Jurisprudence Commons^™

Take In Case Of Emergency: Reconciling Necessity Takings With The Original Meaning Of The Takings Clause, Tony Smith

Northwestern University Law Review

Does the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause permit the state to destroy property without compensation whenever it declares an emergency? The long-standing doctrine of necessity empowers the state to do exactly that.

Courts dating back to common law England have permitted governments to claim a privilege of necessity to avoid paying for private property they destroy in times of crisis. The privilege rests on the principle that the public good sometimes outweighs the harm the individual suffers. Today’s courts and academics stretch this principle to its limits, arguing necessity should be used as a vehicle for combating all manner of social …

What On Earth Is A Burden On Interstate Commerce?, Andrew Jordan

Northwestern University Law Review

What is a burden on interstate commerce? That’s an important question under the Dormant Commerce Clause’s Pike balancing test. But it’s a question whose answer has proven elusive. This shouldn’t be a surprise. After all, states disagree about what counts as a burden or a benefit, and how much weight each has. And there aren’t any obvious constitutional principles we can point to for resolving those disagreements. Recently, some scholars have tried to ground dormant commerce doctrine in economic cost–benefit analysis. The supposed virtue of that approach is that it is neutral as to competing preferences. Thus, for the Court …

The Roberts Court Paradox, John C. P. Goldberg, Benjamin C. Zipursky

Fordham Law Review

As perhaps the most conservative Supreme Court of the past century, the Roberts Court regularly touts its commitment to traditional ideals, including the rule of law. Yet Trump v. United States seems ready to place presidents entirely or largely above the law by granting them absolute or near absolute immunity from criminal prosecutions for official conduct. And Trump is not a one-off: from judicial recusal to qualified immunity to due process decisions, the Court frequently seems to display indifference to values of accountability and impartiality that have long been thought integral to the rule of law. What is going on? …

Emotionally Unstable: Addressing Emotional Distress As A Concrete Injury In Data Breach Cases Post-Transunion, Anna P. Cox

Fordham Law Review

Data breaches and data breach litigation are exponentially on the rise. Plaintiffs whose information is stolen in a data breach often claim emotional distress for fear of future harm the data breach may cause. However, plaintiffs who bring suit in federal court must show that they have suffered an injury in fact for purposes of Article III standing before a federal court will exercise jurisdiction. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez requires that plaintiffs who seek money damages under a theory of risk of future harm show that they have suffered a present concrete injury to …

Rights In The Eyes Of The Beholder: The Lived Hierarchy Of Rights In India's Democracy, Sehar Abdullah, Keerthana Satheesh, Prashant Narang

Socio-Legal Review

This paper examines how citizens in India perceive and prioritise fundamental rights, with particular attention to the six freedoms under Article 19(1) and the property right. While the freedoms of Article 19(1) remain central to democratic citizenship, the Forty-Fourth Constitutional Amendment of 1978 reclassified the right to property as a constitutional right under Article 300A. This shift prompts an important question: Does the diminished constitutional rank of property correspond to its place in popular hierarchies of rights? Our in-depth interviews with 26 respondents, whose livelihoods make them especially sensitive to changes in both categories of rights, reveal that citizens continue …

The Section 32(1) Analysis: Clarifying Eldridge In Light Of York Region District School Board, Kate Glover Berger

All Papers

The Eldridge framework, a stable feature of Canadian Charter jurisprudence for decades, sets out part of the framework for determining when entities or activities qualify as “government” under section 32(1), the Charter’s application section. In light of this stability, the Supreme Court of Canada’s analysis of the section 32(1) issue in York Region District School Board v Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario was surprising. It raised the question: Why did the Court in York Region deviate from well-settled law on the Eldridge framework and, in the process, seemingly change the framework’s thresholds? This question arises because the Court in …

Chapter 9 Bankruptcy: The Solution That Causes Problems, Peter C. Alexander

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

There is a little-known form of bankruptcy called a “Chapter 9,” reserved for insolvent cities, villages, and other municipalities. Occasionally, one reads about a city or a county that has filed for Chapter 9 relief, like Detroit, Michigan, or Orange County, California; however, it is very hard to file a Chapter 9 case, in part, because existing law requires a municipality to obtain permission from its home state before it can file for relief in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. An additional constraint is that the only option municipalities have when seeking bankruptcy relief is to file a Chapter 9 because …

Existing Together From The Beginning: Freedom To Contract And Black Mutual Aid, Cara Mcclellan

Northwestern University Law Review

In a new wave of litigation, conservative legal organizations are attempting to rely on Reconstruction-era civil rights legislation to prevent nonprofits, charities, foundations, and other privately organized groups from engaging in race-conscious work. Unlike the Supreme Court’s recent rollback of affirmative action, which dealt with universities’ ability to consider race in admissions as state actors and as recipients of federal funding, a series of lawsuits now challenge the ability of private organizations to consider race in how they invest money and resources to create social impact. Adding fuel to the fire, on January 21, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive …

Not Colorblind, Kimberly West-Faulcon

Northwestern University Law Review

This Essay criticizes the use of the term “colorblind” in reference to attacks on racial diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies. It argues it is inapt and unconscionably obtuse to use colorblindness terminology to selectively target inclusion-motivated race consciousness for automatic illegality. The Essay’s central project is to examine claims underlying attacks on racial inclusion policies such as the Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College lawsuit to expose the legal endgame that anti-DEI forces seek to make a centerpiece of America’s future. In so doing, it surfaces the differential scrutiny of race consciousness …

Standing On Stare Decisis After Students For Fair Admissions, Areeb Asif, Lindsey Roloff

Northwestern University Law Review

The Supreme Court recognized nearly half a century ago in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke that “the ‘nation’s future depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure’ to the ideas and mores of students as diverse as this Nation of many peoples.” Nevertheless, the Court seriously undercut efforts to bring such a future to life by striking down race-conscious admissions programs in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina (collectively SFFA). Though SFFA’s binding effect is limited to educational institutions, …

Crisis Convergence, Sarah Medina Camiscoli

Northwestern University Law Review

Progressive jurists and legal scholars have called the Supreme Court’s doctrine of colorblind constitutionalism that dismantled affirmative action in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard (SFFA) a crisis for constitutional democracy. However, scholars have not yet tended to students, particularly students mobilized for racial justice, to understand their interpretation of this race-evasive ideology and what insights those mobilized students might offer in this pivotal moment. Given the fact that a small coalition of dissenting conservative jurists, scholars, and mobilized students—the Federalist Society—spent decades crafting the doctrine, scholarship, and resources that drive colorblind constitutionalism …

Toward A Perpetual Practice Of Affirmative Action, Sheldon Bernard Lyke

Northwestern University Law Review

Despite perceptions that affirmative action is “dead” following the Supreme Court ruling in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (SFFA), this Essay argues that affirmative action remains crucial for addressing racial bias in admissions processes. This Essay examines the strict scrutiny standard, which requires that any use of race must serve a compelling government interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest. Courts have interpreted the narrowly tailored prong of this standard to include a logical end point requirement, which mandates that race-conscious measures must have a clear and limited …

Constitutional Futurisms, Jeremiah Chin

Northwestern University Law Review

How do we reckon with the past? The Supreme Court’s recent embrace of originalism as a mode of constitutional analysis relies almost exclusively on a view of history and tradition that would bind us to an understanding of principles and ideals that legitimized the exclusion of minority voices. Cases such as New York State Pistol and Rifle Ass'n v. Bruen use flavors of originalism as a framework to define rights and governmental powers through their historical antecedents, but this broad standard of interpretation is notably absent in the Court’s recent discussions of histories and traditions of racism in the United …

Volume 48 Masthead

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Keynote Address: Community Over Constitution, Riddhi Mukhopadhyay

Seattle University Law Review

In this keynote address, Riddhi Mukhopadhyay challenges the veneration of the U.S. Constitution by highlighting its origins in exclusion and its continued failure to protect marginalized communities. Drawing from her experience in civil legal aid and gender justice, she argues that the Constitution was drafted to consolidate power among white, wealthy men and continues to reflect that legacy through racial, gender, and class-based inequities. While acknowledging the significance of constitutional amendments and landmark cases, Mukhopadhyay emphasizes that meaningful change has always come from community-led action, not top-down reform. Additionally, Mukhopadhyay calls on lawyers and legal advocates to center community, practice …

The Lost Child: A Critique On Transracial Adoption Rhetoric, Hallie Conyers-Tucker

Seattle University Law Review

Transracial adoption in the United States reflects a deeply rooted history of colonialism, cultural assimilation, and racial hierarchy, masked by rhetoric focused on the “best interest of the child.” The author critiques that rhetoric and traces how adoption practices and policies, both domestic and international, have evolved to reinforce systemic inequities. Through historical analysis of the forced adoption of Native American, Black, and Asian children, it reveals how the best interest standard has been wielded not to protect children but to uphold political and racial ideologies. The author argues that the prevailing adoption framework relies on child-saving and color-blind narratives …

A Global Reconstruction: Black Internationalism And The Human Rights Regime, Britta Redwood

Seattle University Law Review

Black American advocates for civil, political, and economic rights have long taken an internationalist approach and fostered connections with international organizations and transnational movements. This engagement has also been a generative force and played role in shaping international law. Beginning in the early years of the twentieth century, Black intellectuals and leaders, spearheaded by the NAACP and the UNIA, focused on human rights as a means for addressing and repairing the harms wrought by slavery, Jim Crow, and racism. From the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Genocide Convention, and the drafting of …

The Gap: Addressing The Missing Piece In HawaiʻI’S Anti-Discrimination Laws On Credit And Lending, Wendy Mun

Seattle University Law Review

This author addresses the significant gap in Hawaiʻi’s anti-discrimination laws, specifically the lack of explicit protections for LGBTQ+ individuals against credit and lending discrimination. Although federal laws like the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and recent interpretations by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) extend some protections, they remain vulnerable to shifting federal priorities and interpretations. The author explores how other states, particularly California and Washington, have enacted robust statutory protections that clearly prohibit credit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. They argue that Hawaiʻi, despite its large LGBTQ+ population, must amend its credit protection laws to reflect …

The U.S. Drug Policy Hamster Wheel: A Critical Discourse Analysis Of Seattle’S New Drug Ordinance, Hallie Conyers-Tucker

Seattle University Law Review

The author critically examines Seattle’s new drug ordinance using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to reveal how legislative language influences the policy's actual effect. Although the ordinance claims to prioritize diversion and community health, the use of permissive language such as “may” and “shall” grants broad discretionary power to law enforcement and undermines the stated intent. The author situates the ordinance within a broader historical context, highlighting how drug policy in the United States has consistently been shaped by racialized and stigmatizing narratives. Additionally, the author argues that meaningful reform requires reframing the discourse around substance use to support public health …

Something Concrete: How Labor Advocates Can Best Respond To The Ambiguity Of Glacier Northwest, Ateş Serifsoy

Seattle University Law Review

The Supreme Court’s much-anticipated decision in Glacier North-west, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local No. 174 (Glacier) marked a critical moment for workers’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the longstanding practice of Garmon preemption. Yet, initial fears of a significant rollback of workers’ rights, driven by sensational headlines, were met with an unexpectedly narrow Court opinion. This Comment examines Glacier’s implications for Gar-mon preemption and the right to strike. It offers the historical background of the doctrine of labor law preemption before Glacier; presents a detailed analysis of Glacier itself, including its …

Table Of Contents

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Can The Law Protect My Craft? How Gaps In Copyright Of Knitting Patterns Symbolize A Greater Struggle For Protecting Traditionally Feminine Forms Of Intellectual Property, Kysa Walzer

Seattle University Law Review

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the application of intel-lectual property rights within the context of copyright protection of knit-ting patterns. The article will discuss the underutilization of copyright pro-tection for knitters and crafters and its larger impact upon craft and indus-try traditionally comprised of women. Part I introduces knitting patterns and a short history of copyright protections. Part II discusses the specific areas within knitting patterns and the knitting community which give rise to legal grey areas for copyright protection. Part III discusses the larger implications of copyright and intellectual property in spaces where women traditionally make …

A New Exclusionary Rule To Protect Bodily Integrity And Discourage Pretext Stops, Josephine Ross

Seattle University Law Review

The author proposes a novel state-level exclusionary rule to reduce racial profiling and protect bodily autonomy during police encounters. The current Fourth Amendment jurisprudence fails to deter pretextual stops and frisks because the exclusionary rule often turns on officer fault and "good faith," allowing racially motivated practices to go unchecked. As federal rollbacks on diversity and data collection hinder efforts to track racial bias, the author argues for a statutory evidentiary rule that automatically excludes drug evidence found during (1) traffic stops, (2) pat-downs for weapons, and (3) consent searches, regardless of an officer’s intent or the legality of the …

Navahine V. HawaiʻI Dept. Of Transportation: The Keiki Will Lead Us, Catherine Smith

Seattle University Law Review

The author analyzes the landmark case Navahine v. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation, which culminated in the world’s first constitutional climate settlement. Catherine Smith, serving as an expert for the youth plaintiffs, situates the case within Hawaiʻi’s legal tradition of prioritizing children’s rights and intergenerational equity. She explores the evolution of children’s constitutional protections, contrasting Hawaiʻi’s progressive jurisprudence with the dominant adult-centric legal framework on the mainland. She critiques four recurring analytical missteps in U.S. courts that marginalize children’s interests and highlights Hawaiʻi’s public trust doctrine and cultural values, such as the Aloha Spirit, as models for addressing climate-related harms. …

Constitutional Futurism As Pedagogy, Jeremiah Chin

Seattle University Law Review

Constitutional Law has transformed from a course on history to a discussion of current events. Cases like Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo reveal that the study of constitutional law is not a static, or even linear, discussion of constitutional text and history. Law is a shifting, changing enterprise that reflects social constructions of power, authority, and identity. How do we teach, learn, and understand constitutional law that is so laden with history, riddled with theories of consistency and adherence to precedent, but ultimately subject …

Two Concepts Of Judicial Deference To Religious Claims, Chagai Schlesinger

BYU Law Review

Religious exemptions from general laws are everywhere. The U.S. Supreme Court is expanding its exemption doctrine, systemically preferring religious needs over conflicting considerations. This ignites an ongoing debate between those celebrating religious liberties and those fearing their societal costs. Assessing this judicial trend, as this Article highlights, requires noticing how it is facilitated by a broad deferential approach to religious claims, refraining from evaluating their content.

This Article argues that this broad expression of judicial deference is analytically flawed and normatively implausible. The problem lies in the failure to distinguish between two types of religious claims when deferring to them: …

Making The Margins Visible: Dignity At Work And The Promise Of Puttaswamy—Review Of Gendered Bodies And Worlds Of Labour: Reconceptualizing Dignity After Puttaswamy Vs Union Of India, Shreya Shree

National Law School Journal

This review examines Kalpana Kannabiran and Devi Jagani’s reimagination of dignity as a framework for securing justice in gendered labourscapes. By centering a broad and dynamic understanding of dignity as a right, an inherent characteristic, and an enabling condition for rights-talk, the book advances new ways of articulating rights-claims through an intersectional and interdisciplinary reading of the Indian Constitution. The review highlights the significance of this approach in renewing understandings of the worker, labour, discrimination, and rights, while exploring its possibilities and limits in confronting violence and injustices embedded in gendered labour relations within the domestic sphere and beyond.

Is It Time To Scrap Stare Decisis?, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii

Articles

Shortly after returning to the presidency, Donald Trump terminated several independent federal officers, prompting legal action by employees who occupied government positions covered by statutory for cause removal protections long held constitutionally permissible and valid. Eventually, one or more suits alleging unlawful termination owing to the removal without cause will reach the Supreme Court to be decided on the merits. Having steadily narrowed the Humphrey’s Executor line of cases that insulate these officers, the Court now seems poised to displace that precedent entirely. In isolation, the overruling would mark a seismic doctrinal shift and major advance in legal conservatism's pursuit …

The Objective Observer: The Washington State Supreme Court's Remedial Aspirations And Experience On The Ground, David B. Owens

Washington Law Review

The Washington State Supreme Court has adopted an “objective observer rule” for addressing whether race impacted jury selection and extended this rule to evaluating all aspects of Washington courts, including jury trials. The objective observer rule allows courts to evaluate whether decisions in those courtrooms could be viewed as the result of racial bias, even where there is no evidence of specific racial animus and in the absence of racial slurs. The rule, which covers a form of disparate impact, has now existed for over half a decade. This Article outlines the Washington State Supreme Court’s development of the objective …

No Lawyer, No Jail: A Critical Case Study Of Pragmatism And The Flaws Of “Purposeful” Decision Making In Argersinger V. Hamlin, Alisa Smith, Sarah K. Stice

Seattle University Law Review

By releasing conference notes and internal communications, Supreme Court Justices provide insight into the otherwise private decisionmaking process, shedding light on how case outcomes and legal reasoning are framed and negotiated. The watershed case of Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972) extended the constitutional right to counsel to some, but not all, misdemeanor defendants. The case was argued twice, and the Court relied on empirical and authoritative sources to answer complex and practical questions about requiring counsel. This case study employs critical discourse analysis to uncover what influenced the Justices’ decisions and how they framed, shaped, and constructed social realities to foreground …