Constitutional Law Commons^™

The People's Court: On The Intellectual Origins Of American Judicial Power, Ian C. Bartrum

Scholarly Works

This article enters into the modern debate between "constitutional departmentalists"-who contend that the executive and legislative branches share constitutional interpretive authority with the courts-and what are sometimes called "judicial supremacists." After exploring the relevant history of political ideas, I join the modern minority of voices in the latter camp.

This is an intellectual history of two evolving political ideas-popular sovereignty and the separation of powers-which merged in the making of American judicial power, and I argue we can only understand the structural function of judicial review by bringing these ideas together into an integrated whole. Or, put another way, we …

Distributed Federalism: The Transformation Of Younger, Anne R. Traum

Scholarly Works

For decades federal courts have remained mostly off limits to civil rights cases challenging the constitutionality of state criminal proceedings. Younger abstention, which requires federal courts to abstain from suits challenging the constitutionality of pending state prosecutions, has blocked plaintiffs from bringing meritorious civil rights cases and insulated local officials and federal courts from having to defend against or decide them. Younger’s reach is broad. It has forced political protestors (from the Vietnam era to Black Lives Matter) to challenge the constitutionality of their arrests and prosecutions within their state criminal proceedings. The doctrine also has made it difficult to …

School “Safety” Measures Jump Constitutional Guardrails, Maryam Ahranjani

Scholarly Works

In the wake of George Floyd's murder and efforts to achieve racial justice through systemic reform, this Article argues that widespread "security" measures in public schools, including embedded law enforcement officers, jump constitutional guardrails. These measures must be rethought in light of their negative impact on all children and in favor of more effective-and constitutionally compliant-alternatives to promote school safety. The Black Lives Matter, #DefundthePolice, #abolishthepolice, and #DefundSchoolPolice movements shine a timely and bright spotlight on how the prisonization of public schools leads to the mistreatment of children, particularly children with disabilities, boys, Black and brown children, and low-income children. …

A Proper Burial, Robert L. Tsai

Faculty Scholarship

This is an invited response to Professor Mark Killenbeck's article, "Sober Second Thoughts? Korematsu Reconsidered." In his contrarian piece, Killenbeck argues that Korematsu was defensible, albeit on narrow grounds: it advanced the development of strict scrutiny. He goes on to argue that comparisons between the internment case and the Supreme Court's Muslim travel ban case are overwrought and that the latter case, too, is defensible. I'm not convinced. First, to say that a ruling is defensible is not saying much; far better for critiques to be tethered to sterner standards. Second, after all these years, Korematsu remains a poorly reasoned …

The Evolution And Jurisprudence Of The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court And Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Of Review, Laura K. Donohue

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The past eight years have witnessed an explosion in the number of publicly-available opinions and orders issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review. From only six opinions in the public domain 1978–2012, by early 2021, eighty-eight opinions had been released. The sharp departure is even more pronounced in relation to orders: from only one order declassified during 1978–2012, since 2013, 288 have been formally released. These documents highlight how the courts’s roles have evolved since 2004 and reveal four key areas that dominate the courts’ jurisprudence: its position as a specialized, Article III …

From Parchment To Dust: The Case For Constitutional Skepticism (Introduction), Louis Michael Seidman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This is the introduction to a new book entitled "From Parchment to Dust: The Case for Constitutional Skepticism." The introduction sets out a preliminary case for constitutional skepticism and outlines the arguments contained in the rest of the book.

America’S Presidential Crisis Of Legitimacy: How The Electoral College Became Obsolete And How We Can Fix It, Julia Rose Foodman

Scripps Senior Theses

The goal of this thesis is to critique the current American Presidential electoral system, the Electoral College, and to show what an alternative could potentially mean for the American people. This paper seeks to answer the following questions: What are the main arguments for the Electoral College, why are they troubling, and how can we mend American Presidential elections for the greater purposes of political equality, democracy, and freedom? To do so, core arguments made by conservative pundits in favor of the Electoral College are outlined in order to bring attention to their logical, political, and moral inconsistencies. The inequalities …

A Plumber With Words: Seeking Constitutional Responsibility And An End To The Little Sisters Problem, Alison M. Latimer, Benjamin L. Berger

Articles & Book Chapters

Joe Arvay sometimes described his work as a lawyer as being a “plumber with words”. We think what he meant was that he strived to offer tangible solutions to concrete problems. In other words, while it’s good to know what the law says, and what legal enthusiasts think about how the law operates, Charterbreaches affect real people, most of them not lawyers. It is the lived experience of the law that ultimately ought to draw our concern, energy, and talents.If you want to bend the law towards justice, you need to focus remedial attention on what the law actually …

No, The Firing Squad Is Not Better Than Lethal Injection: A Response To Stephanie Moran’S A Modest Proposal, Michael Conklin

Seattle University Law Review

In the article A Modest Proposal: The Federal Government Should Use Firing Squads to Execute Federal Death Row Inmates, Stephanie Moran argues that the firing squad is the only execution method that meets the requirements of the Eighth Amendment. In order to make her case, Moran unjustifiably overstates the negative aspects of lethal injection while understating the negative aspects of firing squads. The entire piece is predicated upon assumptions that are not only unsupported by the evidence but often directly refuted by the evidence. This Essay critically analyzes Moran’s claims regarding the alleged advantages of the firing squad over …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Book Review - The Tenth Justice: Judicial Appointments, Marc Nadon, And The Supreme Court Act Reference By Carissima Mathen & Michael Plaxton, Jamie Cameron

Articles & Book Chapters

This short book review discusses The Tenth Justice: Judicial Appointments, Marc Nadon, and the Supreme Court Act Reference, by Professors Mathen and Plaxton. The “tenth justice” is Justice Marc Nadon, who was appointed from the Federal Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. The appointment inspired the Supreme Court Reference and conclusion by a majority of the Court that their colleague – as Nadon was already sworn in – was not eligible to be appointed to one of Quebec’s three positions on the Court. The Tenth Justice offers an excellent, high-level primer on Justice Nadon’s appointment and …

Passports Of Privilege, Seema Mohapatra

American University Law Review

All Americans sixteen and older are now eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. However, many will not be able to access such vaccinations due to their work situation, health status, and inaccessible vaccination sites. Some have suggested that the use of vaccine passports, credentials used to gain access to places and countries by showing proof of vaccinations, may encourage people to get vaccinated. The COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare deep inequities in our society, and this Article argues that the use of vaccine passports would further exacerbate such chasms. Part I of this Article describes the differences between immunity passports …

Property Rights: Fiercely Contested, Strongly Guarded, And Continually Defended. How The Supreme Court's Decision In Cedar Point Emphasized The Court's Devotion To Private Property Rights, Sarah Haddon

American University Law Review

In 1975, California’s Agricultural Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) enacted a regulation allowing union organizers to access agricultural employers’ private properties “for the purpose of meeting and talking with employees and soliciting their support” (the “access regulation”). The access regulation does not require the union organizers to obtain consent before entering employers’ properties; instead, union organizers must only file a “written notice of intention to take access.” The notice provides the union organizers access to an employer’s property for three hours a day up to 120 days each year during the hour before the workday, during lunch, and after the …

Proffitt V. Florida: Distorting Death, Corinna Lain

Law Faculty Publications

This essay, Chapter 7 in Painting Constitutional Law, examines Xavier Cortada’s depiction of Proffitt v. Florida, the 1976 decision that approved Florida’s guided discretion statute after Furman v. Georgia had invalidated the death penalty in 1972. Cortada’s depiction is a fantastical piece, a piece that captures the horror of death by electrocution set against two columns of ominous looking Roman numerals. The Roman numerals represent the mechanical imposition of death — the formulaic approach to death penalty decision-making that tells sentencers to simply add up the columns of aggravating and mitigating circumstances and see where the balance lies. Cortada resists …

Presidents And The U.S. Constitution: The Executive’S Role In Interpreting The Supreme Law Of The Land, Mitchell Scacchi

Honors Theses and Capstones

In 1832, President Andrew Jackson issued a veto message claiming the same duty as the Supreme Court to interpret the U.S. Constitution. Do modern presidents exercise the principal role in interpreting the U.S. Constitution that President Jackson claimed was their duty, and, if so, in what ways do they choose to articulate their interpretations? The hypothesis is that modern presidents have exercised a principal role in interpreting the U.S. Constitution similar to the interpretative duty expressed by President Jackson, and they perform this duty, in part, through the issuance of veto messages and signing statements. After a content analysis of …

Structural Deregulation, Jody Freeman, Sharon Jacobs

Publications

Modern critics of the administrative state portray agencies as omnipotent behemoths, invested with vast delegated powers and largely unaccountable to the political branches of government. This picture, we argue, understates agency vulnerability to an increasingly powerful presidency. One source of presidential control over agencies in particular has been overlooked: the systematic undermining of an agency’s ability to execute its statutory mandate. This strategy, which we call “structural deregulation,” is a dangerous and underappreciated aspect of what then-Professor, now-Justice Elena Kagan termed “presidential administration.”

Structural deregulation attacks the core capacities of the bureaucracy. The phenomenon encompasses such practices as leaving agencies …

Giving Joseph Hearings Their Due: How To Ensure That Joseph Hearings Pass Due Process Muster, Amy Greer

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

No, It Is Not A Christian Nation, And It Never Has Been And Should Not Be One, Erwin Chemerinsky

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Doctrine Untethered: “Passage Along The Shore” Under The Rhode Island Public Trust Doctrine, Sean Lyness

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Law Of The Gun: Unrepresentative Cases And Distorted Doctrine, Eric Ruben

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

There is a familiar saying, “If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” The so-called Law of the Hammer takes a distinctive form in adjudication. If all judges see is one repeating fact pattern for a given area of law, they might perceive it as archetypical and build the law around it. If that fact pattern does not accurately reflect the field, however, the result can be analytical distortion in terms of both the choice of doctrine and its implementation.

This Article uses Second Amendment jurisprudence to illustrate this phenomenon. It reveals how District of Columbia …

Dignity And Discrimination, Frederick Mark Gedicks

Faculty Scholarship

Delivered as the Dignity in Law Symposium keynote address, this essay surveys uses of “dignity” in U.S. constitutional law, with a focus on conflicts between the dignities attached to citizenship and religious conscience. Parts I and II discuss dignity as state sovereignty and hierarchical status. Part III examines the collision of dignities in the Masterpiece Cakeshop decision. Part IV argues that attention to the public or private nature of the site where religious accommodation is demanded clarifies when accommodation is appropriate, using a house of worship and a government office as illustrations. Part V lists other sites of accommodation and …

Amending A Racist Constitution, William J. Aceves

Faculty Scholarship

Ours is a racist Constitution. Despite its soaring language, it was founded on slavery and a commitment to racial inequality. This vision is etched in the constitutional text, from the notorious Three-Fifths Clause to the equally repugnant Fugitive Slave Clause. And despite the Civil War and the Reconstruction Amendments, the Constitution retains these vestiges of slavery in its fabric. After 230 years, it is time to remove these troubling provisions from the Constitution. This Essay offers a radical departure from prior constitutional practice. Instead of appending yet another amendment that would simply require readers to ignore the offending language, this …

Reclaiming The Long History Of The "Irrelevant" Nineteenth Amendment, Tracy A. Thomas

Akron Law Faculty Publications

The Nineteenth Amendment has been called an “irrelevant” amendment. The women’s suffrage amendment has been deemed insignificant as a constitutional authority, reduced to a historical footnote. In the Supreme Court canon, it has been diminished as a text that “merely gives the vote to women.” With the accomplishment of that simple task, the amendment has been assumed to offer little guidance to modern constitutional analysis or gender equality. The Nineteenth Amendment has become a “constitutional orphan,” disconnected from its historical origins and precedential place in constitutional jurisprudence. This constricting view of the Nineteenth Amendment ignores the structural implications and significant …

Judicial Deference To Administrative Interpretation Of Statutes From A Comparative Perspective, Vincent Martenet

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Article examines, from a comparative perspective, how judicial deference to administrative interpretation of statutes takes place and whether it is constitutionally admissible. Since constitutions and statutes rarely deal expressly with this issue, courts may have to determine whether or not such deference is permitted, and, if so, whether generally or in certain cases only. The constitutional, legal, and judicial context prevailing in each country is particularly important in this regard. Nevertheless, it may provide courts with little, if any, guidance on the specific issue of deference to administrative statutory interpretation. In this respect, a nuanced approach along all or …

Free Speech And Democracy: A Primer For Twenty-First Century Reformers, Toni M. Massaro, Helen Norton

Publications

Left unfettered, the twenty-first-century speech environment threatens to undermine critical pieces of the democratic project. Speech operates today in ways unimaginable not only to the First Amendment’s eighteenth-century writers but also to its twentieth-century champions. Key among these changes is that speech is cheaper and more abundant than ever before, and can be exploited — by both government and powerful private actors alike — as a tool for controlling others’ speech and frustrating meaningful public discourse and democratic outcomes.

The Court’s longstanding First Amendment doctrine rests on a model of how speech works that is no longer accurate. This invites …

Abortion Rights In The Supreme Court: A Tale Of Three Wedges, Jennifer S. Hendricks

Publications

No abstract provided.

How The Supreme Court Talks About The Press (And Why We Should Care), Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

Disaggregating Chevron, Lawrence B. Solum

Faculty Scholarship

Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. is widely regarded as the most important administrative law decision in the history of the United States. The scholarly literature is vast and defies summary or cataloging. Moreover, Chevron is contested and criticized, defended and derided, lauded and lamented—the source of “angst and rancor” in the words of Professor Kristin E. Hickman and R. David Hahn in their article, Categorizing Chevron. One might think that when it comes to Chevron, there is “no new thing under the sun,” but in fact, Chevron is still full of surprises. When we turn …

Appellate Courts And Civil Juries, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

In federal civil litigation, decision-making power is shared by juries, trial courts, and appellate courts. This Article examines an unresolved tension in the different doctrines that allocate authority among these institutions, one that has led to confusion surrounding the relationship between appellate courts and civil juries. At base, the current uncertainty stems from a longstanding lack of clarity regarding the distinction between matters of law and matters of fact. The high-stakes Oracle-Google litigation—which is now before the Supreme Court—exemplifies this. In that case, the Federal Circuit reasoned that an appellate court may assert de novo review over a jury’s verdict …

Don't Change The Subject: How State Election Laws Can Nullify Ballot Questions, Cole Gordner

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Procedural election laws regulate the conduct of state elections and provide for greater transparency and fairness in statewide ballots. These laws ensure that the public votes separately on incongruous bills and protects the electorate from uncertainties contained in omnibus packages. As demonstrated by a slew of recent court cases, however, interest groups that are opposed to the objective of a ballot question are utilizing these election laws with greater frequency either to prevent a state electorate from voting on an initiative or to overturn a ballot question that was already decided in the initiative’s favor. This practice is subverting the …