Constitutional Law Commons^™

Genealogy In Constitutional Law, Charles W. Tyler

Vanderbilt Law Review

Genealogy is a form of argument that seeks to discredit social phenomena by exposing their pernicious ancestry. In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has used genealogy to undermine key provisions of written law, doctrinal rules, longstanding practices, and private conduct in cases involving a wide range of constitutional issues.

After comprehensively documenting this development, this Article contends that genealogy can advance conclusions within several widely recognized modalities of constitutional interpretation. More specifically, genealogy can be used to undermine assertions of authority implicit in arguments from precedent, tradition, and ethos. And it can be used to reveal its object’s function …

Constitutional Federalism And The Nature Of The Union, Anthony J. Bellia Jr., Bradford R. Clark

William & Mary Law Review

Federalism is an essential feature of the Constitution’s design and structure, but the Constitution does not spell out every respective authority of the federal government and the States in precise detail. This omission has led some observers to embrace broad—if not unlimited—federal power and reject certain longstanding federalism doctrines—such as state sovereign immunity, the anti-commandeering doctrine, and the equal sovereignty of the States. The objection to such doctrines is that the Constitution does not affirmatively grant States these sovereign rights and powers. This charge overlooks long-forgotten background context essential to faithful interpretation of the Constitution. The former British Colonies in …

The Power Of All: Tort In The Age Of Constitution, Cristina Carmody Tilley

Faculty Publications

Life in a multicultural nation can be fraught. The United States is a case in point, with hostile tension between members of competing identity groups playing out today on streets, in offices, and across the media. Modern Americans assume that bridging race, gender, and class inequity is the stuff of public—constitutional—law. This assumption follows the lead of modern American lawyers, who migrated to this body of law just as historians, sociologists, and economists began to insist that the private law of tort was exclusively concerned with the accidental physical harms inevitable in a modern economy. According to this econostory, tort …

Fighting For Abortion Access In Canada: A Constitutional Analysis, Jordana Borzellino

Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies

Access to abortion is a controversial matter that creates a labyrinth of polarizing issues. Perspectives on abortion range from anathema to overzealous support, with stakeholders occasionally resorting to legal avenues to control access one way or another. This paper will explore the possibility of protecting and expanding access to abortion through constitutional mechanisms in the Canadian legal landscape. By analyzing Canada's current degree of access, this paper will explain that abortion services for those in need are inadequate. In order to advocate for greater access, this paper examines a multitude of legal tools and doctrines to constitutionally protect access to …

The Potential Impact Of Charter Section 28 On Quebec's Controversial Secularism Law And The Pursuit Of Gender-Equality In Canadian Courts, Nywani Albert

Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies

The Western liberal democratic order, anchored in respect for individual rights and constitutional norms, faces a critical challenge as Quebec follows the pattern of several European nations in enacting laws restricting religious attire. While the Quebec Law 21, “An Act Respecting the Laicity of the State,” is ostensibly neutral, it particularly restricts Muslim women's rights. This paper explores an ongoing, novel legal strategy challenging Quebec's secularism law, focusing on Section 28 of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. While Section 28 mandates gender equality in Charter implementation, its potential remains largely unexplored in the decades since Charter enactment. Drawing …

Rethinking The History Of The Seventeenth-Century Colonial Ordinance: A Reinterpretation Of An Ancient Statute, Mark Cheung

Maine Law Review

In 1648, the Massachusetts colonial government ordered into print The Book of the General Laws and Libertyes that included an ordinance, commonly known as the Colonial Ordinance. The Ordinance extended private seashore property rights to the low water mark but to no more than one hundred rods beyond the high-water mark. The 1648 Ordinance replaced an earlier version enacted in the Body of Liberties of 1641. While both versions of the Ordinance enumerated public rights of fishing, fowling, and navigation in the foreshore, the 1648 Ordinance provided the critical language extending the private boundary to the low water mark. Prior …

Expanding Public Access By Codifying The Public Trust Doctrine: The Massachusetts Experience, William L. Lahey, Lauren Sandler Zurier, Kenneth W. Salinger

Maine Law Review

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts is dramatically expanding public access to the coast through statutory and regulatory codification of the public trust doctrine. Is this legislative and administrative experiment relevant to other states, particularly to Maine? The initial answer to this question may depend on the meaning of the Bell v. Town of Wells decision. For better or for worse, Massachusetts jurisprudence set the course followed by the majority of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court in Bell. To some, including several of the authors in this symposium, the bearing of the Massachusetts courts leads to a civic wasteland where the public's …

Intellectual Indifference—Intellectual Dishonesty: The Colonial Ordinance, The Equal Footing Doctrine, And The Maine Law Court, Orlando E. Delogu

Maine Law Review

Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of the recent Bell decision was the fact that it was 4-3, that significant public interests were lost because a bare majority refused to examine, in the detail necessary, the Colonial Ordinance, old and new United States Supreme Court cases, Maine law, or the reasoning of their own colleagues who filed a compelling dissenting opinion in the case. A mere recitation of the dissenting opinion would serve no useful purpose—it is a part of the public record; its rationale speaks for itself. Had the rationale of the dissent been adopted by the majority it would …

Public Trust, Public Use, And Just Compensation, Alison Rieser

Maine Law Review

In its recent decision, Bell v. Town of Wells, the Maine Law Court declined to grapple with one of the major legal conceptual problems presented by the case. The court failed entirely to reckon with the intersection of two competing, dynamic principles of American property law; these principles are increasingly significant in an era of growing conflict between public and private interests in land and natural resources. The first principle protects particular expectations of private owners of property through application of the just compensation (or "takings") clause of the fifth amendment. The second principle recognizes that certain property is held …

Judicial Preferences And Aggrandizement Effects, Jason Marisam

ConLawNOW

Scholars increasingly portray the Supreme Court as power hungry and self-aggrandizing. This aggrandizement literature, though, lacks a robust causal theory. This essay argues that judicial aggrandizement is not the product of a power-maximizing agenda but a function of judicial preferences and legal background conditions. Aggrandizement occurs in cases where legal background conditions do not align with judicial policy preferences and the justices assert power to create their preferred policy outcomes. This theory has significant prescriptive and normative implications. For example, counterintuitively, this essay shows that more judicial aggrandizement could be a sign of a healthier institution under some conditions.

Section Three Of The Fourteenth Amendment: Insurrection, Mark A. Graber

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The public, scholarly, and legal debate over whether former president Donald Trump is eligible to hold office under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment has focused far more on technical legal questions than on whether Trump engaged in an insurrection. Scholarly and public commentary rarely examines the constitutional/ common law of insurrection, preferring instead to examine whether Trump is exempt from Section Three because Section Three either exempts presidents or the presidency from disqualification or because Section Three is not self-executing. Trump v. Anderson (2024) focused on state incapacity to disqualify “oathbreaking insurrectionists” rather than on whether Trump was an …

Contempt: The Original Judicial Cheat Code, Ryan L. Scott

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The judicial contempt power challenges the fundamental rights enshrined in America’s Constitution. Imagine spending eight years in federal prison with no right to a jury trial or a court appointed attorney. Your only reprieve is the discretion of the judge who is imprisoning you. Meaningful appeals and even habeas corpus actions are generally not available remedies. Instead, what was originally justified as an inherent power of the court, necessary to maintain order and decorum, is increasingly used for trivial offenses or to incarcerate individuals for far longer than their possible crimes would otherwise warrant.

Despite widespread instances of abuse of …

Book Review: John Paul Stevens, The Making Of A Justice: Reflections On My First 94 Years, New York, Little, Brown And Co., 2019, Pp. 549, $35.00 (Hardback), Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The autobiography of Justice John Paul Stevens, published just a few months before he died, is an enticing travelogue for Supreme Court nerds. Other travelers may want to pick a different landscape.

Emergency Powers For Good, Elena Chachko, Katerina Linos

William & Mary Law Review

Emergency powers are widely, and justly, criticized as threats to the rule of law. In the United States, forty-three declared emergencies give the executive vast authority to exercise power unencumbered by standard legal and procedural requirements. A long tradition of executive use of emergency powers to erode civil liberties amplifies fears of executive overreach.

Yet this, we argue, is only part of the picture. We examine how emergency powers can be used for good. We argue that under certain limited conditions, political actors can legitimately invoke emergency powers to transform public policy. In addition to widely accepted requirements of crisis …

The Takings Blunderbuss: From Pennsylvania Coal To Dobbs, Michael Allan Wolf

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article explores three problems with the excess use of the Takings Clause (the "takings blunderbuss") that should cause concern not to left-wing judges and scholars who endorse seemingly unfettered activism from the bench and champion an organic view of the Constitution, but instead, and somewhat surprisingly, to conservatives who claim to eschew those practices. The first problem is that the text and original understanding, as far as we can discern, indicate that the Takings Clause was designed to ensure that owners receive payment when they are forced to sacrifice ownership of their tangible property for public use, most commonly …

The Nineteenth Amendment And Dobbs, Paula A. Monopoli

ConLawNOW

There was a surge in legal scholarship around the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution—the Woman Suffrage Amendment—leading up to its centennial in August 2020. But this scholarly interest around the Nineteenth peaked two years before the U.S. Supreme Court’s historic decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June 2022. This paper revisits the Nineteenth Amendment in light of the Court’s decision in Dobbs. It argues that the Nineteenth should be understood as a ban on sex discrimination that extends beyond the right to vote. The Amendment expands the scope of women’s citizenship as a matter …

Amicus Brief Of Legal Scholars Lee Kovarsky Et Al. In Support Of Petitioner, Ira P. Robbins

Amicus Briefs & Court Filings

QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether a second-in-time habeas claim filed while an appeal from the judgment on an initial habeas claim is still pending counts as a second or successive habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)

INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE: Amici curiae are law professors and legal scholars who study federal post-conviction law and civil procedure. Amici curiae have no personal interest in the outcome of this case. They all share an interest in seeing habeas law applied in a way that ensures the just and timely adjudication of claims while preserving the traditional and intended operation of the Federal Rules …

What The Cluck? Backyard Chickens And Maine's Mysterious Right To Food, Lucy Weaver

Maine Law Review

When Maine voters approved the nation’s first “right to food” constitutional amendment, many were concerned about the amendment’s potential to conflict with animal welfare, food safety, and other regulations currently in place at the state and local level. Born from a decade of advocacy, the amendment represents a new era for Maine’s food sovereignty movement. However, the boundaries of the amendment remain unclear, and Maine’s municipalities lack sufficient guidance as they attempt to navigate how this amendment applies to them. This Comment explores one example of the many challenges that may arise from the enactment of the right to food …

Dobbs And Sterilization Decision-Making: Understanding The Coercive Spillover Effects In Reproductive Choice, Thomas Williams

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The Supreme Court majority in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization argued their decision would have limited impact beyond abortion rights. This Article examines how Dobbs and subsequent state abortion restrictions are likely to increase women’s reliance on permanent sterilization procedures, particularly among already marginalized populations. Drawing on emerging data and historical context, I argue that some post-Dobbs sterilizations should be understood as effectively coerced by state policies, implicating reproductive justice concerns and potentially undermining fundamental rights established in Skinner v. Oklahoma. Then, I demonstrate how interdisciplinary bioethics frameworks and methodologies can help courts better understand the full implications of …

Rules & Laws For Civil Actions: 2025 Ed., Stella Burch Elias, Derek T. Muller, Jason Rantanen, Caroline Sheerin, Maya Steinitz

Books

Rules and Laws for Civil Actions is an open-access resource for law students containing the U.S. Constitution, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and selected federal and state statutes. The book was created by a team of faculty members at the University of Iowa College of Law to supplement the study of Civil Procedure, Evidence, Constitutional Law, and other law school courses. In addition to containing the official text, each legal source found in Rules and Laws for Civil Actions is accompanied by an introductory section written by an Iowa Law professor …

The Penal Judgment Exception To Full Faith And Credit: How To Bind The Bounty Laws, Walker Mckusick

Washington Law Review

In the current moment of interstate friction over abortion, the penal judgment exception poses a barrier against interstate enforcement of bounty laws. A doctor who prescribes a medicated abortion to a Texas patient may be exposed to civil liability—even in faraway Washington State. A Washington court asked to enforce a Texas judgment against the doctor is subject to the Full Faith and Credit Clause. Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution mandates that each state give full faith and credit to judgments rendered in sister states. Under Texas Senate Bill 8 (S.B. 8), any member of the public …

Perspectives On The Constitution Of The War On Drugs: A Collection Of Posts From The Balkinization Blog, Douglas A. Berman, Rachel Barkow, Louis Michael Seidman, Kimani Paul-Emile, Jennifer D. Oliva, Shaun Ossei-Owusu, Katherine Shaw, Paul Butler, David E. Pozen

Faculty Scholarship

This collection of essays provides extended commentary from multiple law professors on David Pozen’s 2024 book, The Constitution of the War on Drugs. Pozen’s book provides a rich and astute perspective on a wide array of dynamic legal, political, and social stories at the intersection of constitutional jurisprudence and drug policy. The work is the first book in Oxford University Press’s Inalienable Rights series to be fully open access. Yale Law Professor Jack Balkin, recognizing the book engaged many historical and cutting-edge issues in the fields of constitutional law, criminal law and health law, invited professors in these fields …

The Long Shadow Of Food Lion, Knight First Amend. Inst. (May 31, 2024), Alan K. Chen

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

This essay discusses the continuing shadow of Food Lion, Inc. v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., which looms over the efforts of journalists and, increasingly of other citizens, to engage in undercover investigations to discover and disseminate truthful information on matters of profound public concern. At a time when many impediments to freedom of the press have emerged, legal barriers to undercover investigations suppress a key newsgathering tool that was once an important part of the news media ecosystem. After describing the extensive litigation battle in the case, the essay argues that the decision continues to cast a chilling effect over journalists …

Constitutional Rights And Retrenchment: The Elusive Promise Of Equal Citizenship, Deborah L. Brake

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Private Litigation Impact Of New York’S Green Amendment, Evan Bianchi, Sean Di Luccio, Martin Lockman, Vincent Nolette

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law

The increasing urgency of climate change, combined with federal environmental inaction under the Trump Administration, inspired a wave of environmental action at the state and local level. Building on the environmental movement of the 1970s, activists have pushed to amend more than a dozen state constitutions to include “green amendments” — self-executing individual rights to a clean environment. In 2022, New York activists succeeded, and New York’s Green Amendment (the NYGA) now provides that “Each person shall have a right to clean air and water, and a healthful environment.”

However, the power of the NYGA and similar green amendments turns …

Anti-Transgender Constitutional Law, Katie Eyer

Vanderbilt Law Review

Over the course of the last three decades, gender identity anti-discrimination protections and other transgender-supportive government policies have increased, as government entities have sought to protect and support the transgender community. But constitutional litigation by opponents of transgender equality has also proliferated, seeking to limit or eliminate such trans-protective measures. Such litigation has attacked as unconstitutional everything from laws prohibiting anti-transgender employment discrimination to the efforts of individual public school teachers to support transgender teens.

This Article provides the first systematic account of the phenomenon of anti-transgender constitutional litigation. As described herein, such litigation is surprisingly novel: while trans-protective measures …

American Democracy And The State Constitutional Convention, Jonathan L. Marshfield

UF Law Faculty Publications

Fears about the health of American democracy are high. And with the Supreme Court loosening federal constraints and returning critical substantive issues to the states, there is new and particular interest in the democratic quality of state institutions. While some see opportunity in this decentralization, there is also good reason to believe that many states are failing to deliver on America’s democratic ideals. There are growing concerns, for example, that many state legislatures are enacting laws wildly misaligned with majority preferences on important issues like guns, abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, and healthcare. There are also deeper structural concerns regarding partisan gerrymandering, …

Convening For (Climate) Change: The Constitutional Case For A U.S. Climate Assembly, Will Mccabe

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Note argues that a national U.S. Citizens’ Assembly for Climate would not violate the non-delegation doctrine which prevents Congress from improperly delegating its constitutional legislative power to another body. A climate assembly could potentially be authorized in several ways; this Note explores that of Congress convening a climate assembly through statute, either as an independent body or as a body under the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency. Part I examines the current state of American climate policy and the political debate surrounding it, putting forward a case for a novel approach, and also examines the concept of climate …

Constitutional Rights And Remedial Consistency, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Publications

When the Supreme Court declined definitively to block Texas’s S.B. 8, which effectively eliminated pre-enforcement federal remedies for what was then a plainly unconstitutional restriction on abortion rights, a prominent criticism was that the majority would have never tolerated the similar treatment of preferred legal protections—like gun rights. This refrain reemerged when California enacted a copycat regime for firearms regulation. This theme sounds in the deep-rooted idea that judge-made law should adhere to generality and neutrality values requiring doctrines to derive justification from controlling a meaningful class of cases ascertained by objective legal criteria.

This Article is about consistency, and …

An Originalist Approach To Puerto Rico: Arguments Against The Status Quo, Micah Allred

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

Few originalists have grappled with a fundamental question about Puerto Rico: whether the Constitution permits the United States to hold the island indefinitely as nonstate territory. There are reasons to doubt that it does. The main purpose of the Constitution’s territorial provisions was to allow Congress to transition the then West-ern Territory into states. And, as a structural matter, Congress’s direct authority over Puerto Ricans conflicts with important constitutional principles such as federalism. But for originalists, arguments from purpose and structure are helpful only insofar as they elucidate the original meaning of the Constitution’s text. This Article lays out two …