause …

The Next Generation, Jeremiah Chin

Articles

What would the law look like if we let children remake it? Laws govern, classify, and circumscribe children who inherit the law and its consequences. Discourses of power invoke children as rhetorical strategies to gain political favor or obviate a position—yet children are uncritically excluded from participating in the systems that control them. Children are subjected to the laws and objects of legislation, but denied the rights, autonomy, or authority to participate in the making of law and policy. Even the conceptualization of the constitutional rights of children is treated as an assumption, ill-defined and under theorized by traditional legal …

Washu Expert: Can Trump Bypass Senate Approval Of Controversial Cabinet Nominees?, Andrea Scoseria Katz, Neil Schoenherr

Scholarship@WashULaw

Andrea Katz, an associate professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis, is an expert on constitutional law, with a focus on presidential power. Here, she discusses how Cabinet members are traditionally appointed and whether the Senate or the Supreme Court could stop Trump from doing an end-around on tradition.

Shadow Districts, Quinn Yeargain

Cardozo Law Review

Redistricting disputes—for congressional, state legislative, and local districts—have proven all-consuming in politics. Litigation over the legality of districts, under both federal and state law, is near constant when decennial redistricting occurs. But largely omitted from redistricting litigation and scholarship, however, are the districts drawn to elect members of statewide boards. These boards have outsized authority over some of the most salient disputes in politics today, with state boards of education setting policies for what can be taught in classrooms and how LGBT students are treated by the public education system, public utility commissions adopting policies for renewable energy production and …

No Bullying Allowed Here: Adopting A Misuse Doctrine To Defeat Trademark Bullies, Jessica Shechtman

Cardozo Law Review

In order to maintain trademark rights, trademark owners are encouraged to enforce and police their trademarks through civil actions. Enforcing trademark rights is encouraged and incentivized by the Lanham Act because failure to do so may result in harsh consequences for trademark owners. Some of these consequences include weakening of strength or abandonment of the mark, which may result in loss of trademark rights. However, large companies go above and beyond to police and protect their trademarks. At times, this overenforcement is unethical and crosses a fine line between following the law and abusing the law, causing a number of …