Law and Politics Commons^™

Western Reconstruction And Woman Suffrage, Lorianne Updike Toler

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The normal narrative of woman suffrage in the United States begins in Seneca Falls, New York, and steadily marches along through the lives and papers of the most noteworthy national suffragettes—Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, Lucy Stone, and a handful of other women until the hard-fought passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. The six-volume History of Woman Suffrage tomes tells just such a story.

Yet the dominant narrative “overgeneralizes the experiences of the national, largely eastern leadership” and “generally neglect[s] the West, or fail[s] to evaluate its significance within the national movement.” Although the American Woman Suffrage Association was organized …

Three Questions About "Stand Your Ground" Laws, Cynthia V. Ward

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Filling The Ninth Circuit Vacancies, Carl Tobias

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Upon Republican President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit experienced some pressing appellate vacancies, which the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AO) carefully identified as “judicial emergencies” because the tribunal resolves a massive docket. Last year’s death of the iconic liberal champion Stephen Reinhardt and the late 2017 departure of libertarian former Chief Judge Alex Kozinski—who both assumed pivotal circuit leadership roles over numerous years—and a few of their colleagues’ decision to leave active court service thereafter, mean the tribunal presently confronts four judicial emergencies and resolves most slowly the largest …

Some Form Of Punishment: Penalizing Women For Abortion, Mary Ziegler

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In 2016, Donald Trump ignited a political firestorm when he suggested that women should be punished for having abortions. Although he backtracked, Trump’s misstep launched a debate about whether women have been or should be punished for having abortions. At the same time, Trump’s comments revealed that punishing women has become far more than an abstraction. In 2016, Indiana resident Purvi Patel became just the most recent visible example when she was sentenced to twenty years for feticide and child neglect for inducing an abortion.

But in spite of the furor created by Trump’s comment and Patel’s conviction, the history …

Judicial Supremacy Revisited: Independent Constitutional Authority In American Constitutional Law And Practice, Mark A. Graber

William & Mary Law Review

The Supreme Court exercises far less constitutional authority in American law and practice than one would gather from reading judicial opinions, presidential speeches, or the standard tomes for and against judicial supremacy. Lower federal court judges, state court justices, federal and state elected officials, persons charged with administering the law, and ordinary citizens often have the final say on particular constitutional controversies or exercise temporary constitutional authority in ways that have more influence on the parties to that controversy than the eventual Supreme Court decision. In many instances, Supreme Court doctrine sanctions or facilitates the exercise of independent constitutional authority …

Why Congress Does Not Challenge Judicial Supremacy, Neal Devins

William & Mary Law Review

Members of Congress largely acquiesce to judicial supremacy both on constitutional and statutory interpretation questions. Lawmakers, however, do not formally embrace judicial supremacy; they rarely think about the courts when enacting legislation. This Article explains why this is so, focusing on why lawmakers have both strong incentive to acquiesce to judicial power and little incentive to advance a coherent view of congressional power. In particular, lawmakers are interested in advancing favored policies, winning reelection, and gaining personal power within Congress. Abstract questions of institutional power do not interest lawmakers and judicial defeats are seen as opportunities to find some other …

If It Looks Like A Super Pac, Acts Like A Super Pac, And Is Restricted Like A Super Pac, Then Treat It Like A Super Pac: Why Contribution Limits On A Hybrid Pac’S Independent-Expenditure Arm Are Impermissible, Jacob N. Kipp

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Second Dimension Of The Supreme Court, Joshua B. Fischman, Tonja Jacobi

William & Mary Law Review

Describing the Justices of the Supreme Court as “liberals” and conservatives” has become so standard— and the left-right division on the Court is considered so entrenched— that any deviation from that pattern is treated with surprise. Attentive Court watchers know that the Justices are not just politicians in robes, deciding each case on a purely ideological basis. Yet the increasingly influential empirical legal studies literature assumes just that— that a left-right ideological dimension fully describes the Supreme Court. We show that there is a second, more legally-focused dimension of judicial decision making. A continuum between legalism and pragmatism also divides …

Does The 'Mcconnell Principle' Make Sense?, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Presupposing Corruption: Access, Influence, And The Future Of The Pay-To-Play Legal Framework, Allison C. Davis

William & Mary Business Law Review

Political spending, in all of its various permutations, lies at the nexus between campaign finance law and pay-to-play law. Both of these legal doctrines seek to minimize the corrupting effects of money upon elected officials and candidates, and both impose various caps and restrictions on political contributions in order to do so. Over the past half-century, however, the Supreme Court has struggled to define what sort of activity constitutes “corruption” in the political sphere. In light of its decisions in 2010’s Citizens United v. FEC and 2014’s McCutcheonv. FEC—two seminal cases that dramatically altered campaign finance regulation— the Court now …

How The Supreme Court Can Change Politics As Usual, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

'"Ideology" Or "Situation Sense"? An Experimental Investigation Of Motivated Reasoning And Professional Judgment, Dan M. Kahan, David Hoffman, Danieli Evans, Neal Devins, Eugene Lucci, Katherine Cheng

Faculty Publications

This Article reports the results of a study on whether political predispositions influence judicial decisionmaking. The study was designed to overcome the two principal limitations on existing empirical studies that purport to find such an influence: the use of nonexperimental methods to assess the decisions of actual judges; and the failure to use actual judges in ideologically-biased-reasoning experiments. The study involved a sample of sitting judges (n = 253), who, like members of a general public sample (n = 800), were culturally polarized on climate change, marijuana legalization and other contested issues. When the study subjects were assigned to analyze …

Measuring Party Polarization In Congress: Lessons From Congressional Participation In Amicus Curiae, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

First, I will detail the prevalence of party polarization and how party polarization has limited congressional interest in its institutional prerogatives vis-à-vis the executive. Second, I will discuss my research findings governing congressional amicus briefs. I will consider patterns in bipartisan filings over time (comparing the less polarized 1974–1985 Supreme Court terms with the more polarized 2002–2013 terms). I will also consider the types of issues lawmakers and their institutional counsel have pursued in their filings. This investigation will reveal a decline in briefs in institutional cases and an upswing in briefs on politically salient issues that divide the parties …

The Narrowing Of Federal Power By The American Political Capital, David Fontana

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Essay--—prepared for a symposium hosted by the William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal on the future of the District of Columbia--—argues that American federal power can be better understood by considering the features of the metropolitan area that houses the most important parts of the American federal government. In other American metropolitan areas and in most capital metropolitan areas elsewhere in the world, local life features multiple and diverse industries. Washington is the metropolitan area that houses the most important parts of the American federal government, and Washington is dominated by the government and related industries. Washington is, …

Menendez And America's Public Corruption Problem, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

"Stand Your Ground" And Self Defense, Cynthia Ward

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Three Questions For The "Right To Vote" Amendment, Richard Briffault

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Democratic Capital: A Voting Rights Surge In Washington Could Strengthen The Constitution For Everyone, Jamin Raskin

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Theories Of Representation: For The District Of Columbia, Only Statehood Will Do, Mary M. Cheh

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Welcome To New Columbia: The Fiscal, Economic And Political Consequences Of Statehood For D.C., David Schleicher

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

"…Chosen By The People Of The Several States…": Statehood For The District Of Columbia, Larry Mirel, Joe Sternlieb

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Right To Vote: Is The Amendment Game Worth The Candle?, Heather K. Gerken

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Criminalizing Politics, Jeffrey Bellin

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

The Partisanship Spectrum, Justin Levitt

William & Mary Law Review

In a polarized political environment, allegations of excessive partisanship by public actors are ubiquitous. Commentators, courts, and activists levy these allegations daily. But with remarkable consistency, they do so as if “partisanship” described a single phenomenon. This Article recognizes that the default mode of understanding partisanship is a descriptive and diagnostic failure with meaningful consequences. We mean different things when we discuss partisanship, but we do not have the vocabulary to understand that we are talking past each other.

Without a robust conceptualization of partisanship, it is difficult to treat pathologies of partisan governance. Indeed, an undifferentiated approach to partisanship …

In Search Of Justice: An Examination Of The Appointments Of John G. Roberts And Samuel A. Alito To The U.S. Supreme Court And Their Impact On American Jurisprudence, Alberto R. Gonzales

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

During 2005, President George W. Bush appointed Federal Circuit Court Judges John G. Roberts and Samuel A. Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court. These appointments were the culmination of years of examination of the work, character, and temperament of both men commencing during the 2000 presidential transition. Our evaluation included face-to-face interviews; an analysis of judicial opinions, speeches, and writings; and conversation with friends, colleagues, and court experts. Based on this work, a select group of Bush Administration officials developed a set of predictors that formed the basis of our recommendation to President Bush that he elevate Circuit Court Judges …

Charities In Politics: A Reappraisal, Brian Galle

William & Mary Law Review

Federal law significantly limits the political activities of charities, but no one really knows why. In the wake of Citizens United, the absence of any strong normative grounding for the limits may leave the rules vulnerable to constitutional challenge. This Article steps into that breach, offering a set of policy reasons to separate politics from charity. I also sketch ways in which my more precise exposition of the rationale for the limits helps guide interpretation of the complex legal rules implementing them.

Any defense of the political limits begins with significant challenges because of a long tradition of scholarly criticism …

The Use Of Gender Quotas In America: Are Voluntary Party Quotas The Way To Go?, Anisa A. Somani

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Urban Politics And The Assimilation Of Immigrant Voters, Rick Su

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Split Definitive, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins

Popular Media

For the first time in a century, the Supreme Court is divided solely by political party.

The Senate: Out Of Order?, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Faculty Publications

Due to the routine use of the filibuster and related devices, today’s Senate operates as a supermajoritarian body. This Symposium Article considers whether this supermajoritarian aspect of the Senate renders it dysfunctional and, if so, what can be done about it. I contend that the Senate is indeed broken. Its current supermajoritarian features have pernicious effects. Further, and contrary to the claims of many of the Senate’s defenders, this aspect of the Senate is not part of the original design. I go on to explain why the Senate’s procedures, despite their deficiencies, have nonetheless proven resistant to reform. The impediment …