Constitutional Law Commons^™

Geduldig's Footnote: Five-Plus Decades Of State Courts Reckoning With Federal Pregnancy Discrimination Doctrine, Martha F. Davis

Northwestern University Law Review

In Geduldig v. Aiello (1974), the U.S. Supreme Court held that pregnancy discrimination does not constitute sex discrimination. The decision’s constitutional logic has recently been applied in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and United States v. Skrmetti. Yet over five decades, state courts have overwhelmingly rejected Geduldig’s rationale—both in construing state employment discrimination statutes and in interpreting state constitutional equality provisions. Courts in at least sixteen states have rejected Geduldig’s rationale in construing state employment discrimination laws, while only four states have followed it. Of the ten states with Equal Rights Amendments that have addressed whether …

Disability And Constitutional Legitimacy, Katherine A. Macfarlane

Washington Law Review

Disability classifications can take one of two forms. The more familiar form targets people with disabilities on account of their disability and harms them. This type of government classification receives deferential rational basis review and is therefore difficult to challenge. But government action that benefits people with disabilities also classifies on the basis of disability and receives rational basis review. This Article focuses on classifications that provide preferential treatment to disabled people precisely because of their disability—through disability affirmative action programs—and argues that their legitimacy is bolstered, not weakened, by the rational basis standard. It does so by distinguishing the …

The Paradox Of Equal Protection: Anti-Subordination Rhetoric In Service Of Anti-Classification Ends, Aanya Ghosh

Bates College Undergraduate Law Review

This article examines the evolution of Equal Protection jurisprudence through the competing lenses of anti-classification and anti-subordination. Anti-classification holds that the Constitution prohibits governmental use of racial categories regardless of purpose; anti-subordination holds that the Equal Protection Clause targets the perpetuation of racial hierarchy rather than the mere use of racial categories. Beginning with the foundational ambiguity of Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and tracing the doctrinal trajectory through Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007), and Students for Fair Admissions …

Amicus Brief In Trump V. Barbara: An Originalist Defense Of Birthright Citizenship, Jed Handelsman Shugerman, Evan D. Bernick

Faculty Scholarship

For nearly all of the first 235 years under the Constitution, the citizenship of every child born in the United States to alien parents, with immaterial exceptions, was a given. Then, in 2025, the Trump administration changed course. Even though the Fourteenth Amendment makes no mention of limiting birthright citizenship to the children of domiciled parents, the Government now claims that is what “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” has always meant. While the Government and its amici admit that the common law recognized the citizenship of children of transient aliens, their remaining “survey of history range[s] from the constitutionally irrelevant” …

Adding Family Complications To Birthright Citizenship, Scott Titshaw

Articles

On the first day of his second administration, President Trump issued an executive order purporting to restrict citizenship of U.S.-born children based on their parents’ citizenship or immigration status. In the process, it discriminates between mothers and fathers and adopts genetic definitions of “mother” and “father” to exclude any parent, who is not the child’s “immediate … biological progenitor.”

Courts and scholars have condemned this attempt to restrict birthplace citizenship as a violation of both the Fourteenth Amendment and the Immigration and Nationality Act. Yet there has been little, if any, discussion of the new family-based conditions in the order. …

Public Schools: Immigration & Customs Enforcement’S Unconstitutional And Inhumane Hunting Ground, Ma Camille Briones

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Against Doctrinal Siloing: Harmonizing Fiscal Federalism And The U.S. Constitution, David Gamage, Darien Shanske

Faculty Publications

This Essay argues that constitutional law’s treatment of fiscal federalism has fractured into a bewildering collection of doctrinal silos. Federal spending that pressures states, federal preemption of state taxes, the Dormant Commerce Clause, sovereign immunity, Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the federal taxing power are all analyzed through distinct tests, even when they implicate the same basic conflict between federal authority and state fiscal autonomy. The result is not just theoretical confusion but inconsistent constitutional answers. Current doctrine can protect states from comparatively modest liabilities while leaving uncertain whether Congress may displace large swaths of state revenue authority. …

Why Dobbs Is No Roadmap For Deciding State Constitutional Abortion Issues, Daniel A. Small

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

In deciding that Fourteenth Amendment “liberty” does not protect a woman’s decision to end her pregnancy, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization sought to distinguish the precedent that Roe and Casey relied on to recognize an abortion right. The Dobbs majority claimed that this precedent did not support a right to abortion because, in its view, destroying a fetus is more immoral than the conduct at issue in those earlier cases. However, moral concerns about fetal destruction shed no light on the nature or characteristics of a woman’s liberty interest in an abortion decision. These concerns, therefore, cannot show whether …

Skrmetti Beyond Scrutiny, Kate Redburn

Faculty Scholarship

In United States v. Skrmetti, the Supreme Court upheld Tennessee Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), a state law that prohibits transgender minors from accessing gender-affirming care. For the first time, the Court considered a fundamental question in civil rights law: How does the Fourteenth Amendment regard transgender people? The Court gave little guidance. It did not sort out principles for deciding when anti-transgender discrimination classifies by sex, nor whether transgender people are a suspect class. Instead, the Court held that “[i]n the medical context, the mere use of sex-based language does not sweep a statute within the reach of …

An Originalist Case For Birthright Citizenship Of Unlawful Immigrants' Children: Anti-Gypsy And Anti-Chinese Restrictions As Context, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

The Trump administration and other opponents of birthright citizenship for the children of “unlawful immigrants” make the following originalist claim about the Fourteenth Amendment: Even if the clause meant birthright citizenship, it applies today only to “lawful immigrants,” because the category of “unlawful immigrant” or “illegal immigrant” did not exist in the 1860s, when the clause was written and ratified. Opponents also argue that the Fourteenth Amendment’s citizenship clause originally implied a “loyalty” or “allegiance” requirement.

These assertions are historically inaccurate.

To the contrary, the concept of “unlawful immigrants” existed in the 1850s-60s, and Americans ratified birthright citizenship without indicating …

Trump V. Casa, Inc.: Brief Of Scholars Of Constitutional Law And Immigration As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Samuel Erman

Appellate Briefs

Amici are law professors whose research focuses on constitutional law and immigration. Amici have an interest in ensuring that the Fourteenth Amendment is interpreted in a manner consistent with its text and history, and accordingly have an interest in this case.

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 …

Prenatal Personhood, State Duties, And Congress’S Abortion Power Under The Fourteenth Amendment, David R. Upham

Catholic University Law Review

Many antiabortion jurists have contended that by its original meaning, the Fourteenth Amendment not only (1) recognizes the personhood of prenatal human beings, but also (2) requires states to have and enforce the antiabortion laws necessary to the equal protection of these prenatal persons, and even (3) empowers Congress to pass remedial antiabortion laws where the state fail to protect such persons.

In this essay, I will contend that the Amendment does indeed recognize the personhood of prenatal human beings, but largely leaves with the states the authority to determine the scope of the protection to be afforded such persons. …

Beware Of The Dangers Of The State-Created Danger Doctrine: A Look At The Ninth Circuit's Approach, Julia Steiner

University of Miami Law Review

The Fourteenth Amendment applies to state, not private, actors. It, like the whole of our Constitution, operates as a negative restraint on government. The Due Process Clause thus forbids states from taking certain action—but it does not and cannot compel the state to act ab initio. These core concepts formed the basis of the Supreme Court’s decision in DeShaney v. Winnebago County, where the Court reaffirmed that the only instance where the state assumes an affirmative duty to provide safety and security is when the state itself restrains an individual from protecting themselves.

Yet, since DeShaney, the circuit …

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. …

An "Exceedingly Persuasive Justification": Affirmative Action As Protected By The Free Exercise Clause, Kristin O'Bryan Pereira

Pepperdine Law Review

In 2023, the Supreme Court’s Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard (SFFA) decision effectively outlawed the use of race-based affirmative action programs in higher education, holding that such programs violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Meanwhile, the current Supreme Court has been unprecedently friendly to claimants seeking Free Exercise Clause protection from government restraints on religious exercise. The intersection between these two areas of law has implications for a category of schools not explicitly considered in the SFFA decision—private, religious schools …

Smoking Guns In The Rearview Mirror: Defending Washington's Firearm Regulations With Historical Analogues, Hyejin Lee

Washington Law Review

Mass shootings and gun violence are inescapable facts of American life. America is the only developed country where mass shootings occur almost daily. Despite the widespread sentiment of hopelessness surrounding this problem, state and local governments have been enacting various gun restriction laws. However, in a series of recent cases, the U.S. Supreme Court established an originalist standard for evaluating Second Amendment claims that poses significant challenges to the constitutionality of state and local gun laws. To survive constitutional muster, gun laws today must share common regulatory purpose and mechanism with historical analogues from the period between the founding and …

An Analysis Of Florida's Dual Enrollment Laws: How Florida's Model Is Uniquely Protected By The Fourteenth Amendment, William H. Hamman

Honors Undergraduate Theses

Florida’s dual enrollment program is an offering within the state’s basic education package, allowing secondary students to participate in postsecondary courses while simultaneously earning secondary and postsecondary credit. In Florida, around 80,000 students participate annually, and 1.5 million students are within the grade range eligible for participation in the program. This thesis analyzes how the program, and subsequently eligible students, are granted constitutional protections under the Fourteenth Amendment. The author conducted this research to highlight the expansive nature of constitutional law and demonstrate how Florida’s model is unique among state-mandated dual/concurrent enrollment programs. To conduct the necessary research, the author …

The Forgotten Victims: A Case For Children’S Compensation Amidst Parental Wrongful Incarceration, Mackenzie Crabbe

Touro Law Review

Wrongful incarceration is a tragedy that occurs far more often than most would care to admit. However, it is not only the wrongfully convicted person who suffers from this phenomenon. Most innocent people who are incarcerated have a family who is then affected and suffers immensely. Many wrongfully incarcerated individuals have children who then grow up without their parents, or with a significant barrier hindering their relationship with their parents. Typically, incarceration, and the separation of families that comes along with it, is justified by the need to regulate crime and keep communities safe. How[1]ever, when innocent people are serving …

Dobbs V. Brown, Benjamin H. Barton

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization1is the most important and impactful Supreme Court decision since at least Roe v. Wade, and potentially since Brown v. Board of Education. Past survey data show that most Americans can only name two Supreme Court opinions: Roe and Brown. Dobbs will surely join that list. This Article compares the history, drafting, and opinions of Dobbs and Brown to show what a missed opportunity Dobbs represents. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the opinion, it should be clear that Dobbs was one of those unique times (like that of Brown) where the Court …

Free Movement Rights And The American City, Ryan Stoa

FIU Law Review

American cities are facing an inflection point. Widespread dissatisfaction with urban planning outcomes is making land use and transportation policies (such as congestion pricing) a mainstream topic of debate. Suburban sprawl and housing shortages are moving urban populations into the periphery, commuting times (and associated mental health problems) are increasing, and pedestrian and cyclist deaths caused by vehicles are at all-time highs. American cities that were largely planned and built in the twentieth century based on assumptions that we now know are flawed are not meeting the needs of their residents, and urban planners are making changes to reshape urban …

The Curiously Minor Role Of Minor V. Happersett (Foreword), Susan Frelich Appleton, Travis Crum, Hannah Keidan

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Foreword introduces a symposium marking the 150th anniversary of Minor v. Happersett, a Supreme Court decision unanimously holding that the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause did not enfranchise women. Notwithstanding its impact on the women's suffrage movement and the subsequent ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment, Minor presents a puzzle: it is a relatively obscure precedent that remains deeply relevant to contemporary legal debates. To elucidate this point, this Foreword juxtaposes Minor with two notorious Supreme Court decisions: Dred Scott and Dobbs.

Like Dred Scott, Minor pairs a morally repugnant result with legalistic reasoning. But whereas …

A Crust Of Bread: Religious Resistance And The Fourteenth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash, Stephanie Hall Barclay

Law Faculty Publications

In Employment Division v. Smith, the U.S. Supreme Court denied heightened constitutional protection to religiously motivated exercise burdened by neutral and generally applicable laws. The history presented in this Article suggests that the Smith approach conflicts with the original understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment. Out of the crucible of religious abolitionist resistance to the Fugitive Slave Act emerged a substantive theory of constitutional religious freedom: American citizens should have the right to obey the Biblical command to care for the needy and provide the hungry a "crust of bread," even if doing so was contrary to neutral and generally …

Women On Death Row In The United States, Sandra Babcock, Nathalie Greenfield, Kathryn Adamson

Cardozo Law Review

This Article presents a comprehensive study of forty-eight persons sentenced to death between 1990 and 2022 who were legally recognized as women at the time of their trials. Our research is the first of its kind to conduct a holistic and intersectional analysis of the factors driving women’s death sentences. It reveals commonalities across women’s cases, delving into their experiences of motherhood, gender-based violence (“GBV”), and prior involvement with the criminal legal system. We also explore the nature of the women’s crimes of conviction, including the role of male codefendants and the state’s use of aggravating factors. Finally, we reveal …

Overturning Sffa V. Harvard, David Hinojosa, Chavis Jones

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

One of the first lessons law students learn is the importance of stare decisis. It not only serves as a tool to learn how to apply settled law to argument and persuasive writing, but foundationally stare decisis helps promote the public’s trust, confidence, and faith in the judicial system. Thus, when the Supreme Court issued its 6-3 opinion in 2023 in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard/University of North Carolina (“Harvard”), most onlookers viewed the decision as being the final nail in the coffin for affirmative action in higher education admissions. However, we—the authors—are among the minority.

In …

Power For The People: Recognizing The Constitutional Right To Vote For President, Charlie Martel

Cardozo Law Review

On January 6, 2021, a mob attacked the United States Capitol to overthrow the certification of the legitimately elected president and install the election loser, Donald Trump. Before this, there was another coup attempt. Trump and his team pressured state legislators and officials not to certify legitimately elected presidential electors, and to instead certify fake electors for Trump. This was based on the theory that the Constitution grants states “plenary power” to select presidential electors, even if this means cancelling citizen elections or rejecting their outcome. The coups failed—this time.

There should be no next time. The Supreme Court should …

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

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Decoding Dobbs: A Typology To Better Understand The Roberts Court's Jurisprudence, Katie Yoder

Honors Projects

The U.S. Supreme Court first recognized Substantive Due Process (“SDP”) in the early twentieth century. In Lochner v. New York, the Court established that there are certain unenumerated rights that are implied by the Fourteenth Amendment.Though SDP originated in a case about worker’s rights and liberties, it quickly became relevant to many cases surrounding personal intimate decisions involving health, safety, marriage, sexual activity, and reproduction.Over the past 60 years, the Court relied upon SDP to justify expanding a fundamental right to privacy, liberty, and the right to medical decision making. Specifically, the court applied these concepts to allow for freedoms …

Slaughtering Slaughter-House: An Assessment Of 14th Amendment Privileges Or Immunities Jurisprudence, Caleb Webb

Senior Honors Theses

In 1872, the Supreme Court decided the Slaughter-House Cases, which applied a narrow interpretation of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14^th Amendment that effectually eroded the clause from the Constitution. Following Slaughter-House, the Supreme Court compensated by utilizing elastic interpretations of the Due Process Clause in its substantive due process jurisprudence to cover the rights that would have otherwise been protected by the Privileges or Immunities Clause. In more recent years, the Court has heard arguments favoring alternative interpretations of the Privileges or Immunities Clause but has yet to evaluate them thoroughly. By applying the …

The Red Pill: Critical Race Theory, Ostrich Law, And The 14th Amendment Right To Free And Equal Thought And Dignity, Kindaka J. Sanders

St. Mary's Law Journal

No abstract provided.