Constitutional Law Commons^™

Aspek Hukum Pasar Modal (Bagian 2), Soemantoro Fhui

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

Abstract

The Fallacies Of Originalism: Why Treating History And Tradition Alone As Dispositive Is Not Superior To The Tiers Of Scrutiny, Gage A. Johnson

Cleveland State Law Review

The goal of this Article is to develop the current history and tradition standard. I argue that the Bruen use of history and tradition is not a more principled or better way of interpreting the Constitution than the infamous tiers of scrutiny. This argument is supported by analyzing the way the Court has used history and tradition in reviewing restrictions on the Second Amendment and the push for it to be used under the First Amendment. I argue that Justice Thomas’s rigid application of history and tradition is essentially an ends-justifying-the-means analysis that is no different than the so called …

The Second Amendment Right To Bear Arms, Or Lack Thereof: Assessing The Prohibition Of Unlawful Immigrants From Possessing Firearms, Anna Egensperger

Et Cetera

This Note looks at the hot button issue of whether unlawful immigrants should have the constitutional right to bear arms. Thus far, the Circuit Courts have come to different conclusions which require the input of the United States Supreme Court. Although intertwined with political views, this Note attempts to take a non-partisan stance which prioritizes the application of case law and a consistent reading of the Constitution. To provide the full context of this issue, this Note begins by describing the facts and holding of Columbia v. Heller which creates the first test for establishing a right protected under the …

The Second Amendment, Illegal Aliens, And The Bruen Test: Defending The Constitutionality Of 18 U.S.C. § 922(G)(5), Ian Duncan

Cleveland State Law Review

This Note examines the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), which prohibits unlawful aliens from possessing firearms, under the Supreme Court’s text-and-history framework announced in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen and developed further in United States v. Rahimi. In the wake of Bruen, lower courts have fractured over how strictly to demand historical analogues and how to treat longstanding status-based restrictions in § 922, including prohibitions on possession by felons, domestic-violence offenders, and noncitizens. Against that backdrop, this Note argues that § 922(g)(5) is constitutionally sound.

Part I traces the development of Second …

Penegakan Peraturan Lalu Lintas Dan Kepatuhan Terhadapnya (Dengan Minat Khusus Kota Jakarta), Soerjono Soekanto

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

Abstract

Book Review: We're All Traditionalists Now (Most Of The Time), Richard H. Fallon, Jr., The Changing Constitution: Constitutional Law In The Trump-Era Supreme Court, Michael Gentithes

ConLawNOW

This review highlights the scope and importance of Richard Fallon’s book, The Changing Constitution: Constitutional Law in the Trump-Era Supreme Court. Fallon, a giant of constitutional work, provides a comprehensive, accessible, and vitally important catalogue of the Court’s methodological changes in his posthumously published book. The book argues that while textualism and originalism “have achieved unparalleled prominence,” the Court is also “not consistently originalist” and often relies on a version of traditionalism, similar to but importantly distinct from originalism, that marks an important and undertheorized change. And in yet other areas, the Court eschews either originalism or traditionalism for …

Testimony Of Professor Zalman Rothschild Before The House Subcommittee On Early Childhood, Elementary, And Secondary Education Regarding Mahmoud V. Taylor, Zalman Rothschild

Testimony

On February 10, 2026, Professor Zalman Rothschild, Horn Family Distinguished Research Scholar in Law and Religion at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, testified before the House Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education of the House Committee on Education and Workforce. His testimony addressed the Supreme Court’s decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor and its implications for parental rights, religious liberty, public education, vaccination mandates, and compulsory schooling.

Professor Rothschild situates Mahmoud within the broader constitutional tradition shaped by Pierce v. Society of Sisters, West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, and Wisconsin v. Yoder …

Wildearth Guardians V. U.S. Dept. Of Agric. Animal And Plant Health Inspection Serv. Wildlife Services, Luke A. Zagar

Public Land & Resources Law Review

WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Dept. of Agric. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Serv. Wildlife Services considers whether Predator Damage Management (“PDM”) programs in Wilderness Areas violate the Wilderness Act and whether the United States Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services (“Wildlife Services”) violated the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) in issuing its Final Environmental Assessment (“EA”) and Finding of No Significant Impact (“FONSI”). The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed its prior holding in Forest Guardians v. Naimal & Plant Health Inspection Serv., finding that “the Wilderness Act does not prohibit Wildlife Service …

Protecting Journalism From National Security In Contemporary India, Manish .

National Law School of India Review

Freedom of the press is an important element of a robust democracy. In India, press freedom lacks statutory protection, leaving constitutional protection under Article 19(1)(a) as the only remedy. In recent years, the use of anti-terror laws against journalists investigating alleged lapses or excesses by the state has posed a particular threat to press freedom, given the largely minimalist and statist interpretation that the Supreme Court of India has given to these laws. This has been compounded by the election and re-election of an autocratic populist government to Parliament, which has sought to use law as a means of ensuring …

Regulating Reader(S): Book People V. Wong, Compelled Speech, And Sexually Explicit Library Materials In The Fifth Circuit, Gray Wood

Texas A&M Law Review

This Note analyzes the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent holding in Book People, Inc. v. Wong, which struck down Texas Education Code Chapter 35. Passed under the 88th Texas Legislature’s READER Act in 2023, Chapter 35 instituted a mandatory rating system that required Texas book vendors to review the books they sold to district schools and open-enrollment charter schools for sexually explicit material. Book vendors banded together to oppose the law, arguing that it constituted compelled speech, a legal doctrine that has come to the forefront of First Amendment fights since the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in 303 …

Brief Of Notre Dame Education Law Project, Notre Dame Program On Church, State & Society, And Lindsay And Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Richard W. Garnett, Nicole Stelle Garnett, John A. Meiser

Court Briefs

No. 25-802
Foothills Christian Ministries v. Kim Johnson

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

The First Amendment guarantees religious institutions the power to conduct their internal affairs. Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey- Berru, 591 U.S. 732, 746 (2020). See also Cath. Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Lab. & Indus. Review Comm'n, 605 U.S. 238, 249 (2025); id. at 255 (Thomas, J., concurring). This principle of self-governance, known as the church autonomy doctrine, is an essential feature of the Constitution’s …

President Trump & Control Of Administrative Agencies: The Firing Of Mspb Member Cathy Harris, Jacob Burns Center For Ethics In The Practice Of Law, Floersheimer Center For Constitutional Democracy, Cardozo Chapter Of The American Constitutional Society, Cardozo Labor And Employment Law Society, Cardozo Outlaw, Jessica A. Roth, Cathy Harris

2025–2026 Flyers

Former Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) member Cathy Harris will join her attorney, Nathaniel Zelinsky, for a discussion of her lawsuit challenging President Trump’s removal of her from the MSPB. The case tests the limits of presidential control over independent administrative agencies.

Skrmetti And The Problem Of Incidental Intent, Martin J. Katz

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

The modern Supreme Court has defined “discriminatory intent” as a strict-liability concept. It does not matter why the government sorts people by a protected characteristic, such as race or sex; it matters only that the government does sort people by such a characteristic. This principle is the key holding of affirmative-action cases, such as Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College. Yet, in the recent case United States v. Skrmetti, the Court seemed to focus not on the question of whether the government sorted people by sex (it did), but on the question …

Law School News: Roger Williams University Marks Fred Korematsu Day With Reflection On Rights And Responsibility 02-02-2026, Kelly Brinza, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

When Constitutional Protection For Religious Liberty Gets Lost In Translation: A Case Study From Washington State, Robert W. Gomulkiewicz

Articles

Protecting religious liberty can present difficult challenges when religious liberty conflicts with laws prohibiting discrimination. Balancing religious liberty and nondiscrimination requires courts to accurately apply the U.S. Supreme Court’s complex First Amendment jurisprudence, including cases that address compelled speech, expressive association, and church autonomy. Amidst all the complexity, protection for religious liberty can get lost in translation. One important venue where protection can get lost in translation is in religious liberty cases decided by state supreme courts. The decisions of state supreme courts are especially significant because they provide the authoritative construction for state statutes and the state constitution. In …

Comparative Authoritarian Law, Madhav Khosla, Benjamin L. Liebman

Faculty Scholarship

In recent years, comparative constitutional lawyers have turned their attention to the study of democratic backsliding. However, such scholarship is yet to draw on the now extensive literature on traditional authoritarian systems. The bifurcation of regime type that has structured comparative legal research for decades — for comparative constitutional lawyers and for scholars of specific authoritarian regions — is now under strain. With the global rise of authoritarianism and the growing use of law by authoritarian states, the world is harder to neatly separate into two camps than it once might have been. This Article reflects on how we might …

The Untold Story Of 150 Years Of Women In State Judiciaries, Elizabeth D. Katz

UF Law Faculty Publications

A focus on the U.S. Constitution and federal judges has obscured a longer and more complex history of women serving on state benches — and how state constitutions mattered in their rise.

Winnowing The Wheat From The Chaff: The Continuing Controversy Over Article Iii Standing And The Certification Of Rule 23(B)(3) Damages Classes Containing "Uninjured" Members, William G. Beatty

William & Mary Business Law Review

The controversy surrounding the inclusion of uninjured class members in Rule 23(b)(3) damages classes has deeply divided the federal circuit courts of appeals and continues to do so. This Article explores the constitutional roots of the issue, beginning with the foundational element of Article III standing, and discusses the question of how many uninjured members, if any, Rule 23 permits in a class seeking certification before problems with commonality and predominance arise.

The Article discusses the details of the Laboratory Corp. of America v. Davis case (LabCorp), which, in the spring of 2025, presented the Supreme Court with …

Finding Luis: A Creative Nonfiction Account Of Law & Society, Jason M. Leggett

Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects

This essay explores the contradictions in legal theory and human experience through creative nonfiction. Its main purpose is to argue that a truly just society requires acknowledging the profound influence of individual narratives on the law. This is supported by blending personal narratives, critical analysis, and philosophical inquiry to reveal the gap between codified law and lived realities for marginalized individuals. This unique Legal Poetics methodology employs a series of six vignettes, such as the author's and Luis's shared experiences with traumatic brain injury and the denial of justice, as data. By integrating autoethnography, law as narrative, and performativity theories, …

Is History Precedent?, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

It has been just over three years since the Supreme Court instructed lower courts to evaluate Second Amendment challenges by examining history and tradition. And it is no secret that the courts have struggled. This Article tackles a phenomenon that is born of that struggle. Overwhelmed by the task of evaluating historical claims, lower courts instead are turning to other judges as authorities on history. They are using what I call in this Article “historical precedents”—meaning language about history from an older decision that the subsequent judge then treats as authority, not as part of a legal rule but for …

A Citizenship Model Of The Fourth Amendment, Danieli Evans

Articles

Fourth Amendment law is in disarray. In recent years, courts and scholars have questioned central aspects of Fourth Amendment doctrine—in particular, the reasonable expectations of privacy test that has governed since the 1960s. Scholars and judges have argued for abandoning this test and instead looking to private law (sub-constitutional rules governing private conduct, such as tort, property, and contract law) to determine Fourth Amendment protection.

At a moment when judges and scholars are questioning core aspects of Fourth Amendment doctrine, the time is ripe to reconsider the values Fourth Amendment law ought to serve. I advance a novel vision for …

Originalism, Official History, And Perspectives Versus Methodologies, Keith N. Hylton

Faculty Scholarship

This paper addresses a well-worn topic: originalism, the theory that judges should interpret the U.S. Constitution in a manner consistent with the intent of its framers. I am interested in the real-world effects of originalism. The primary effect advanced by originalists is the tendency of the approach to constrain the discretion of judges. However, I identify another effect of originalism: the creation of official histories, a practice that imposes a hidden tax on society. Another question I consider is whether originalism should be considered a methodology of analyzing the law or a perspective on the law; I argue that originalism …

Drug Scheduling As Institutional Design, Matthew B. Lawrence, David E. Pozen

Faculty Scholarship

Controlled Substances Act (CSA), U.S. drug law has simultaneously fueled mass incarceration, inhibited needed access, and enabled an opioid crisis. To make better choices, this Article argues that the CSA’s institutional design must account for three distinctive features of psychoactive drugs: the prohibition problem (drug bans tend to backfire when demand is inelastic), the pharma problem (drug companies have supercharged incentives to manipulate markets and exploit consumers), and the pluralism problem (drug policy involves irreducibly political questions that no expert discipline can answer). On their own, each of these problems calls for reform to the CSA. Taken together, they call …

The Exactions Illusion: Sheetz’S Missing Dissent, Lee Anne Fennell, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Faculty Scholarship

In April 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously handed down Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, a land use exactions case billed as narrow, inevitable, constitutionally compelled, and obviously correct.  It was none of those things. Sheetz instead ushered in an open-ended shift of policy control over the built environment from state and local legislatures to courts. By its terms, the holding extended the Court’s stringent “exactions” test—which requires the government to prove nexus and proportionality between development conditions and development impacts—beyond its original context of parcel-specific administrative bargains to reach an unspecified set of legislated property conditions. Yet the decision’s …

Constitutional Interpretation As Problem Solving: How The Modalities Work, Jack M. Balkin

Texas A&M Law Review

The standard forms of constitutional argument—the modalities—are central to one of the most important approaches to constitutional interpretation: constitutional pluralism. Both originalists and non-originalists use the modalities. This Essay explains how they work. The modalities of constitutional argument are shared cultural tools for thinking about the Constitution, analyzing legal problems, and formulating arguments to resolve them. Constitutional interpretation is a kind of problem solving, and the modalities are our legal culture’s toolkit for analyzing and solving constitutional problems.

Our use of the modalities presumes that at any point in time, some arguments are better than others. This assumption is central …

Originalist Arguments In Free Speech History, Samantha Barbas

Texas A&M Law Review

Contrary to what historians and legal scholars have often assumed, originalism has played an important role in American free speech history. During the 1950s, originalist interpretations of the First Amendment as prohibiting the crime of seditious libel became popular in legal argumentation, court rulings, and in popular culture more generally. The reason for the popularity of these arguments was the Red Scare. Liberal lawyers, judges, and scholars deployed originalist arguments in their battles against government anti-Communist measures. They argued that the original meaning and purpose of the First Amendment was the ban on punishment for criticism of the government, and …

Race, Memory, And Authority In Constitutional Interpretation, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.

Texas A&M Law Review

This Essay considers how America’s history and memory regarding race complicate constitutional interpretation. If scholars interpreted the Constitution merely to determine what the majority view of the Constitution may have been when it was ratified—its original public meaning (“OPM”)—the loose use of history and memory to interpret the Constitution might be acceptable. What the People—whose membership is contested—thought the Constitution meant when it was framed is interesting, so long as it does not bind us today. However, as Jack Balkin notes in Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation, lawyers and judges attempt to use history …

Memory Warriors, Pluralists, And Abnegators In Constitutional Interpretation: An Essay On Jack Balkin's Pluralist Originalism In Memory And Authority, Jed Handelsman Shugerman, Zachary Shugerman Handelsman

Texas A&M Law Review

One of the most compelling and generative aspects of Jack Balkin’s Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation is its synthesis of constitutional theory, history, and the growing field of the “politics of memory,” and especially the concept of the “memory entrepreneur.” The book project itself is entrepreneurial, if you will, in its cultivating, connecting, and building from different disciplines, academic languages, and national narratives (in that the “politics of memory” is already such an international and interdisciplinary field itself).

Balkin Amid Balkanization: Constitutional Construction, The Uses Of History, And Interpretive Discretion In A Divided Country, Neil S. Siegel

Texas A&M Law Review

Professor Jack Balkin’s Memory and Authority is a good book by a great constitutional theorist, but it gives me some pause. Balkin’s account of legitimate constitutional construction is so capacious and seemingly accepting of a results orientation that it may be difficult to discern when someone is doing it wrong. Balkin repeatedly implies that more is better, both regarding the number of modalities of constitutional interpretation and the kinds of history that are relevant to making constitutional arguments. Moreover, he repeatedly declares that “history is a resource and not a command.” But modality creep may make it more challenging for …

Memory And Authority Of Failed Constitutional Amendments, Julie C. Suk

Texas A&M Law Review

When the original public meaning of any constitutional provision is enforced, guarantees of rights that were adopted before women were included in legal rights may appear illegitimate and inadequate for a 21st-century democracy. Originalists have long pointed to Article V amendment as the legitimate path to changing the Constitution. Jack Balkin’s Memory and Authority points to the importance of expanding American constitutional memory if women and minorities are to be included in the transhistorical “We the People.” This Essay illustrates how the memory and authority of failed constitutional amendments can challenge originalists’ reliance on amendment as the path to democratically …