Fourteenth Amendment Commons^™

Derailing Democracy, Shrinking Responsibility: The New Election Law Landscape, Cory Conley, Tonja Jacobi

Faculty Articles

In democracy jurisprudence, the Roberts Court wears two faces. Its most recent duo of cases illustrates the inconsistency. In Rucho v. Common Cause, the Court ruled that even grossly partisan gerrymanders are nonjusticiable in federal courts. Yet, in Moore v. Harper, the Court rejected granting unreviewable authority to state lawmakers to regulate federal elections—for now. This combination of rulings is not ideological moderation or judicial restraint, as the Court claims. These recent cases are emblematic of broader unpredictability and selectivity in election law. The assertions of judicial humility in Rucho stand in stark contrast to the bald activism …

Foreword, Patricia B. Barnett

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

No abstract provided.

Channeling A Federal Commitment To Education Through State Constitutions And Courts, Nicole Sunderlin, Evan Caminker

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

This article examines the evolution of efforts to secure a federal right to education, highlighting the unsuccessful attempts at the federal level and the shift to state constitutional litigation, which has yielded mixed and limited outcomes. Part I outlines these failed efforts and their consequences. Part II introduces Professor Black’s proposal for a federal right to education, anchored in the State Citizenship Clause. Part III presents a new federalism model that suggests federal constitutional commitments should guide the interpretation of state constitutional provisions, particularly regarding education. The article concludes by advocating for state courts to adopt a more robust interpretation …

We Shall Overcome: The Evolution Of Quotas In The Land Of The Free And The Home Of Samba, Stella Emery Santana

Seattle University Law Review

When were voices given to the voiceless? When will education be permitted to all? When will we need to protest no more? It’s the twenty-first century, and the fight for equity in higher education remains a challenge to peoples all over the world. While students in the United States must deal with the increase in loans, in Brazil, only around 20% of youth between the ages of twenty-five and thirty-four have a higher education degree.

The primary objective of this Article is to conduct an in-depth comparative analysis of the development, implementation, and legal adjudication of educational quota systems within …

Pacific Islands And The U.S. Military: The Legal Borderlands Of The Environmental Movement, Sonia Lei

Seattle University Law Review

Climate change remains an urgent, ongoing global issue that requires critical examination of institutional polluters. This includes the world’s largest institutional consumer of petroleum: the United States military. The Department of Defense (DoD) is a massive institution with little oversight, a carbon footprint spanning the globe, a budget greater than the next ten largest nations combined, and overly generous exemptions to environmental regulations and carbon reduction targets. This Comment examines how this lack of accountability and oversight plays out in the context of three Pacific islands that have hosted U.S. military bases for decades. By considering the environmental impact of …

The Meaning And Ambiguity Of Section Three Of The Fourteenth Amendment, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

The Fourteenth Amendment established the constitutional conditions for the readmission of those states which had attempted to secede from the Union during the American Civil War. Section Three of that amendment, when enforced under the powers granted by Section Five, prevented the leaders of the recent rebellion from returning to Congress, holding any state level office, or receiving any appointment by Democrat President Andrew Johnson, absent congressional permission. Its focus, in other words, was on rebellious disruption of state level decisionmaking and the potentially disruptive appointments by President Johnson. Whether Section Three accomplishes anything more remains unclear as a matter …

Students For Fair Admissions Sends Us Bakke To The Drawing Board For Race- Conscious Affirmative Action In Higher Education, Monica Teixeira De Sousa

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Sun, Surf, And Suppression: Unconstitutional Voting Restrictions In Rhode Island Beach Enclaves, David Marks

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Death At The Door Of Relief: The Criminalization Of Humanitarian Work And Asylum, William Fox

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note argues that the criminalization of humanitarian aid to migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border violates international human rights law and exacerbates a growing refugee crisis. It contends that the U.S. government's "prevention through deterrence" policy funnels migrants into dangerous conditions, leading to increased deaths and human rights violations. The analysis calls for structural reforms, including expanded humanitarian parole, temporary protected status, and refugee resettlement programs, to align U.S. policy with its international obligations and mitigate the crisis.

Subjectively Speaking, The Applicable Standard For Deficient Medical Treatment Of Pretrial Detainees Should Be One Of Objective Reasonableness, Benjamin R. Black

Touro Law Review

There is no uniformity amongst the circuits when it comes to pretrial detainees claims for inadequate medical care. The circuits are currently grappling with this problem, applying two separate tests to pretrial detainees’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims depending on the jurisdiction in which the incident arose. The test that should be applied across all circuits is one of objective reasonableness. However, some circuits do not see it that way, applying the deliberate indifference standard, also known as the subjective standard test. The circuits applying the subjective standard are relying on case law that does not properly analyze the rights …

Federal Substantive Due Process Rights Of Homeless Persons, Tim Donladson

University of San Francisco Law Review

No abstract provided.

My Body, My Choice, My Data: Information Privacy After Dobbs, My Kim Ong

University of San Francisco Law Review

No abstract provided.

Coercive Ideology, Tyler Rose Clemons

Faculty Publications

Current equal protection jurisprudence does not permit challenges to discriminatory government expression, no matter how blatant or extreme. This doctrine, which I label the discriminatory treatment requirement, is a manifestation of anticlassification, the prevailing equal protection framework since the mid-1970s. According to anticlassification, only suspect government classifications implicate the Equal Protection Clause. In this Article, I contend that discriminatory government expression violates the Clause because it contributes integrally to racial subordination. Through a process I call coercive ideology, discriminatory government expression serves as a veiled threat that manipulates individuals into performing public compliance with the dominant ideology. Like the script …

The Consumer’S Choice To Boycott, Agnes Bresee

Seattle University Law Review

In the wake of employees losing their jobs upon voicing their political opinions concerning Israel, Harvard and Columbia law students’ job offers being rescinded upon expressing support for Palestine, and the names and social media profiles of individuals who support Palestine being collected and listed on Canary Mission, such backlash may leave many Americans wondering what form of resistance to settler-colonialist apartheid is acceptable in the twenty-first century. Recently, the movement to collectively boycott brands like Starbucks, which sued its Worker’s Union for a tweet expressing support for Palestine; Disney, which donated money to Israel; and McDonald’s, where a location …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

A Different Approach To Agency Theory And Implications For Esg, Jonathan Bonham, Amoray Riggs-Cragun

Seattle University Law Review

In conventional agency theory, the agent is modeled as exerting unobservable “effort” that influences the distribution over outcomes the principal cares about. Recent papers instead allow the agent to choose the entire distribution, an assumption that better describes the extensive and flexible control that CEOs have over firm outcomes. Under this assumption, the optimal contract rewards the agent directly for outcomes the principal cares about, rather than for what those outcomes reveal about the agent’s effort. This article briefly summarizes this new agency model and discusses its implications for contracting on ESG activities.

Overseeing The Administrative State, Jill E. Fisch

Seattle University Law Review

In a series of recent cases, the Supreme Court has reduced the regulatory power of the Administrative State. Pending cases offer vehicles for the Court to go still further. Although the Court’s skepticism of administrative agencies may be rooted in Constitutional principles or political expediency, this Article explores another possible explanation—a shift in the nature of agencies and their regulatory role. As Pritchard and Thompson detail in their important book, A History of Securities Law in the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court was initially skeptical of agency power, jeopardizing Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR)’s ambitious New Deal plan. The Court’s acceptance …

The Sec, The Supreme Court, And The Administrative State, Paul G. Mahoney

Seattle University Law Review

Pritchard and Thompson have given those of us who study the SEC and the securities laws much food for thought. Their methodological focus is on the internal dynamics of the Court’s deliberations, on which they have done detailed and valuable work. The Court did not, however, operate in a vacuum. Intellectual trends in economics and law over the past century can also help us understand the SEC’s fortunes in the federal courts and make predictions about its future.

The Sffa V. Harvard Trojan Horse Admissions Lawsuit, Kimberly West-Faulcon

Seattle University Law Review

Affirmative-action-hostile admissions lawsuits are modern Trojan horses. The SFFA v. Harvard/UNC case—Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina, et. al., decided jointly—is the most effective Trojan horse admissions lawsuit to date. Constructed to have the distractingly appealing exterior façade of a lawsuit seeking greater fairness in college admissions, the SFFA v. Harvard/UNC case is best understood as a deception-driven battle tactic used by forces waging a multi-decade war against the major legislative victories of America’s Civil Rights Movement, specifically Title VI and Title VII …

Feeding The Good Fire: Paths To Facilitate Native-Led Fire Management On Federal Lands, Kevin Burdet

Seattle University Law Review

In 2003, nearly twenty Native American reservations were devastated by wildfires that originated on adjacent federal lands. The San Pasqual Reservation’s entire 1,400 acres were burned along with over a third of its homes, and seventy-five percent of the Rincon Reservation was burned, taking twenty homes with it. These devastating fires, along with others in 2002, brought about the Tribal Forest Protection Act of 2004 (TFPA), which offered hope for Tribes to propose projects on bordering or adjacent federal lands and protect reservation lands in the process. Unfortunately, twenty years later, the TFPA has had a marginal effect in enabling …

A Hard Pill To Swallow: The Abysmal Mental Health Standards Of Detained Immigrant Children In The United States, Rama Bankesly

Seattle University Law Review

After setting foot into the U.S., unaccompanied children must learn to navigate academic and legal systems while receiving little support and carrying the heavy burden of effects of trauma on their mental health. They need access to mental health care from qualified professionals, but as this Comment will explain, they systematically fail to receive care, as can be seen in cases like Doe v. Shenandoah Valley Juv. Ctr. Comm’n. In Shenandoah, an unaccompanied child arrived in the U.S. and was placed in a facility that failed to provide remotely adequate mental health care and in fact was subjected …

Channeling A Federal Right To Education Through State Constitutions And Courts, Nicole Sunderlin, Evan Caminker

Articles

Professor Black attributes the ubiquitous adoption of education clauses in state constitutions in the immediate pre- and especially post-Reconstruction era to a “constitutional compromise” struck by Congress and the states. The State Citizenship commitment was designed to enhance the republican nature of both levels of governance by ensuring broader access to political participation through voting and broader access to public education to inform and support democratic deliberation. The education component of this commitment was uniquely secured, argues Black, through a state-federal compromise using two complementary mechanisms: first, by mandating states to embrace a state constitutional obligation to provide basic educational …

Narrow But Deep: The Mcculloch Principle, Collective-Action Theory, And Section Three Enforcement, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

In Trump v. Anderson, 144 S. Ct. 662 (2024), the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Colorado Supreme Court erred in excluding President Donald J. Trump from the Republican Party's primary ballot in the state.  The Court reasoned that the Constitution makes Congress, not the states, solely responsible for enforcing Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.  Scholars of Section 3 have demonstrated that Section 3 is self-executing, so the Court's rationale lacks a sound basis in the original or contemporary meaning of the text of the Civil War Amendments, the original intent of their drafters, or …

Students For Fair Admissions: Affirming Affirmative Action And Shapeshifting Towards Cognitive Diversity?, Steven A. Ramirez

Seattle University Law Review

The Roberts Court holds a well-earned reputation for overturning Supreme Court precedent regardless of the long-standing nature of the case. The Roberts Court knows how to overrule precedent. In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA), the Court’s majority opinion never intimates that it overrules Grutter v. Bollinger, the Court’s leading opinion permitting race-based affirmative action in college admissions. Instead, the Roberts Court applied Grutter as authoritative to hold certain affirmative action programs entailing racial preferences violative of the Constitution. These programs did not provide an end point, nor did they require assessment, review, periodic expiration, or revision for greater …

Traditional Notions Of Fair Play And Substantial Justice?: The Interplay Between Remote Work, State Regulations, And Personal Jurisdiction, Kathryn M. Couture

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Battle Over Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion And Critical Race Theory In Florida: A Case Study On The Stop W.O.K.E. Act, Grace Anne Castelin

Honors Undergraduate Theses

Accelerating from 2022 and continuing through 2024, the state of Florida has experienced significant policy changes, particularly within the realm of higher education and affairs of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Many progressive officials, experts, and activists assert arguments that the state is on the verge of evolving into an authoritarian regime while many illiberal policies are being produced through the Florida legislature and current executive leadership—social and economic sectors are consequently threatened in order to maintain political oppression. The Stop W.O.K.E. Act has served as a catalyst for shifting the state's political stance on DEI, culminating in a chain …

Racial Preferences In Employment After Students For Fair Admissions V. Harvard, Michael Yelnosky

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Dobbs And The Future Of Liberty And Equality, Kim Forde-Mazrui

Cleveland State Law Review

This lecture critiques Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and assesses its implications for liberty and equality. Dobbs’ immediate effect was major disruption to abortion rights. In the longer term, by discarding fifty years of precedent and by basing constitutional rights exclusively on long-standing history and tradition, Dobbs jeopardizes liberty and equality rights that the Court has recognized in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Such modern liberty rights include contraception, interracial marriage, adult sexual intimacy and same-sex marriage. Modern equality rights include strong bars on discrimination based on race and sex, and moderate protections for LGBTQ+ status. …

The Anti-Constitutionality Of The Deeply Rooted Test In Dobbs V. Jackson, Reginald Oh

Cleveland State Law Review

The deeply rooted in history test used by Justice Alito in Dobbs v. Jackson to overturn Roe v. Wade is anti-constitutional. In Dobbs, Alito concluded that, because a majority of states in 1868 criminalized abortion, abortion is not deeply rooted in history, and is therefore not a fundamental liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. However, relying on state laws in 1868 to interpret constitutional text not only has no basis in the Constitution, it goes against the fundamental nature of the Constitution as an integrated whole. What I call the Integrated Constitution is based on Chief Justice John …

R.E.S.P.E.C.T.: The Court's Forgotten Virtue, Camille Pollutro

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article recommends a shift in constitutional interpretation that requires the existence of respect for the class at issue when a fundamental right is being considered under the narrow, historical deeply rooted test of the Fourteenth Amendment. By focusing on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, this Article highlights that the class at issue—women—are having their fundamental rights decided for them by the legal sources of 1868. In applying this strict and narrow historical deeply rooted test, the Court fails to consider the lack of respect and autonomy that women had in 1868. To the Court, if twenty-eight out …