Constitutional Law Commons^™

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Discriminatory Censorship Laws, Jonathan Feingold, Joshua Weishart

Faculty Scholarship

The summer of 2020 ignited global protests for racial justice. Across the United States, millions marched with a modest plea: that America reckon with its racism. For K-12 schools, this moment pushed local communities and district leaders to create more inclusive classrooms and curricula. Yet before the summer had ended, America's antiracist turn provoked a backlash campaign that has proven far more impactful and enduring.

This campaign has featured the rise and spread of "discriminatory censorship laws"-a term we apply to government action designed to demean inclusionary values and to deny students access to critical knowledge, inquiry, and thinking. As …

The Major Questions Doctrine, Post-Chevron?: Skidmore, Loper-Bright, And A Good-Faith Emergency Question Doctrine, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

When my students and colleagues fretted about Chevron's fate, I have said, "Worry less. Skid-more." Just as old Skidmore "weight" or "respect" returns post-Chevron, the new (and newer) major questions doctrine(s) survive as a reason to give less weight to an agency interpretation. This symposium essay suggests a special role for the post-Chevron major questions doctrine: an Emergency Questions Doctrine. When the executive asserts an emergency power, when the statutory basis is open-ended (often for very good reasons), majorness means less deference to simple and fast textualism, and more time for courts to engage in deeper purposivism to …

Amicus In Wilcox V. Trump On Presidential Removal And Unitary Executive Theorists’ Errors, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

As courts ask whether Free Enterprise and Seila Law call into question Humphrey’s Executor and independent officers or agencies, the more immediate questions should be focused on new historical evidence and new fact-checking finding pervasive and repeated historical errors and misinterpretations at the foundation of the unitary executive theory of removal.

Since the Supreme Court decided Seila Law, a wave of new historical research has shown that the Founding generation did not understand Article II to grant the President an indefeasible removal power over executive officials. In response, pro-unitary executive scholars have tried to offer new historical support. That …

The Endorsement Test's Early Years, 1983-1985: Notes From The O'Connor Files, Jay D. Wexler

Faculty Scholarship

One of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s signature contributions to U.S. constitutional law was the endorsement test, a subtle but critically important reformulation of the Court’s then prevailing approach to applying the Establishment Clause that focused on the message sent by government action supporting religion and the potentially harmful effects of that message on religious minorities and the political community. Now that the current Court has discarded the endorsement test, leaving the government freer than ever to support religion in a variety of ways, we should expect to see the harms that Justice O’Connor cared about become increasingly widespread and prevalent. …

Originalisms' Indifferences?: Friendly Amendments To Sherif Girgis's "Originalism's Difference?", Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

Sherif Girgis’s Lecture Originalism’s Differences? reflects on what had differentiated originalism from other methods and why those differences are eroding. The differences are (or were): (1) avoiding “ostentatious moral reasoning”; (2) relatedly, constraining judges by requiring originalist historical evidence (i.e., tying judges’ hands); and (3) engaging historical research with more “intensity.” Girgis rightly criticizes the Court for engaging in the same kind of flexibility and creativity that originalists had long rejected.

In this commentary, I highlight our areas of agreement and offer friendly amendments. My title takes Girgis’s title two or three steps further: I use an “s-apostrophe” because I …

Under What Circumstances Is "Caste" Likely To Be Useful As An Analytic Concept (And Should We Care)?, Sanford V. Levinson, Robert L. Tsai

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay is the product of the 2025 “Constitutional Law Schmooze,” where academics from a variety of disciplines and from all over the country meet to discuss a common topic of constitutional law chosen by the moderator. This year’s topic was “caste.” The two of us, having written independent “tickets” of admission for the schmooze—i.e., short essays setting out our tentative thoughts about “caste”—turned out to be relative skeptics about the value of the term for lawyers. We are certainly not hostile to those who differ with us. This should be regarded as a “friendly dissent,” as distinguished, say, from …

The Immigration Subpoena Power, Lindsay Nash

Articles

For over a century, the federal government has wielded the immigration subpoena power in darkness, forcing private individuals, subfederal governments, and others to help it detain and deport. This vast administrative power has remained opaque even to those who receive these subpoenas and invisible to those it affects most. Indeed, the very people targeted by these subpoenas often don’t know they exist, much less how they facilitate arrest and deportation. For these reasons—and more—this power has escaped the legal battles raging over other immigration enforcement tactics and the scrutiny of journalists, scholars, and courts. Thus, as state- and locality-held information …

The Violence Of Bright Lines, Terrell Woolfolk, Kathryn E. Miller

Articles

The U.S. Supreme Court interprets the Eighth Amendment to prohibit members of certain groups from serving extreme punishments, such as the death penalty and life without parole. For example, the Court has long banned death sentences for people with intellectual disability and for those who were under eighteen years old at the time of their crime. More recently, in Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama, the Court extended this reasoning to sentences of life without parole for those under eighteen—prohibiting the sentence altogether for nonhomicide crimes and barring its mandatory imposition for homicides.

Many scholars and advocates have applauded …

Doubting Thomas And Questioning Stare Decisis Under The Roberts Court, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii

Articles

The article critically examines the erosion of stare decisis under the Roberts Court, highlighting concerns about the Supreme Court's increasing willingness to overturn established precedents. While acknowledging the importance of stare decisis in maintaining stability and equality, the author argues that its practical value is being undermined by ideological polarization and a departure from traditional legal reasoning. The article questions the Court's recent approach to precedent, particularly in cases like Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, and critiques the conservative majority's aggressive use of judicial power.

Response: Diagonal Representation, Alma Magaña

Articles

A lot has been written about the crisis of indigent defense and the plethora of factors that have led to the crisis, like the lack of guidance on how indigent defense providers can most efficiently distribute their insufficient resources. This lack of guidance has left jurisdictions across the country to their own devices, resulting in a national landscape of very different models, each with its own variations of the same problems plaguing indigent defense.

Competitive Populism, Madhav Khosla

Faculty Scholarship

The preoccupation of comparative constitutional lawyers over the past decade or so has been the rise of authoritarian populism. This chapter focuses on one possible pathway that might follow our present political moment: competitive populism. This phase will involve a certain kind of institutional vacuum: the prior institutions, associated with liberal constitutional democracy, will not lend themselves to being rebooted. In reflecting on this possible future, this chapter explores the nature and form of deinstitutionalization that has occurred under authoritarian populism, and the elements that define the emerging constitutional framework. The implication here is that what will be crucial …

The New Substantive Due Process, Leah M. Litman

Articles

After the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade, commentators made much about the possible demise of substantive due process—the idea that the Constitution safeguards certain substantive liberties that are not specifically or explicitly spelled out in the Constitution. Judges and scholars are debating which substantive due process decisions are next on the chopping block and whether the entire domain of substantive due process is in jeopardy. But a curious thing happened as the Court scaled back and openly questioned the traditional individual-rights line of substantive due process: Rather than eliminating it entirely, the Court seems to have transposed it elsewhere. …

Inventing Birthright: The Nineteenth-Century Fabrication Of Jus Soli And Jus Sanguinis, Sam Erman, Nathan Perl-Rosenthal

Articles

Formal membership in a state has been an essential political status for well over a century. It is typically gained at birth, either jus soli or jus sanguinis. Jus soli assigns nationality by birth in a nation's territory; jus sanguinis assigns children their parents’ nationality. This article provides an alternative intellectual history of the modern dominance of these principles for attributing nationality. Contrary to prior scholarship, soli and sanguinis were not restatements of existing principles. The soli/sanguinis binary was a nineteenth-century invention. Old-regime European empires attributed membership in the community under one or another single natural law principle. Parentage and …

Memory, Resistance, And Doubt, Richard Primus

Articles

Burroughs v. United States is not a famous case. But it could be. Its central character was a famous man. James Cannon, Jr., was a bishop in the Methodist church, a player in the worlds of business and banking, a ruthless political power broker, and a zealous Prohibitionist. In Virginia, where he lived, his role within the Democratic Party earned him the informal title of “the dry boss of the state,” and his influence extended well beyond the Old Dominion. Indeed, the essayist H.L. Mencken identified Cannon as the most important Prohibitionist in the country. “More than any other man,” …

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 …

Per Se Non-Takings, Nestor M. Davidson, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Faculty Scholarship

In the discourse on the Takings Clause, disputes over methodology have long formed a kind of proxy war, with per se rules ordinarily underwriting strong constitutional protection for property rights and ad hoc standards more often vindicating public interests. At a moment when the Supreme Court is increasingly embracing the rules end of this rules–standards spectrum, this Article offers a novel perspective to challenge the conventional link between categorical reasoning and classical liberal conceptions of constitutional property.

To do so, the Article excavates a vast body of law denying takings liability through rule-like reasoning, an approach the Article calls per …

Race, The Academy, And The Constitution Of The War On Drugs, I. Bennett Capers, Jeffrey Bellin

Faculty Scholarship

The war on drugs is widely viewed as a policy failure. Despite massive government intrusions on personal liberty, drug addiction, overdoses, and drug-related violence have only increased since the war was declared in 1971. David Pozen’s new book, The Constitution of the War on Drugs, reveals a constitutional failure as well. Pozen chronicles a host of constitutional arguments that American litigants deployed to protect a “right” to use drugs with surprising, if fleeting, success. Pozen asks what might have been, exploring why the courts backtracked and effectively removed the Constitution as a meaningful obstacle to drug prohibitions. 

This Review …

Original Discontent, William Magnuson

Faculty Scholarship

There are many theories of constitutional interpretation. Most, but not all, of them assert that, in interpreting the Constitution’s provisions, we should start by taking seriously the intentions of the enactors, meaning, roughly speaking, its drafters, defenders and ratifiers. This Article argues that, in doing so, judges, scholars and policymakers have underestimated an important feature of the process of constitution-making: the discontent of the enactors themselves with the Constitution they were enacting. Time and again, during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, during the penning of the Federalist Papers, and during the state ratifying conventions, the enactors expressed deep reservations about …

Moral Politics Theory Applied To Abortion: Utopias, Dystopias, And Dobbs, Susan Ayres

Faculty Scholarship

This article examines Moral Politics Theory (MPT) as a way to understand current tensions in the US concerning reproductive justice. MPT, as developed and researched for over thirty years by cognitive scientist, George Lakoff, provides a way to explain differences in political worldviews. According to Lakoff’s research in Moral Politics and Don’t Think of an Elephant!, conservatives tend to hold a strict-father model, and progressives hold a nurturant-parent model. People in the political middle tend to endorse both models; Lakoff labels those in the middle as “biconceptuals,” and discusses how this group is most susceptible to persuasion because metaphors frame …

Analisis Demokrasi Pada Pengisian Jabatan Gubernur Dan Wakil Gubernur Di Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, Akbar Ardya Putra, Rosita Candrakirana, Andina Elok Puri Maharani

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

The aim of this research is to analyze the implementation of democracy in the process of filling the governor and deputy governor positions in the Yogyakarta Special Region. This is regulated in the Special Areas Act No. 13/2012. The Act stipulates that the candidates for governor can only be the descendants of the Yogyakarta Sultanate and the candidates for deputy governor can be the descendants of the Duchy of Pakualaman. Following these provisions, there are differences between the special region of Yogyakarta and other regions using general elections to fill regional heads. The results of the study show that the …

Analisis Klausula Choice Of Forum Dalam Kontrak Standar E-Commerce Di Indonesia: Kajian Berdasarkan Perspektif Perlindungan Konsumen, Sarping Saputra

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

This research discusses choice of forum clauses in standard contracts on the five largest e-commerce platforms in Indonesia, namely Shopee, Tokopedia, Lazada, Bukalapak, and Blibli. The clause stipulates the mechanism and location of dispute resolution that automatically binds consumers when using the platform. In practice, these clauses tend to burden consumers, especially regarding access to fair dispute resolution. This research focuses on the compatibility of the choice of forum clause with the principles of consumer protection regulated in the Consumer Protection Law (UUPK). The results reveal that most e-commerce platforms use exclusive forms of choice of forum clauses, such as …

Desain Dan Konstitusionalitas Penerapan Pilkada Asimetris Di Indonesia, Lalu Aria Nata Kusuma

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

The idea of implementing asymmetric regional elections (Pilkada) in Indonesia is not a new concept. However, to date, there has been no effort to provide a design for the implementation of Pilkada in an asymmetric manner, considering the specific needs of each region and its alignment with the 1945 Constitution. This article aims to implement Pilkada in an asymmetric manner by first mapping the asymmetry models of each region based on their specific needs. This research uses a doctrinal and socio-legal approach. The results of this research indicate a need to implement Pilkada asymmetrically in Indonesia. This urgency arises due …

Digital Constitutionalism: Resistensi Kebebasan Berpendapat Di Indonesia Dalam Hegemoni Algoritma Ruang Digital, Yuniar Prehatini, Linda Noviana Mita Devi

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

Era digital membawa transformasi dalam segala aspek kehidupan. Perkembangan teknologi menghadirkan perkembangan zaman pada sisi positif dan negatif dimana penggunaan ruang digital yang dapat diakses tanpa batasan wilayah. Kebebasan diartikan melalui teknologi dengan adanya akses ruang digital memberikan kemudahan akses kepada siapa pun. Melalui algoritma digital, segala hal baik dari aspek budaya, politik, maupun ekonomi dapat diketahui sehingga hal ini juga dapat menimbulkan keresahan apabila tidak diatur batasan akan keberadaannya. Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian normatif yang fokus pada analisis terhadap norma, asas, doktrin, dan teori hukum yang berkaitan dengan perlindungan hak asasi manusia di ruang digital. Hasil penulisan ini menunjukkan …

The Inadequacy Of Perpetuating Vestiges Of Segregation In K-12 Curriculum: The Justiciability Of Reviewing Duties To Adequacy In Florida's Education Clause, Soumya Sreerama

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Although the Supreme Court declared segregation the most abusive affront to education and ruled to eliminate vestiges of segregation “root and branch,” those same roots have grown unchecked to remain prominent today. One of the undercurrents of state-sponsored discrimination that has escaped desegregation remedies is the skewed, whitewashed curriculum that permeated K-12 classrooms in Jim Crow America. More troubling, is that those vestiges of an inadequately biased curriculum are still slithering in students’ courses today. Although student movements and education reformists have attempted to counter skewed curricula by supplementing them with separate ethnic studies courses, states like Florida recently passed …

From The Kkk To The Modern Day: How An Accurate Understanding Of History Can Inform The Proper Standard For Punishing Civil Rights Conspiracies Under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3), Bair Srivastav

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Following the Civil War, Congress passed the Reconstruction Amendments, which secured political rights for newly freed slaves and ushered in a new era for the United States. The Union defeated white Southerners on the battlefield and removed former Confederates from the halls of political power. But white Southerners were still Confederates in spirit. Full of racial hatred, they did not perceive a new era of freedom, but a world twisted into an unnatural order where African Americans walked freely amongst white people and participated in the political process of Southern society. In response to the extension of basic freedoms to …

Pertanggungjawaban Etik Dokter Dalam Melakukan Aksi Mogok Kerja Di Indonesia, Farel Rifandanu

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

The implementation of strikes by doctors is a complex phenomenon with significant implication that give rise to ethical dilemma. Doctors have a responsibility to provide health services, so that a strike can endanger the health care system. On the other hand, doctors also have the right to fight for fair and decent working conditions. In view of these problems, this study has two (2) problem formulations, how the legal regulations regarding the actions of doctors who go on strike and how the ethical responsibilities of doctors who go on strike. This study uses a normative legal research method that …

Penggunaan Unconventional Weapons Dalam Konflik Bersenjata Modern, Fadhillah Wahid Pramudya Aldiansyach

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

The use of unconventional weapons such as cluster munitions, white phosphorus, nuclear weapons, artificial intelligence-based autonomous systems (AI/LAWS), and military neurotechnology is increasingly dominating modern armed conflicts. The characteristics of these weapons, particularly their widespread effects, uncertainty of control, and potential for automatic escalation, can pose serious challenges to the application of the principles of distinction and proportionality in International Humanitarian Law (IHL), especially when used in densely populated areas. The modernization of nuclear systems, the accelerated integration of AI into military command, and the emergence of neurotechnology indicate a regulatory gap that could potentially undermine humanitarian protection. This study …

Brief In Support Of Respondents As Amici Curiae, Donald J. Trump, President Of The United States, Et Al. V. Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, Et. Al, No. 25-332, Andrea Scoseria Katz, Jonathan Gienapp

Scholarship@WashULaw

In the years since this Court’s decision in Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 591 U.S. 197 (2020), legal historians—including originalists—have unearthed a rich body of evidence challenging the conventional wisdom concerning the scope of the President’s removal powers at the Founding. Revisiting not only the Framers’ intellectual influences, but also their driving philosophical concerns and political incentives, this scholarship explains that removal authority was not understood to be vested exclusively in the President as a matter of settled constitutional law, but rather was permissibly exercised by various actors in various ways, intentionally not settled by the …

Disagreement And Historical Argument Or How Not To Think About Removal, Andrea Scoseria Katz, Noah A. Rosenblum, Jane Manners

Scholarship@WashULaw

Scholars have debated the reach of the President’s power to remove government officers for over one hundred years. This old fight is now suddenly urgent as President Trump asserts far-reaching powers to control the federal bureaucracy and the Supreme Court transforms Unitary Executive Theory into caselaw. Yet the scholarly case for an indefeasible presidential removal power has never been weaker.

This Essay continues an ongoing conversation about how to read some critical early republic evidence about removal. It briefly recapitulates the stakes of the disagreement before offering in-depth analyses of developments in Pennsylvania removal practice, including a reading of the …