Courts Commons^™

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

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

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 …

De Novo Review For Asylum At The Circuit Court Level: Comparing A Stringent Standard Of Review For Asylum Seekers In The U.S. To The European Court Of Human Rights’ Standard, Dani Gómez

Human Rights Brief

On March 14, 2022, an immigration judge (IJ) denied the asylum applications of Douglas Humberto Urias-Orellana, Sayra Iliana Gamez-Mejia, and their child, ordering them removed to El Salvador. Urias-Orellana and his family had been placed in removal proceedings with

the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) and filed applications for asylum.  At the individual merits hearing, the IJ ruled that the threats were “insufficiently menacing” to constitute persecution. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed. On further appeal, the First Circuit denied review, holding that courts may not re-evaluate the conclusions drawn from the factual findings de novo unless “any …

Nondo V. Tanzania: Afchpr Signals Its Resolve On Democratic Preservation, Maggie Titus

Human Rights Brief

On September 15, 2025, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (AfCHPR) reopened the pleadings in Abdul Omary Nondo & Others v. United Republic of Tanzania. Applicants Abdul Omary Nondo, Deusdedit Valentine Rweyemamu, and Paul Revocatus Kaunda each filed separate applications against Tanzania challenging alleged conflicts between the Tanzania’s Constitution and its obligations under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the Charter), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). All three applications were filed on November 19, 2020, and served to the State on December 3, …

The Elusive Nexus Standard: Differing Approaches To The Asylum Nexus Standard As Applied To Religious Persecution Perpetrated By Gangs, Chloe Schalit

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

In 2015, Ms. Odalis Mireida Chicas-Machado, the secretary of an evangelical church in El Salvador, started getting harassed by members of the MS-13 gang during her walks to and from the church. Chicas-Machado believed that the harassment began because the gang considered her to be an enemy due to her work spreading the message of God to young people who otherwise might have joined the gang. Approximately one year after the harassment commenced, gang members threatened Chicas-Machado with death if she refused to alert the gang when police cars drove by a local store. The gang sought out Chicas-Machado for …

The Ambiguity That Isn’T: Why Same-Sex Marriage Is Legal In American Samoa, Dante Cade Harootunian, Sammi Lawrence

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that prohibitions on same-sex marriage violate the equal protection guarantees of the U.S. Constitution, several government officials in American Samoa issued statements claiming that the decision had no effect in American Samoa, and, to date, no same-sex couples have

applied for a marriage license in the territory. This Article analyzes the Obergefell decision in light of other federal and territorial court decisions that determined the applicability of constitutional rights to U.S. territories and concludes that, despite the statements of local officials, the Obergefell decision applies in American Samoa, and the …

Public Facing, Privately Shielded: The Employment Gap Created By Title Vii’S Private Club Exemption, Ansley Salmon

American University Business Law Review

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination by employers but exempts “bona fide private membership clubs” that are tax-exempt under Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c). Despite this seemingly clear statutory language, there is a notable lack of appellate decisions interpreting this exemption under Title VII. This scarcity of precedent has led to inconsistent approaches across circuits. For example, the Fifth Circuit has drawn heavily from the Private Club Exemption under Title II of the Civil Rights Act while the Seventh Circuit has treated the two exemptions as entirely distinct. This Comment argues that the Title …

Guest Editorial: Making Gender Equality Visible In Judicial Selections At The European Court Of Justice, Laure Clément-Wilz, Fernanda G. Nicola

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

We begin this issue with a Guest Editorial by Laure Clement-Wilz and Fernanda Nicola, who invite reflection on the criteria for judicial selection at the European Court of Justice. They propose integrating gender parity as a soft criterion in the judicial selection process, thereby contributing to broader discussions on diversity in judicial appointments

Brennan And State Constitutions, Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The former Great Gorge Playboy Resort in New Jersey seems an unlikely place to help form a jurisprudential movement toward reliance on state constitutions to protect civil rights and liberties.

One need only turn back the clock to 1976 to find the story of one of the most significant moments in the rise of state constitutions. Anyone who is steeped in this movement is likely familiar with the lead article in the January 1977 issue of the Harvard Law Review, “State Constitutions and the Protection of Individual Rights.” The author was U.S. Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan Jr.

Legislative Reforms To End Lawfare By State And Local Prosecutors, Elizabeth Beske

Legislative Testimony & Comments

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government will hold a hearing on Tuesday, March 4, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. ET. The hearing, "Legislative Reforms to End Lawfare by State and Local Prosecutors," will examine the use of lawfare tactics by the Biden-Harris Administration to weaponize the rule of law against political opponents. It will further highlight legislative reforms to end politically motivated state and local prosecutions.

The Right To Arbitrate(?): Integrating Consumer Protection Into Judicial Review Of The Mccarran-Ferguson Act And The New York Convention, Rachel Bamberger

American University Business Law Review

International commercial arbitration has grown increasingly popular as an alternative method of dispute resolution. This Comment explores the struggle courts face when they must determine whether to apply the New York Convention, an international treaty that recognizes and compels arbitration agreements, or a federal statute known as the McCarran-Ferguson Act, which delegates authority to the states to regulate insurance. Conflict arises when foreign insurers seek to compel arbitration under the New York Convention in states with antiarbitration insurance laws, and courts must choose between upholding domestic state laws or honoring the Treaty.

This Comment examines the method of analysis used …

Book Review The Making Of A Justice: Reflections On My First 94 Years By John Paul Stevens, Stephen Wermiel

Book Reviews

The autobiography of Justice John Paul Stevens, published just a few months before he died, is an enticing travelogue for Supreme Court nerds. Other travelers may want to pick a different landscape.

In The Making of a Justice: Reflections on My First 94 Years, Stevens who died in July 2019, at age 99, spent 130 pages on his life before he joined the Supreme Court and then 394 pages describing the decisions during his thirty-four year as a Justice. Stevens was an agile writer and did as good a job as anyone can of making the narrative accessible, but it …

No-Hire Rulings Forget Competition, Val Ricks

American University Law Review

Two recent and noted antitrust rulings on the legality of no-hire (or “no-poach”) agreements paid lip service to preserving and promoting competition for employees but in the end failed to apply competition as a standard. Instead—and this is seen only deep in the weeds of the decisions themselves, on careful reading—judges demanded that no-hire agreements be held illegal only when they constitute abuse of market power, more or less. These decisions impliedly distinguish horizontal agreements not to compete for employees from horizontal agreements not to compete for customers, or on price. The opinions tend to “require careful economic analysis” of …

The Paradox Of Continuing Risk, W. Jonathan Cardi, Ashton Jenne, Chance Villarreal

American University Law Review

The continuing-risk rule is ubiquitously cited by Restatements, casebooks, and treatises as a core duty rule in negligence cases. Indeed, as this Article reveals, the rule has been “adopted”—in the sense that at least one court in a jurisdiction has applied the rule, and no court has rejected it—in thirty-one jurisdictions. In addition to the breadth of its adoption, the continuing-risk rule is also far-reaching: it imposes an affirmative duty to warn, protect, or rescue another from a risk if the defendant’s conduct contributed to the initial creation of that risk. Because most negligence cases involve risk-creating conduct by the …

Section 4 -- Jury, Trial: A Misnomer In The Faa, Tracey B. Frisch

American University Business Law Review

The purpose of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), according to the Supreme Court, was not merely to reverse judicial hostility towards arbitration by placing agreements to arbitrate on the same footing as other contracts but to actively promote the use of arbitration on a national scale. It is not surprising then that most provisions of the FAA envision limited court intervention into the arbitration process.

Erie And Enforceability Of Forum Selection Clauses, Patrick Woolley

American University Law Review

Whether and to what extent state law governs the contractual validity of forum selection clauses in federal court remains highly contested. This Article argues for a two-part answer.

State law should govern whenever a party seeks a § 1404(a) transfer of venue within the federal judicial system. The Court has insisted that the choice-of-law rules of the state to which the suit is transferred govern when transfer is required by a contractually valid clause. That insistence accords with the Erie policy of vertical uniformity between state and federal courts only if the law of the state in which the transferring …

Structuring The President’S Removal Power: An Agency-Specific Approach, Peter Margulies

American University Law Review

Recent Supreme Court decisions have taken a broad view of the President’s power to remove executive branch officials. According to the Court, the President’s Article II obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” generally requires that the President have authority to remove officials at will. The Court has thus far declined to overrule Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, a 1935 decision upholding “forcause” restrictions on removal for multi-member “quasi-judicial” bodies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Nonetheless, recent Court decisions have eroded the rationale in the earlier case, which has received additional attention because of efforts …

Personal Jurisdiction’S Aberrant Theory Of Consent, Roger Michalski

American University Law Review

Consent has been a pillar of personal jurisdiction doctrine at least since Pennoyer. The Supreme Court recently strengthened this pillar by deeming a corporate registration statute to constitute consent. Consent to submit to a court’s adjudicatory power can now be unintentional, based on inaction, is irrevocable, does not have to be informed, is all-or-nothing, and is blind to power inequalities. Failing to say “no” at the right time in the right way means “yes.”

Such a theory of consent clashes with what consent means elsewhere. In other contexts, we are reminded that “no means no,” the “absence of no does …

Brief Of Professors William Araiza, Jeffrey Lubbers, And Peter M. Shane As Amici Curiae In Support Of Defendantappellant Federal Trade Commission, Jeffrey Lubbers

Amicus Briefs & Court Filings

Amici are law professors who teach and write in the fields of administrative law and statutory interpretation. Amicus William Araiza is the Stanley A. August Professor of Law at Brooklyn Law School. Amicus Jeffrey Lubbers is Professor of Practice in Administrative Law at American University, Washington College of Law. Amicus Peter M. Shane is the Jacob E. Davis and Jacob E. Davis II Chair in Law Emeritus at Ohio State University, Moritz College of Law. As leading administrative law scholars, amici have a strong interest in the sound development of administrative law in the federal courts, and are submitting this …

Book Review: John Paul Stevens, The Making Of A Justice: Reflections On My First 94 Years, New York, Little, Brown And Co., 2019, Pp. 549, $35.00 (Hardback), Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The autobiography of Justice John Paul Stevens, published just a few months before he died, is an enticing travelogue for Supreme Court nerds. Other travelers may want to pick a different landscape.

Christian Domination, Ruth Colker

American University Law Review

It is hard to deny that the United States is a Christian nation despite the First Amendment’s promise that the legislature will not establish a religion. The United States is not a Christian nation merely because of the religious beliefs that many people privately hold. It is a Christian nation, in part, because the courts and legislatures have facilitated that development. Moreover, as this Article will argue, Christian favoritism within the political and legal system has developed in sharp contrast to the treatment of Black people, women, the LGBTQ+ community, and disabled people.

This Article explores the development of Christian …

The Downstream Consequences Of Transunion Llc V. Ramirez: Why 5 U.S.C. § 2954 Plaintiffs Have Article Iii Standing Consistent With Lower Courts’ Interpretation Of Transunion, Erin Mccoy

American University Law Review

The Supreme Court, in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, created additional standing hurdles by requiring plaintiffs to identify a common law historic-analogue when alleging a statutory harm. In doing so, the Court arguably limited informational standing—a unique Article III standing theory whereby plaintiffs may establish an injury for failure to receive information—because informational injuries did not exist at common law.

This Comment asks whether informational standing survives in a post-TransUnion universe, using 5 U.S.C. § 2954 and lower courts’ interpretation of TransUnion for guidance. The statute, § 2954, comes to light in a string of litigation involving the potential illegality …

Litigating Original Meaning From Heller To Rahimi: The Role Of Lawyering In The Confused Path Of Second Amendment Jurisprudence, Lawrence Rosenthal

American University Law Review

The Second Amendment is on a jurisprudential march. An individual right to “keep and bear arms” for purposes unrelated to militia or military service was not recognized until the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision, applying what it took to be the original meaning of the “right to keep and bear arms” found in the Second Amendment, in District of Columbia v. Heller. Subsequently, the Court, in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, invalidated a statute requiring a permit to carry concealable firearms on a showing of particularized need. Most recently, in United States v. Rahimi, …

Review Of Veterans Law Decisions Of The Federal Circuit 2022-2023 Edition, Yelena Duterte, Hugh Mcclean, Stacey-Rae Simcox

American University Law Review

In 2022 to 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) continued its conversation with the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”), Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”), and veterans to help sculpt the jurisprudence coming from the youngest of the federal courts, the Veterans Court. The Federal Circuit’s jurisprudence addressed ten main legal issues: class actions, petitions for writ of mandamus under the All Writs Act, defining standards of proof with the term “results from,” the benefit of the doubt doctrine post-Lynch, education benefits, less than honorable discharges, the rating schedule, implicit denials, equitable …

A Year In Review: The Federal Circuit's 2023 Government Contract Law Decisions, Sophie Marsh, Taylor Mcdaniels, Allison Moors

American University Law Review

This Article continues previous in-depth reviews of government contract law cases decided by the Federal Circuit and published by the American University Law Review. In 2023, the Federal Circuit clarified the appropriate standard of review, emphasizing that, more likely than not, the Boards of Contract Appeals should apply a de novo standard of review. Additionally, the court set significant judicial precedent by holding that the issues of party standing, timely raising a solicitation defect, and asserting a sum certain are nonjurisdictional. Finally, the court also issued decisions concerning implied-in-fact contracts, excusable delays, and the importance of reporting unallowable costs.

American University Law Review Keynote Address, Erwin Chemerinsky

American University Law Review

My talk this morning focuses on the agenda of the current Roberts Court. I think that every Supreme Court can be said to have an agenda. Sometimes it seems conscious and deliberate, apparent from the outset. Sometimes it seems to evolve and only becomes obvious later.

Who Thinks Treaties Are Like Contracts? Not John Marshall, David P. Stewart, Diana A. A. Reisman

American University International Law Review

Courts in the United States are fond of analogizing treaties to contracts. The U.S. Supreme Court has done so on numerous occasions, as have nearly all federal circuit courts. Indeed, the treaty-as-contract trope has permeated U.S. legal discourse since at least the early 1800s when Chief Justice John Marshall wrote in Foster v. Neilson that “[a] treaty is in its nature a contract between two nations, not a legislative act.”

Discussant Commentary On The Twenty-Fourth Annual Grotius Lecture, Karima Bennoune

American University Law Review

I express my sincere thanks to the American Society of International Law and the International Legal Studies Program at American University Washington College of Law for the invitation to be this year’s commentator. It is indeed an honor to respond to Judge Charlesworth’s erudite Grotius Lecture: “The Art of International Law.”

Just getting to say Judge Hilary Charlesworth alone is very meaningful. She is only the fifth woman judge out of 110 total judges on the International Court of Justice (ICJ) so far. Thanks to hard work by feminist international lawyers like her, there is finally an uptick in women’s …

Maintaining Due Process By Extending Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. To Federal Class Actions, Felicia D. Sych

American University Law Review

In 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its seminal decision in Bristol Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, subsequently altering the scope of personal jurisdiction and further narrowing its interpretation of specific jurisdiction. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. held that a state court can only assert specific personal jurisdiction over a defendant when there is a meaningful nexus between the forum state and the claims at issue. The Court purposefully refrained from deciding whether its holding applies to federal courts adjudicating federal class actions. After denying a petition for writ of certiorari to resolve the issue in 2021, the question …

The Disability Docket, Jasmine E. Harris, Karen M. Tani, Shira Wakschlag

American University Law Review

The monumental changes emanating from the contemporary Supreme Court have now generated abundant commentary—but it remains possible to glean new insights if we review the Court’s work from an alternative perspective, one that does not often inform mainstream accounts. Drawing on insights from Disability Legal Studies and other critical approaches to law, as well as from the trenches of disability advocacy and civil litigation, this Article applies a “disability lens” to the Supreme Court’s 2021 and 2022 Terms. Our review of the Court’s published decisions and broader docket suggests three themes. We highlight (1) the role of disability cases in …

The Absurd Reach Of A "Colorblind" Constitution, David Hinojosa, Genevieve Bonadies Torres

American University Law Review

Affirmative action has long spurred debates over whether the Equal Protection Clause and subsequent civil rights legislation were intended to permit policies aimed at disrupting racial hierarchies, dismantling systemic discrimination, and ensuring equal opportunity for Black people and other historically marginalized groups. The current lawsuits pending before the Supreme Court challenging affirmative action admissions programs at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) and Harvard College are no exception. Like prior lawsuits, the plaintiff in both cases—Students for Fair Admissions (“SFFA”)—and its amici seek to turn back the clock on racial diversity at selective universities by urging the …