Constitutional Law Commons^™

Urge To Reform Life Without Parole So Nonviolent Addict Offenders Never Serve Lifetime Behind Bars, Johanna Poremba

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Traditions Of American Constitutional Law, Marc O. Degirolami

Faculty Publications

This Article identifies a new method of constitutional interpretation: the use of tradition as constitutive of constitutional meaning. It studies what the Supreme Court means by invoking tradition and whether what it means remains constant across the document and over time. Traditionalist interpretation is pervasive, consistent, and recurrent across the Court’s constitutional doctrine. So, too, are criticisms of traditionalist interpretation. There are also more immediate reasons to study the role of tradition in constitutional interpretation. The Court’s two newest members, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, have indicated that tradition informs their understanding of constitutional meaning. The study of traditionalist …

Popular Constitutional Argument, Thomas G. Donnelly

Law Faculty Publications

Critics have long attacked popular constitutionalists for offering few clues about how their theory might work in practice—especially inside the courts. These critics are right. Popular constitutionalism—as a matter of both theory and practice—remains a work in progress. In this Article, I take up the challenge of developing an account of (what I call) popular constitutional argument. Briefly stated, popular constitutional argument is a form of argument that draws on the American people’s considered judgments as a source of constitutional authority—akin to traditional sources like text, history, structure, and doctrine. Turning to constitutional theory, I situate popular constitutional argument within …

India’S First Period: Constitutional Doctrine And Constitutional Stability, Madhav Khosla

Faculty Scholarship

Studies on constitutional stability and endurance rarely gesture toward the role of legal doctrine. While the workings of courts are often considered in understanding how a constitutional order might be sustained, this is almost variably achieved by examining the relationship between courts and other institutions. This chapter takes a different approach and studies the way in which constitutional consolidation might also be shaped by the doctrinal orientations and forms of reasoning that courts adopt. It does so by considering the first period of Indian constitutionalism. The focus is on two specific areas: the place of the Directive Principles in India’s …

Gobbledygook: Political Questions, Manageability, & Partisan Gerrymandering, Michael Gentithes

Akron Law Faculty Publications

In finding that extreme partisan gerrymandering is a non-justiciable political question in Rucho v. Common Cause , the Supreme Court fixated upon the lack of judicially manageable standards to evaluate their constitutionality. The decision culminated in the Court's recent reinforcement of that manageability focus in partisan gerrymandering cases, with Chief Justice Roberts even calling efforts to numerically calculate the extremity of such gerrymandering "sociological gobbledygook." Such belabored fears about manageability misread the questions in the political question doctrine. The doctrine requires the Justices to initially ask, as a normative matter, whether the judiciary should resolve the controversy in our constitutional …

Symposium: The Puzzling And Troubling Grant In Kisor, Gillian E. Metzger

Faculty Scholarship

From one perspective, the Supreme Court’s decision to grant review in Kisor v. Wilkie is not surprising. Dating back at least to Justice Antonin Scalia’s 2011 concurrence in Talk America v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., through Decker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center in 2013 and Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association in 2015, there’s been growing interest on the Supreme Court’s conservative wing in overturning Auer deference, or the doctrine that an agency’s interpretation of its own regulation is “controlling unless plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.” The campaign to overturn Auer v. Robbins then stalled, with the court denying …

November 19, 2019: Court-Packing, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Court-Packing“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Public Rights, Private Privileges, And Article Iii, John Harrison

Georgia Law Review

PUBLIC RIGHTS, PRIVATE PRIVILEGES, AND ARTICLE III John Harrison* This Article addresses the constitutional justification for adjudication by executive agencies that rests on the presence of a public right. The public rights rationale originated in the nineteenth century and was for many decades the dominant explanation for the performance of adjudicative functions by executive agencies. The U.S. Supreme Court most recently relied on that rationale in Oil States Energy Services v. Greene’s Energy Group in 2018. In light of the Court’s interest in the nineteenth century system, this Article explores that system in depth and seeks to identify the ways …

Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division Third Department

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

July 19, 2019: Justice Stevens R.I.P., Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Justice Stevens R.I.P.“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

The Trump Travel Ban: Rhetoric Vs Reality, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

President Trump's "Muslim ban" set the nation afire with debate. Opponents to the ban were motivated by the President's underlying motivations. Three iterations of the travel ban were struck down by lower courts. Before the Supreme Court, however, the travel ban was upheld. First, the plain language of § 1182(f) granted broad discretion to the President. Second, it did not violate the prohibition of discrimination against selected categories in § 1152(a)(1)(A). Finally, it failed to violate the Establishment Clause because it is facially legitimate, satisfying rational basis review. The Court found no facial evidence demonstrating discriminatory bias.

Masterpiece Cakeshop And The Future Of Religious Freedom, Mark L. Movsesian

Faculty Publications

Last term, the Supreme Court decided Masterpiece Cakeshop, one of several recent cases in which religious believers have sought to avoid the application of public accommodations laws that ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The Court’s decision was a narrow one that turned on unique facts and did relatively little to resolve the conflict between anti-discrimination laws and religious freedom. Yet Masterpiece Cakeshop is significant, because it reflects broad cultural and political trends that drive that conflict and shape its resolution: a deepening religious polarization between the Nones and the Traditionally Religious; an expanding conception of equality that …

June 23, 2019: All The Justices Get Religion Wrong Again, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “All the Justices Get Religion Wrong Again“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

June 22, 2019: What The Supreme Court Should Have Said, But Didn't, In The Maryland Cross Case, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “What the Supreme Court Should Have Said, But Didn't, in the Maryland Cross Case“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Equality Opportunity And The Schoolhouse Gate, Derek Black, Michelle Adams

Faculty Publications

Public schools have generated some of the most far-reaching cases to come before the Supreme Court. They have involved nearly every major civil right and liberty found in the Bill of Rights. The cases are often reflections of larger societal ills and anxieties, from segregation and immigration to religion and civil discourse over war. In that respect, they go to the core of the nation’s values. Yet constitutional law scholars have largely ignored education law as a distinct area of study and importance.

Justin Driver’s book cures that shortcoming, offering a three-dimensional view of how the Court’s education law jurisprudence …

Originalism And Second-Order Ipse Dixit Reasoning In Chisholm V. Georgia, D.A. Jeremy Telman

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article presents a new perspective on the Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence during the Early Republic. It focuses on what I am calling second-order ipse dixit reasoning, which occurs when Justices have to decide between two incommensurable interpretive modalities. If first-order ipse dixit is unreasoned decision-making, second-order ipse dixit involves an unreasoned choice between or among two or more equally valid interpretive options. The early Court often had recourse to second-order ipse dixit because methodological eclecticism characterized its constitutional jurisprudence, and the early Court established no fixed hierarchy among interpretive modalities.

Chisholm, the pre-Marshall Court’s most important constitutional decision, illustrates …

May 15, 2019: What Impeachment And Court-Packing Have In Common, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “What Impeachment and Court-packing Have in Common“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

April 14, 2019: Two Cases Of Independence--The Court And The Fed--And What They Tell Us About American Nihilism, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “ Two Cases of Independence--the Court and the Fed--and What They Tell Us About American Nihilism“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Reshaping American Jurisprudence In The Trump Era - The Rise Of Originalist Judges, Jeffrey F. Addicott

Faculty Articles

One of the factors that is often cited as a key reason why President Donald J. Trump was elected as the forty-fifth president, was his pledge to the American people to "make America great again" by appointing "conservative judges" to the bench, particularly when it came to filling any vacancies that might open on the United States Supreme Court. Since the never ending fight for securing an ideological majority on the Supreme Court is always viewed with great concern by both political parties, many wondered whether then candidate Trump was simply telling potential voters what they wanted to hear, or …

In This Issue, What Would Justice Brennan Say To Justice Thomas?, Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Judicial Review And Constitutional Interpretation In Afghanistan: A Case Of Inconsistency, Shoaib Timory

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

March 17, 2019: The Response To My Anti-Court-Packing Message, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The Response to My anti-Court-Packing Message“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

February 23, 2019: Opening Of The Memphis Talk On Court-Packing, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “Opening of the Memphis talk on Court-Packing“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

March 21, 2019: My Op-Ed On The Bladesnburg Cross, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “ My op-ed on the Bladesnburg Cross“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Republicans And The Voting Rights Act, Michael T. Morley

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Christian Legislative Prayers And Christian Nationalism, Caroline Mala Corbin

Articles

No abstract provided.

How To Get Away With Murder: The “Gay Panic” Defense, Omar T. Russo

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Justice Jackson In The Jehovah's Witnesses' Cases, John Q. Barrett

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

I will address Justice Jackson and Jehovah’s Witnesses in four parts. First, I will begin with Robert Jackson himself, introducing the man who became a Supreme Court Justice, and who came to author Barnette and at least one other very notable opinion in a Jehovah’s Witness case. Second, I will turn to the Barnette case in its Supreme Court legal context, which turns out to be two Court terms, 1941–42 and 1942–43, of many Jehovah’s Witnesses cases. These cases produced a run of Court decisions that are a framework surrounding Barnette, and thus understanding them is important to …

Passive Avoidance, Anita S. Krishnakumar

Faculty Publications

In its nascent years, the Roberts Court quickly developed a reputation—and drew sharp criticism—for using the canon of constitutional avoidance to rewrite statutes in controversial, high-profile cases. In recent years, however, the Court seems to have taken a new turn, quietly creating exceptions or reading in statutory conditions in order to evade potentially serious constitutional problems without expressly discussing the constitutional issue or invoking the avoidance canon. In fact, the avoidance canon seems largely, and conspicuously, missing from many cases decided during the Court’s most recent Terms, playing a significant role in justifying the Court’s construction in only one majority …

Quiet-Revolution Rulings In Constitutional Law, Dan T. Coenen

Scholarly Works

The Supreme Court ordinarily supports its establishment of major constitutional principles with detailed justifications in its opinions. On occasion, however, the Court proceeds in a very different way, issuing landmark pronouncements without giving any supportive reasons at all. This Article documents the recurring character and deep importance of these “quietrevolution rulings” in constitutional law. It shows that—however surprising it might seem—rulings of this sort have played key roles in shaping incorporation; reverse incorporation; congressional power; federal courts; and freedom-ofspeech, freedom-of-religion, and equal-protection law. According to the synthesis offered here, these rulings fall into two categories. One set of cases involves …