Jurisprudence Commons^™

Writing – Écriture, Peter Goodrich

Articles

This is the twentieth article in this series (and the fifth in volume 77).

Vaccines, Religious Liberty, And The Gvr As Doctrinal Signal, Zalman Rothschild

Articles

This Essay proceeds in four Parts. Part I traces the doctrinal baseline, showing that vaccines have long functioned as the limit case for religious liberty. Part II briefly describes the doctrinal changes of the COVID-19 era — the Supreme Court’s expansion of religious equality doctrine, and its emergency-docket denials that left vaccine mandates formally unresolved — before explaining why the GVR in Miller signals a different move: the extension of the religious liberty framework to vaccine mandates, bypassing the comparability analysis that had allowed most courts to sustain them under the equality model. Part III turns to Miller itself and …

Protecting Cultural Personality, J. Janewa Osei-Tutu

Articles

When companies use cultural symbols or cultural heritage from an indigenous or local community without their knowledge or permission, it can lead to claims of cultural appropriation, particularly in the fashion industry. Yet, the law provides little to no remedy. Trademarks and geographical indications can be used to protect collective cultural identities. However, these intellectual property laws are not helpful if the affected cultural group has not commercialized its identity by offering goods or services to the public. This Article contributes to the literature by theorizing a dignitary-based intellectual property model for protecting cultural identities. It draws on the U.S. …

Is Tax “Law”?, Luís C. Calderón Gómez

Articles

Although taxation remains a hotly contested issue in debates by both politicians and political theorists—over the optimal size of government, distributive (and sometimes corrective) justice, or even the legitimacy of current private property arrangements—taxation has been largely ignored by legal theorists, to the detriment of both tax law and legal theory.  This Article argues that tax law, driven by its battle against tax evasion, is in deep conflict with widely accepted conceptions of “legality”—that is, the qualities that make a rule distinctively and normatively “law.”  This matters because legality is a key buttress in jurisprudential and political theory accounts that …

New Judicial Federalism And The Establishment Clause: Classroom Ten Commandments As A Case Study In State Constitutional Protection, Caroline Mala Corbin

Articles

Louisiana recently enacted a law requiring a Ten Commandments display in every public school classroom from kindergarten to college. Forty-five years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a nearly identical attempt to introduce Christianity into the public schools violated the Establishment Clause—the clause in the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment that requires some degree of separation between church and state.

Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has since reduced the Establishment Clause to a shadow of its former self. It replaced doctrinal tests that protected religious minorities with a history and tradition test that is easily manipulated and that presumes the …

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 Return Of Private Law, Anthony J. Sebok

Articles

Recent events offer a grim picture of the future of public law. In particular, President Trump’s assault on the administrative state seems destined to hamper the ability of agencies to protect the public in familiar areas such as drug safety, auto safety, environmental protection, and consumer protection.

Institutionalized Ostracism, Danieli Evans

Articles

Belonging is a fundamental need, like food or water. Hundreds of social psychology studies find that people who are ostracized (excluded, rejected, or ignored) experience severe pain and suffering. Ostracism threatens basic needs, triggers the same neurocognitive processing system as physical pain, and impairs functioning. Furthermore, ostracized people may cope in ways that beget “deviant” labeling and further ostracism.

Belonging and ostracism are prevalent themes in social psychology research, but these constructs have received relatively little attention in law. This Article begins to explore the implications of this research for law. I make three contributions: First, I name and describe …

Substance And Process In Corporate Law: Theory And History, William Wilson Bratton, Simone M. Sepe

Articles

Over the last half-century, corporate law has moved from substance to process as the Delaware courts have avoided direct review of the merits of transactions, substituting review of the processes that brought the transactions about. This is a familiar observation, perhaps a truism. But it is a truism that is undertheorized. This article addresses the theory gap, suggesting a structural reason for the trend. Simply, the courts avoid reviewing substance because they lack a theory of value. The theoretical void disables direct evaluation of transactional merits. Process review avoids this problem. Processes and their operation are the lawyer's stock in …

The Sovereignty Problem In Federal Indian Law, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

There is a sovereignty problem in federal Indian law-namely, that the federal government's sovereign defenses prevent tribal nations and individual Indian people from realizing justice in the courts. Often, compelling tribal and Indian claims go nowhere as the judiciary defers to the interests of the United States, even where Congress has expressly stated its support for tribal interests. Conversely, tribal judiciaries allow claims to proceed to the merits, invoking customary and traditional law to hold tribal governments accountable.

Sovereignty theory helps to explain why justice can be done in one court system but not another. But federal, state, and tribal …

Doubting Thomas And Questioning Stare Decisis Under The Roberts Court, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii

Articles

The article critically examines the erosion of stare decisis under the Roberts Court, highlighting concerns about the Supreme Court's increasing willingness to overturn established precedents. While acknowledging the importance of stare decisis in maintaining stability and equality, the author argues that its practical value is being undermined by ideological polarization and a departure from traditional legal reasoning. The article questions the Court's recent approach to precedent, particularly in cases like Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, and critiques the conservative majority's aggressive use of judicial power.

Cross-Talk, Alicia Bannon, John Q. Barrett, Tyler Rose Clemons, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii, Mark C. Niles

Articles

The symposium examines the Supreme Court's recent trend of overturning precedent, arguing that this practice undermines the principle of *stare decisis* and the Court's legitimacy. Historically, the Court has used precedent to protect marginalized groups, but recent decisions suggest a shift toward benefiting non-marginalized interests, such as big businesses and conservative groups. This change is seen as a departure from the Court's traditional role and raises concerns about judicial humility and the politicization of the judiciary.

Intuitions In Tort Law And Theory, James A. Macleod

Articles

This Essay highlights the many ways that ordinary conceptual and moral intuitions shape the development of tort law. It further argues that, for a range of doctrinal and institutional reasons, such intuitions deserve a central place in tort theorists’ efforts to explain, predict, justify, and reform the law of torts. Finally, given the stakes for both positive and normative tort theory, the Essay emphasizes the need for more systematic empirical research into the content and operation of people’s tort-relevant intuitions.

Property And Information, Jeanne L. Schroeder, David G. Carlson

Articles

The article proceeds as follows. As the information theory is a reaction to legal realism, Part I explores its antecedents in the work of Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld and Ronald H. Coase. Part II presents the information theory as arising from Professor Smith’s interpretation of the Coase theorem.11 In the imaginary world of TC0, we are supposedly indifferent to organizing by property and organizing by contract. Property eclipses contract as the organon of the economy because property reduces the cost of delineation and processing—of speaking and comprehending. We show that this theory is founded on a misunderstanding of Coase. Part III …

New Legal Realism At 20: Rethinking Law In An Era Of Populism And Social Movements, Jeffrey Omari, Pablo Rueda-Saiz, Richard Ashby Wilson

Articles

This Article critically examines the New Legal Realism (NLR) movement on its twentieth anniversary and illuminates its distinctive intellectual contributions. In evaluating NLR's unique methodological and substantive contributions, we explore the movement's relationship to other interdisciplinary theories and empirical approaches to law. NLR approaches show a commitment to a comparative, cross-national exploration of legal phenomena while allowing for grounded generalizations about the relationship between law and society. NLR approaches embrace a diverse range of methods and emphasize the importance of "looking up, down, and sideways." Notably, NLR embraces both "top-down" and "bottom-up" methods, providing comprehensive insights into the intricate interactions …

Theistic Illiberal Constitutionalism: A Review Of Adrian Vermeule’S Common Good Constitutionalism, Kyron J. Huigens

Articles

Adrian Vermeule’s Common Good Constitutionalism drew a remarkable amount of attention from constitutional law scholars when it was published in 2020. About eighteen months later, Vermeule published a piece complaining that the critics had missed the point, that they had ignored the natural law jurisprudence that grounds the work. He was correct. This Review addresses Vermeule’s natural law jurisprudence, emphasizing the fact that it is a religious natural law jurisprudence. His arguments are in the tradition of ScholasticismAristotelian logic incorporated into Christian theology by St. Thomas Aquinas. Scholasticism is a remarkably weak foundation for constitutional jurisprudence. It is a vast …

Free Speech Originalism: Unconstraining In Theory And Opportunistic In Practice, Caroline Mala Corbin

Articles

Courts should not apply originalism in freedom of expression cases. Originalists claim that originalism prevents judges from imposing their own views. It does not-not in theory and not in practice. Instead, as the treatment of hate speech bans suggests, it is not principles but outcomes that determine whether and which version of originalism is used. Moreover, a true originalist First Amendment would likely lead to impoverished free speech protections.

Part I provides background on original public meaning originalism, the iteration of originalism currently favored by scholars. It also explains how the theory falls short of its original promise of limiting …

Trade Law Policing On The Factory Floor: Next Generation Agreements And Their Corporate Accountability Tools, Kathleen Claussen

Articles

Trade policymakers' increased attention to sustainability has prompted the development of trade tools focused on corporate accountability within international trade agreements. As evidenced by the creation and use of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement's Rapid Response Labor Mechanism, this institutional shift has potent implications for labour rights and environmental protections. This article, which transcribes a lecture delivered at the Lauterpacht Centre in October 2023, scrutinises the turn toward supply-chain policing within international trade law and its institutional, legal, sociological, rhetorical and disciplinary effects.

Arbitration's Unraveling, Myriam E. Gilles

Articles

It has been over a decade since the Supreme Court declared that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts state-law policies that stand as an obstacle to enforcement of the class-banning arbitration clauses that companies tuck into standard-form contracts. In that time, plaintiffs’ lawyers have tried challenging class action–banning arbitration provisions on myriad legal grounds, as well as pressing for federal and state legislation to undo the Court’s ruling in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion. Neither strategy has borne much fruit—until now. In the past few years, congressional action has exempted specific categories of cases from mandatory arbitration, suggesting that an area-by-area …

Applying Strict Scrutiny In Termination Of Parental Rights Proceedings: Why Alabama’S Jurisprudence Should Reshape Child Protection Practice, Christopher Church, Vivek Sankaran

Articles

“Our decision in [Pierce] holds that parents have a fundamental constitutional right to rear their children . . . . I would apply strict scrutiny to infringements of fundamental rights.” “[S]trict scrutiny leaves few survivors.” Termination of parental rights (TPR) stands as “a unique kind of deprivation” that results in the state irrevocably severing a parent’s fundamental right to care for their child. In The Ties that Bind Us, we scrutinized the child protection system’s overuse of TPR, employing clinical, empirical, and constitutional perspectives. This Article advocates for a constitutionally anchored framework aimed at enforcing strict scrutiny when considering TPR …

Fair Value As Process: A Retrospective Reconsideration Of Delaware Appraisal, William Wilson Bratton

Articles

This Article reconsiders the jurisprudence of fair value under Delaware's appraisal remedy, placing recent cases in historical perspective and offering a novel account. Its central observation is that appraisal has developed into a process jurisprudence rather than jurisprudence devoted to the articulation of an entitlement. As such it defies expectations and excites the wrath of academic commentators looking for a more conventional, rights-based evolution. There is a nominal entitlement: the cases at all times announce that shareholder dissenters may pursue going concern value (as opposed to third party sale value) as the measure of fair value. But the Delaware courts …

Witness Hide-And-Seek: Why Federal Prosecutors Should Record Pretrial Interviews, Christina Frohock, Jeffrey E. Marcus

Articles

This Article pays long-overdue attention to a federal appellate court's warning against "playing hide-and-seek" with witnesses. Specifically, prosecutors should record interviews. While courtroom cameras dominate the topic of judicial transparency, cameras can play a critical role in a sleepier corner of criminal proceedings: pretrial witness interviews. The Article first tracks the history of open judicial proceedings as a tradition of our Anglo- American jurisprudence. Next, the Article identifies the normative thread running through that history. Fairness may suffer when cameras transform public proceedings into publicized proceedings. Finally, the Article argues that this same issue of fairness applies to pretrial witness …

Collaborative Constructions: Designing High School History Curriculum With The Lost & Found Game Series, Owen Gottlieb, Shawn Clybor

Articles

This chapter addresses design research and iterative curriculum design for the Lost & Found games series. The Lost & Found card-to-mobile series is set in Fustat (Old Cairo) in the twelfth century and focuses on religious laws of the period. The first two games focus on Moses Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, a key Jewish law code. A new expansion module which was in development at the time of the fieldwork described in this article that introduces Islamic laws of the period, and a mobile prototype of the initial strategy game has been developed with support National Endowment for the Humanities. The …

Carrie Menkel-Meadow: Dispute Resolution In A Feminist Voice, Andrea K. Schneider

Articles

The presence of women in the law has changed the law’s substance, practice, and process. Carrie Menkel-Meadow, whose scholarship centers on this theme, is one such revolutionary woman.

Professor Menkel-Meadow, who I am proud to call my colleague, co-author, and friend (hereinafter referred to as Carrie), began her career in 1977 with a series of simple questions that sparked a breathtaking body of work. Carrie probed the depth of male domination in the realm of law and wondered what changes female representation might engender. In particular, she focused her inquiry on the value orientation each respective gender might bring to …

A Second Look For Children Sentenced To Die In Prison, Kathryn E. Miller

Articles

Scholars have championed “second look” statutes as a decarceral tool. Second look statutes allow certain incarcerated people to seek resentencing after having served a portion of their sentences. This Essay weighs the advantages and disadvantages of these statutes as applied to children sentenced to die in prison and argues that focusing on this small, discrete group may be a digestible entry point for more conservative states who fear widespread resentencing. Moreover, because early data indicates that children convicted of homicide and released as adults have very low recidivism rates, second look beneficiaries are likely to pose little threat to public …

Judging Offensiveness: A Rubric For Privacy Torts, Patricia S. Abril, Alissa Del Riego

Articles

How do we judge whether a violation of someone's privacy is offensive? Currently, U.S. tort law requires privacy violations be "highly offensive to a reasonable person" to afford redress. However, our research reveals that there is no effective analysis-or rhyme or reason-to determine what conduct, disclosure, or implication is offensive. Our review of hundreds of privacy tort cases concludes that the ambiguity of the offensiveness prong has created opportunity for both significant legal errors and thriving biases, which often lead to discriminatory and neglectful treatment of women, racial minorities, and other marginalized groups. This is particularly alarming because the offensiveness …

Against Progress: Intellectual Property And Fundamental Values In The Internet Age, Or Cohen Sasson

Articles

No abstract provided.

Love In The Time Of Covid, Jeanne L. Schroeder

Articles

A striking aspect of the current American cultural divide is divergent attitudes towards expertise, generally, and masking and vaccination to mitigate the Covid-19 pandemic, specifically. Liberal pundits profess shock that Red State America won’t just ‘trust the science’. On the right, politicians and television personalities reject mandates in the name of ‘freedom’.

Lacanian discourse theory gives insight into this. The rejection of expertise is an example of an ‘hysteric discourse’ challenging a ‘university discourse’: the regime of experts. An hysteric discourse is a critique of rules imposed by experts by the subjects-subjected-to them. Hysteria can lead, in turn, to a …

The Pledge Of Allegiance And Compelled Speech Revisited: Requiring Parental Consent, Caroline Mala Corbin

Articles

Since the Supreme Court decided West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette in 1943, free speech law has been clear: public schools may not force students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Nevertheless, in two states -Texas and Florida- students may decline to participate only with parental permission. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law on the grounds that the parental requirement furthered parents' substantive due process right to control the upbringing of their children.

The Eleventh Circuit decision is flawed both in its understanding of the First Amendment right to be free of compelled speech and …

Reasoning V. Rhetoric: The Strange Case Of “Unconstitutional Beyond A Reasonable Doubt”, Hugh D. Spitzer

Articles

An odd formulation has frequented American constitutional discourse for 125 years: a declaration that courts should not overturn a statute on constitutional grounds unless it is “unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt.” This concept has been thought of as a presumption, a standard, a doctrine, or a philosophy of coordinate branch respect and judicial restraint. Yet it has been criticized because “beyond a reasonable doubt” is at root an evidentiary standard of proof in criminal cases rather than a workable theory or standard for deciding constitutional law cases. This article discusses the history and use of “unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt,” …