Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Health Status Of U.S. Democracy, Philip C. Bobbitt

Faculty Scholarship

In 1776, Thomas Paine wrote Common Sense, a pamphlet that galvanized American public opinion in the aftermath of the colonial confrontations at Lexington and Concord. The disorganized revolt against British authority was largely undecided on next steps, public opinion having failed to coalesce around capitulation to London or revolution against the British government. Paine’s argument for American independence was uncompromising. Prefiguring the Declaration of Independence that put King George III front and center in the emerging conflict, Paine wrote: “In the monarchies, the King is the Law but in America, Law is King.”

Presidential Immunity: Before And After Trump, Thomas P. Schmidt

Faculty Scholarship

“All the officers of government,” the Supreme Court said long ago, “from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law, and are bound to obey it.” Despite that ringing and categorical language, however, the Court has held that the President — the “highest” and most powerful of all government officers — is “immune” from judicial oversight in several respects. Indeed, when the Court held last Term that former presidents are presumptively immune from criminal prosecution for officials acts, the dissenters warned: “In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.”

This Article …

The Administrative Law Of Mccarthyism, Nicholas Handler

Faculty Scholarship

This Article recovers the largely overlooked legal and administrative history of the federal loyalty-security program, and argues that it played a formative role in the development of modern civil service protections and administrative law. During the McCarthy era, the United States Civil Service Commission (CSC), under pressure from Congress, implemented a sweeping loyalty program aimed at rooting out purportedly disloyal federal employees. Though often remembered as a moment of political overreach and civil liberties violations, this Article shows that the loyalty program simultaneously catalyzed a surprising expansion in procedural rights for government workers—both through internal reforms initiated by the CSC …

Supreme Court And Presidentialism: When Judges Stand In The President’S Way, Michael Procopio Avelar

LL.M. Essays & Theses

This article examines the conditions under which constitutional courts are able to resist executive attempts at institutional capture during periods of democratic erosion. Instead of concentrating on the mechanisms through which courts are attacked, it focuses on how courts effectively behave in the long term when operating under sustained political pressure. The central claim is that judicial resistance cannot be explained solely by formal institutional design or by a general commitment to constitutional principles. It depends on the interaction of three variables: judicial replaceability, external support, and enforcement capacity.

The article develops a typology of judicial responses to executive aggrandizement, …

L’Indépendance De La Justice : Une Question De Moralité Des Juges ?, Myriam Mehanna

Proche-Orient, Études juridiques

Defining and measuring the concept of judicial independence, often a source of contradictions, is crucial to ensure that the reform of the judicial system genuinely leads to the protection of the independence of judges and justice. This article puts forward three essential points: 1. Judicial independence is a measurable concept based on a set of specific guarantees; 2. It is also a complex concept, encompassing multiple facets that must be protected simultaneously; 3. Ultimately, it stems from legislative (and possibly constitutional) recognition of these complementary guarantees rather than from a moralizing discourse imposed on judges.

Humphrey's Eulogy: A Functionalist View Of Trump V. Slaughter And The Role Of The Ftc, Alex Zhang

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Trump v. Slaughter presents the Supreme Court with a foundational question about the administrative state: whether the for-cause removal protections afforded to Federal Trade Commission Commissioners under the FTC Act are consistent with Article II's vesting of executive power in the President, and, if not, whether Humphrey's Executor v. United States should be overruled.

In March 2025, President Trump removed two FTC Commissioners without satisfying the statutory standard of inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. The dismissed Commissioners sued, and the District Court for the District of Columbia granted summary judgment in their favor, holding that Humphrey's Executor …

Child Support Factory: Racist History, Harm, And Unconstitutionality Of The Child Support System's Contractual Operations, Daniel L. Hatcher

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

Within America’s justice institutions, the child support system has become a business. The intended mission of aid has been traded and abdicated through contractual deals to churn vulnerable families into factory-like revenue operations. Juvenile and family courts across the country have partnered through countless intertwined interagency contracts with human service agencies, prosecutors, attorneys general’s offices, probation departments, and policing offices—all aimed at generating revenue from impoverished children and parents rather than serving their best interests. The resulting child support factory is vast, harmful, unconstitutional, unethical, and grew from a racist history that devastated Black families, and still operates with starkly …

Article Iii's Constraints On The Legislative Power, Elizabeth Earle Beske

William & Mary Law Review

Article III’s heightened concreteness standard for statutory harms takes federal judges deep into legislative terrain, jeopardizing statutory damage provisions and confining Congress to post hoc solutions rather than preemptive strikes. The Supreme Court has insisted that creating a cause of action is a legislative function. At the same time, its recent standing cases instruct lower federal courts to permit suit on statutory injuries only when they find actual harm that bears a tight connection to injuries recognized at common law. This new harm requirement rests uneasily with countless statutes featuring statutory damage provisions that are in place precisely because damages …

The Vanishing Enforcer: Consumer Protection In An Era Of Dual Retrenchment, Alisher Juzgenbayev

Northwestern University Law Review

Recent developments, including reductions in the federal workforce, effective suspension of certain enforcement activities, and attempted centralization of independent agency rulemaking in the White House, have significantly weakened administrative agencies. This administrative retrenchment is concerning as private enforcement of a number of consumer protection statutes has been simultaneously curtailed through the Supreme Court’s decisions in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins and TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, which dramatically narrowed plaintiffs’ standing. These decisions rely in part on a vision of strong executive authority, positing that broad private standing conflicts with an Article II framework where a politically accountable President faithfully implements laws …

Selective Service And The Separation Of Powers, Jeremy K. Kessler

Faculty Scholarship

The legal history of the U.S. military draft is a case study in creative statutory interpretation. Throughout the twentieth century, this interpretive creativity tended both to expand draft registrants’ substantive and procedural rights, and to recalibrate the roles played by Congress, the courts, and various executive branch factions in the governance of tens of millions of young men. Today’s Military Selective Service Act (“MSSA”) reads much like the law that governed the land when the country last went to war with conscripts during the 1950s and 1960s. But between U.S. entry into the Korean War and its withdrawal from Vietnam, …

Electoral Due Process, Michael S. Kang

Northwestern University Law Review

Hyperpartisanship has hit century-long highs in American politics and is emboldening state government attempts to undermine election outcomes by using control over state lawmaking structure to strip away authority, and sometimes outright unseat, partisan opponents after they win elected office. Even as traditional norms against such moves have eroded, the Supreme Court has taken a pro-partisanship turn in removing judicial checks against such moves under equal protection and constitutional structure. This Article proposes shifting from challenges under those doctrines to a new approach under electoral due process for confronting this new generation of antidemocracy. Federal due process law restricts the …

Reconstituting A Constitution, And A Republic: The Architecture Of Authoritarian Rule, J. Maria Glover

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

A constitution can be remade without tearing it down, or even changing a single word. It is done by law.

“The judicial power is vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior courts as Congress may establish,” whose “province and duty” it is to “say what the law is.” U.S. Const. Art. III §1; Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 (Cranch) 137 (1803). It is not the power to remake the Constitution that grants it.

The Supreme Court is turning the inherited powers that hold power to law into instruments of its own aggrandizement. It is taking authority from …

From Myers To Slaughter: A Brief Theory Of The Constitutionalization Of Secondary Sources, Dana Neacsu, Paul D. Callister

Faculty Works

For more than two centuries, American constitutional adjudication has relied upon secondary sources. Yet constitutional theory has almost entirely ignored them. Originalism debates constitutional text. Living constitutionalism debates constitutional evolution. Theories of precedent debate judicial authority. None asks a more fundamental question: What role do secondary sources play in constitutional adjudication? This Article argues that the answer has fundamentally changed in the last 100 of years. Chief Justice William Howard Taft's opinion in Myers v. United States (1926) marked a constitutional revolution by transforming secondary authorities from explanatory materials into evidence of constitutional continuity. Exactly one century later, Chief Justice …

The Foreign Commerce Power, Kathleen Claussen, Timothy Meyer

Faculty Scholarship

This Article is the first to scrutinize presidential trade authority under the Constitution. The Constitution grants the President no independent power to regulate foreign commerce. That conclusion, while apparent from a straightforward reading of Articles I and II, stands in stark contrast to executive conduct of U.S. trade policy in recent years. This Article traces the roots of this constitutional distortion to a confluence of doctrinal drift and academic oversight. Courts and commentators have increasingly relied on an expansive conception of executive power grounded in a perceived general foreign affairs authority. In doing so, they have blurred the line between …

The Missing Constitutional Law Of Executive Conditions, Nicole Huberfeld, Matthew B. Lawrence

Faculty Scholarship

This Article contributes to development of the constitutional law of executive conditions. Courts are wrestling with the constitutionality of federal efforts to encourage what the federal government cannot mandate—speech on particular subjects, participation in cooperative federalism programs, and so on—but have failed to appreciate an important distinction. Binding statutory conditions articulated by Congress or an executive branch delegee (statutory conditions) and non-binding executive conditions articulated by executive branch actors engaged in regulation by deal (executive conditions) are different in constitutionally salient ways that can and should inform the development of workable doctrine. Yet courts, advocates, and scholars have only begun …

Rethinking Judicial Power & Remedial Restraint, Caprice L. Roberts

Catholic University Law Review

This Article maintains that groundbreaking Supreme Court cases reshaping judicial power and restraint are frequently remedies centric. The much- anticipated ruling in Trump v. CASA illustrates this correlation. Interpreting traditional equity, the Supreme Court circumscribed federal judicial power to issue universal relief. The Court relied on Marbury v. Madison to bolster its reasoning on the limits of judicial power. Ironically, both cases denied any remedy while enhancing the potential for future judicial power. Whether via judicial review and supremacy power or the Court’s future ability to now be the only federal court able to issue universal remedies—the Court’s role in …

The Quest For Budget Armor: Public Expenditures, Positive Rights, And Separation Of Powers In Washington's State Constitution, Kristen L. Fraser

Washington Law Review

In 2012, Washington’s landmark McCleary decision confirmed and expanded previous interpretations of the state constitution’s “paramount duty” clause, affirming a vital positive right to education and a judicial willingness to enforce it against the other branches. Notwithstanding a tense six-year period of judicial supervision after the ruling, ultimately the state legislature enacted broad education funding reforms and the appropriations and revenues to implement the additional resources for schools. Given competition among stakeholders for public funding for state programs, in the post-McCleary period, other litigants have asked courts to find similar positive constitutional rights to state services and funding. So …

Constitutional Obiter Dicta On Male-Male Sex And Fundamental Rights In Singapore, Benjamin Joshua Ong

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

The Singapore Court of Appeal held a law prohibiting male–male sexual intercourse (s 377A of the Penal Code) unenforceable on non-rights-based grounds. The court's remarks about the rights to life and liberty (including whether sexual orientation is mutable), freedom of expression, and equality are obiter. But they are significant, since in Singapore, there are few constitutional rights cases and the courts focus on spelling out the limits to executive and legislative power without necessarily striking down exercises of such power on rights grounds. Indeed, the obiter dicta prompted the Legislature to repeal s 377A. Given the repeal, the obiter dicta …

A Democracy Denied—Act 236’S Unconstitutional Restriction On Arkansas’S Initiative And Referendum Rights, Megan Prettyman Halford

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Whither Leviathan? The Seepage Of Constitutional Law Into Public-Private Arbitration In The United States, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

The chapter analyses how constitutional law influences private-public arbitration in the United States. Its central thesis is that constitutional law exerts a powerful indirect influence on arbitration law. While the US Constitution does not directly regulate arbitration, its underlying norms—such as separation of powers, federalism, and individual rights—impact arbitration law indirectly. The chapter explores the ways in which these constitutional principles influence public-private arbitration through statutory interpretation, treaty design, and private protocols reflecting constitutional norms. This pattern of influence manifests itself in public arbitration (i.e. arbitration involving states or state-owned entities) just as it does in private arbitration. Highlighting how …

Climate Exceptionalism In Court, Zachary D. Clopton, David A. Dana

Northwestern University Law Review

Across a range of cases, fossil fuel companies, government actors, and some judges have conceded that climate change is an exceptional phenomenon, only to argue that its exceptional nature is a reason to keep climate change out of court. These parties and judges thus seek to avoid the adjudication of climate cases on the merits, even when the neutral application of existing law would provide for jurisdiction in these cases. We term this phenomenon “climate jurisdiction exceptionalism.”

This Article provides a comprehensive account of climate jurisdiction exceptionalism, focusing on two main threads: Article III standing and state court jurisdiction. First, …

Deference Or Preference: Analyzing The Treatment Of Chevron U.S.A., Inc. V. Nrdc As A Precedent At The Supreme Court, Allison Dehart

Senior Theses

Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. is one of the most cited Supreme Court cases in history, with over 18,000 citations in federal courts alone (Merrill, 2012). It has reached doctrinal status and was widely considered a vital precedent, one that guided the fields of environmental and administrative law. However, in June of 2024, the Supreme Court released their opinion in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overturned Chevron. With the ubiquity of Chevron in US Courts, this decision caused widespread confusion and worry over what would replace the precedent. In an era where environmental …

Disqualification, Immunity, And The Presidency, Gillian E. Metzger

Faculty Scholarship

Trump v. Anderson and Trump v. United States were two momentous decisions in a momentous Supreme Court term. Sharing then former — and now current — President Trump as a party, the decisions hold important implications for presidential power and accountability.

Anderson arose from a suit brought by Colorado voters to challenge Trump’s inclusion on the Republican primary ballot in that state. They argued that Trump organized and incited the mob that attacked the Capitol on January 6, 2021, and disrupted the Electoral College vote count and certification. In their view, this disqualified him from serving as President under section …

The Ideational Dimension Of Judicial Power, Allen C. Sumrall

Marquette Law Review

The judiciary dominates contemporary American politics. In the United States, courts have overcome their humble origins to act as central figures in nearly every major policy dispute and separation of powers dispute. To explain this development, scholars have documented the increase in the federal judiciary’s institutional capacity and resources. Most accounts of the judiciary’s changing role in American constitutional politics focus on the courts’ expanded jurisdiction, the statutes that channel judicial review, the courts’ material resources, or changes to how politicians harness or respond to the judiciary. But focusing on these more formal institutional changes only gets us so far. …

Our Partisan Supreme Court And An Essential First Step Toward Reclaiming What's Been Lost, Gary Simson

Articles

Partisan decision-making by even only one Supreme Court Justice in a single case is not a trivial matter. The ill effects are greatly compounded when five or more Justices of a similar partisan bent regularly deliberate about, and decide, cases in a partisan way. At that point, we’ve got what can fairly be described as a partisan Supreme Court.

I argue in this Article that, to all of our great misfortune, a partisan Supreme Court is very much what we’ve got today. On a more hopeful note, though, I also argue that although reforming the Court to be a much …

“In Defiance Of Gifts”: The Dutch Origins Of The Foreign Emoluments Clause, Liam E. Cronan

Touro Law Review

Starting in 2017, a series of lawsuits against President Donald Trump grounded their arguments on a long-overlooked portion of the Constitution: the Foreign Emoluments Clause, which in its most basic form bans government officials from accepting gifts, or “emoluments,” from foreign entities. Until 2017, few courts or scholars had ever scrutinized this provision. But with Trump’s presidency and enduring reports of his foreign business dealings, this oft-shunned area of the law suddenly garnered the attention of courts and scholars alike. Because of a clear “lack of precedent” on this matter, federal judges soon parsed historical records to determine the Clause’s …

The Ethical Dilemma Of The Highest Court: Could Congress Constitutionally Impose A Binding Code Of Ethics On The United States Supreme Court?, Amys Serret

FIU Law Review

In response to mounting ethical concerns about Supreme Court Justices, the Court introduced its own Code of Conduct in November 2023, likely prompted by recent controversies involving Justice Clarence Thomas. This code aimed to dispel the public perception that Supreme Court Justices operate without ethical boundaries. The code mirrors the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, established in 1973, outlining ethical rules and principles for the Justices. It shares the same five canons and includes most provisions from the lower federal judges’ code, albeit with some differences. Although the Court’s ability to establish its own code is unquestioned, this …

What Is Trump Immunity?, Carlos Manuel Vázquez

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Trump v. United States, the Supreme Court held that a former President is entitled to an immunity in criminal cases in certain circumstances. The decision has been heavily criticized, with many commentators saying it places the President above the law. Exactly how it does so depends on what type of immunity a former President enjoys. Is the immunity enjoyed by former Presidents in criminal cases an immunity from the operation of the primary obligations imposed by the criminal laws in question? Or is it an immunity from being subjected to certain types of sanctions for having violated validly …

States In The Separation Of Powers, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Fletcher's Uncertainty Principle, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

am here to talk about the equal protection challenges facing Indian Country. I am going to give you my thesis right off the bat, which is that Haaland v. Brackeen decided the equal protection issue for us already, and we should behave as if it is decided.

I will explain what I mean by that. But first, let’s talk about what we will call the Mancari rule. The Mancari rule is fundamentally what Indian law is about, and it goes something like this—I am going to more or less paraphrase the guiding principle of Morton v. Mancari from 1974. Any …