Legal History Commons^™

The History Of The Constitution Is Our Future., Maggie Blackhawk

Michigan Law Review

The Constitution of the United States establishes a government; it also stands as the fundamental law of a people. It shapes daily life, distributes power, and sets a direction for the future. And yet when we ask about the reach and meaning of the Constitution, we are increasingly told to look backward. The answers to our future are said to lie in the past.

The Supreme Court, Regime Politics, And Federalism: From The New Deal To The Trump Era, J. Mitchell Pickerill, Lilly A. Pickerill

Northern Illinois University Law Review

In the 1990s, the conservative majority on the Rehnquist Court championed state sovereignty and autonomy in a series of cases some commentators dubbed a “federalism revolution.” The Supreme Court crafted constitutional doctrines under the Commerce Clause, Tenth and Eleventh Amendments, and Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment that limited federal powers while protecting or bolstering state powers. The Court’s doctrines in those cases diverged from its approach to constitutional federalism since the New Deal in the 1930s, but it tracked with the conservative Republican political agenda promoting a “new federalism” going back to Presidents Nixon and Reagan. However, as the …

The Lost Origins Of Antitrust, William Magnuson

Faculty Scholarship

Over the last decade, the once-sleepy field of antitrust has suddenly sprung to the forefront of public attention. The digitalization of the economy, the expansion of Big Tech, and the rise of platform monopolies have all raised deep questions about the nature of corporate power and law’s capacity to constrain it. Some scholars have argued that antitrust enforcement must be reinvigorated in substance and broadened in scope in order to combat rapidly rising economic inequality. Others have argued that antitrust law is ill-equipped to address these broad moral issues and instead must be re-focused on its traditional principles of consumer …

Property Law As History, Michael Allan Wolf

UF Law Faculty Publications

Because property law and history are so inextricably intertwined, it has become even more important for law professors to share with students and colleagues the ways in which knowledge of history unlocks difficult concepts, suggests workable solutions to contemporary puzzles, and makes very dry concepts—destructible contingent remainders, running covenants, privity, and the Rule in Dumpor’s Case—much easier to digest.   Sampling from the doctrinal menu of a typical first-year property course--adverse possession, present estates and future interests, landlord-tenant, concurrent interests, servitudes, land transactions, eminent domain, regulatory takings, and zoning--this article identifies two aspects of the law of property as history, using …

Oregon’S History Of Using The Law To “Stack The Deck” In Favor Of White Males, Janet Steverson

Lewis & Clark Law Review

The United States has a sordid, racist history that permeates society still today. The State of Oregon has its own racist history, systematically excluding persons of Black African ancestry in its early years. This Essay explains this history and how seemingly historical practices continue to provide advantages to some, while detrimentally impacting others. This history is put in context by providing explanations of particular terms and this Essay further explains why examining these historical laws are critical in moving forward.

Creation And The Republican Revival, William M. Treanor

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Gordon Wood's classic book Creation of the American Republic has long influenced legal thought and originalist scholarship in particular. It played a central role in the Republican Revival movement, an effort by leading scholars such as Cass Sunstein and Frank Michelman to recover a progressive originalism at the same time as conservative originalism was starting to shape constitutional jurisprudence. But, while the Republican Revival nominally relied on Wood, it misread central elements of his book - his concept of virtue and his belief that republicanism had largely been displaced at the time of the drafting of the Constitution.

The time …

Five Lessons From Ken Kersch’S Conservatives And The Constitution For The Present Moment, James E. Fleming, Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

Timothy Snyder’s On Tyranny, a New York Times bestseller, has the subtitle, “Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century.” Ken Kersch’s Conservatives and the Constitution: Imagining Constitutional Restoration in the Heyday of American Liberalism (2019) provides at least twenty lessons from the second half of the Twentieth Century about the development of conservative constitutional thought and activism. Although conservatism has changed in many ways since the 1954-1980 period on which Kersch’s book focuses, these lessons are relevant for understanding the present political moment, filled with concerns that the U.S., during the second Trump Administration, is lurching toward tyranny, authoritarianism, and …

Nonparty Protective Relief In The Early Republic: Judicial Power To Annul Letters Patent, James E. Pfander, Mary E. Zakowski

Northwestern University Law Review

Much of the debate over the constitutionality of universal or nonparty protective relief in the federal court system has focused on lessons drawn from historical practice. But with its emphasis on injunctive relief, the literature has largely ignored forms of adjudication that arose outside the courts of equity and led to judgments and decrees affecting the rights of nonparties. As a result, the story of nonparty protective relief has not yet been fully told.

This Article offers a more complete story, highlighting proceedings in which federal courts issued judgments that settled a matter once and for all. Some familiar examples …

Presidents, Opinions, And Independent Officers, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

The Opinions in Writing Clause is a persistent textual problem for the claim that Article II implies an indefeasible removal power: If the Framers believed they had given the president an unconditional removal power, why would they also specify a lesser power merely to ask for opinions? New historical research confirms this textual problem was also contextual: early state constitutions, the Ratification debates, and the First Congress indicate that the Opinions Clause’s original public meaning signaled independence of department heads, or at least the possibility of congressional requirements like good cause.

Legal scholars have already shown that the texts of …

Reckoning With Antisemitism In History And Tradition, Nathaniel Shaw Hay, Isaac Barnes May

Pepperdine Law Review

“History and tradition” has become a watchword of modern constitutional interpretation, shaping Supreme Court jurisprudence and framing ongoing debates over the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. Yet this interpretive framework remains under-theorized in one critical respect: how should it grapple with the prejudices embedded in the very traditions it invokes? This Article examines that question through the lens of anti-Jewish discrimination in Anglo-American law, using this history as a case study to examine both the perils and promise of relying on history as a source of constitutional authority. For centuries, the common law excluded Jews from full civic participation in …

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 …

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 …

The Problem Of Market Power In Postwar America: Antitrust Law, Regulatory Discourse, And Changing Ideas Of Market Power, Laura Phillips-Sawyer

Scholarly Works

US antitrust law prohibits anticompetitive restraints of trade, including collusion among firms and single-firm monopolization. The law serves as a democratic check against concentrations of private economic power. However, in the post-World War II era, the law has changed largely through case law, rather than through statutory interventions. Thus, understanding the role that antitrust law has played in reconciling capitalism and democracy requires us to ask what has influenced changes to antitrust law. This chapter traces antitrust law’s postwar development across three key periods: 1940–1970s, mid-1970s to 2010s, and 2010s to present. It argues that each era’s approach to the …

The Origins Of "The Rule Of Law", Jeremy K. Kessler

Faculty Scholarship

This Article offers a novel account of the origins of “the rule of law” in the English-speaking world. The phrase itself likely entered the language as a literal translation of the Latin regula juris. Prior to the early seventeenth century, however, the phrase appears to have been used exclusively to refer to the specific legal rule or maxim most relevant to the resolution of a particular kind of dispute. The more general and abstract use of the phrase – to refer to an ideal of political morality or an ideal type of governance – first appeared in the public …

But For A Free Press: A Response To Press Freedom Skeptics, Patrick J. Charles, Kevin Francis O'Neill

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article is divided into three Parts. Part I will outline the history-in-law case for why the historical record sufficiently supports recognizing distinct constitutional press freedoms. Part II then provides a history-in-law response to some of the most common arguments made by press freedom skeptics as to why distinct constitutional press freedoms should not be recognized by the courts. Lastly, Part III makes the case for why the recognition of distinct constitutional press freedoms should become a jurisprudential reality and provides a roadmap to accomplish this.

This abstract has been taken from the authors' introduction.

Second Amendment Principles, Jamie G. Mcwilliam

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In United States v. Rahimi, the Supreme Court explained that firearm regulations “must comport with the principles underlying the Second Amendment.” This Article examines what those principles are, how to derive them, and how to apply them in concrete cases. It begins with the Second Amendment’s core principle of defense of self and community, which traces its lineage back to classical thinkers like Aquinas and Grotius. The tradition of firearm regulation that surrounded the adoption of the Second Amendment depended on this fundamental principle. But it also developed subsidiary principles that implement the defense principle in specific ways. This …

Understanding Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization: How The Modern Supreme Court Broke From Tradition And Changed The Original Meaning Of Due Process, Matthew W. Lunder

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

What follows here describes and criticizes the modern liberal and conservative approaches to substantive due process. Part I shows how substantive due process came about in the mid-twentieth century as the union of two extant doctrines: incorporation and fundamental rights. Part II then describes how modern conservatism used the doctrine to arrive at the deeply rooted-in-history-and-tradition test and shows the deliberate reconfiguration of the jurisprudence during the latter twentieth century into the novel patchwork of the modern-conservative method applied in Dobbs. Part III offers a contrast, describing and explaining the traditional due-process analysis of medieval origin and the concept of …

Eye-For-An-Eye: High Compensation Awards Against States As Undue Punishment, David M. Bigge, Jonathan M. White

American University International Law Review

In observing the past several years’ debates regarding reparations under international law, we are reminded of lessons we learned as children in Sunday School. The Jewish and Christian sacred texts address the principle of retributive justice reflected in the Biblical phrase “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” During the early rabbinic period, the great sages grappled with the import of this rule. Jesus famously rejected the rule in favor of mercy: “turn the other cheek.” The rabbis were not as interested in rejecting this rule in its entirety as ensuring that it yielded justice.

A Legal Analysis Of Wisconsin’S Disturbing History Of Unpunished Lynchings, 1848–1910, Steven M. Biskupic

Marquette Law Review

“Wisconsin is getting a reputation for lynching.” So reported the Manitowoc Pilot in 1881, after an enraged mob stormed a courtroom in Pepin County and, in the midst of legal proceedings, brutally lynched Ed Maxwell, who had been charged with killing two law enforcement officers. Between 1848 and 1910, Wisconsin had dozens of similar lynching attempts, undertaken by hundreds of otherwise law-abiding citizens and witnessed by thousands more. Nineteen resulted in violent death. Yet with only one exception, an outlier involving a battered wife, no one was ever criminally punished for engaging in lynchings in Wisconsin. This record is even …

"May It Please Her Honor": The United States' First Women Judges, 1870-1930, Elizabeth D. Katz

UF Law Faculty Publications

Between 1870 and 1930, hundreds of women served as judges in the United States. While a small number compared to the men who served, these pathbreaking officials were particularly visible and influential in women's efforts to secure political rights and advance in the legal profession. Women's progress in obtaining judgeships developed in a regional pattern, with women in the Midwest and West able to secure earlier and broader jurisdiction positions than their counterparts in the Northeast and South. Seeking access to the judiciary, women in conservative states made gendered arguments about women's supposed superiority in overseeing cases involving women, children, …

Transunion, Vermont Agency, And Statutory Damages Under Article Iii, Randy Beck

Scholarly Works

The Supreme Court concluded in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez that a plaintiff may not sue to collect statutory damages under a statute like the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) simply because the defendant violated a right Congress conferred on the plaintiff. Instead, Article III requires the plaintiff to show that the statutory violation resulted in a “concrete” injury with “a ‘close relationship’ to a harm ‘traditionally’ recognized as providing a basis for a lawsuit in American courts.” The TransUnion Court made no effort to explain how its conclusion could be reconciled with Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States …

From The Kkk To The Modern Day: How An Accurate Understanding Of History Can Inform The Proper Standard For Punishing Civil Rights Conspiracies Under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3), Bair Srivastav

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Following the Civil War, Congress passed the Reconstruction Amendments, which secured political rights for newly freed slaves and ushered in a new era for the United States. The Union defeated white Southerners on the battlefield and removed former Confederates from the halls of political power. But white Southerners were still Confederates in spirit. Full of racial hatred, they did not perceive a new era of freedom, but a world twisted into an unnatural order where African Americans walked freely amongst white people and participated in the political process of Southern society. In response to the extension of basic freedoms to …

Should Hate Speech Be Criminalized? Lessons From The Canadian Experience In R V. Zundel And R V. Keegstra, Kenneth Grad

FIU Law Review

There is a global trend toward increased use of criminal law to combat hate speech. In assessing this trend, one should be mindful of the experience of countries that have long had criminal laws targeting harmful expression. Canada is one such country. Using the leading Canadian cases of R v. Zundel and R v. Keegstra, this article argues that the Canadian experience suggests the criminal law is a flawed mechanism for countering harmful expression. This is so for at least three reasons. First, hate-speech prosecutions may undermine the group dignity and sense of inclusion of minority groups. Second, criminal laws …

The Griffin's Case Phenomenon And The Problem Of Historical Knowledge In Legal Arguments, Rachel A. Shelden

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The sudden relevance of a formerly little-known historic case is surely not new; much of legal history is necessarily about discovery and rediscovery of the past. Still, I think the clarity with which we can outline the development of the Griffin’s Case phenomenon offers an opportunity to think carefully about the role of history in constitutional conversation. What follows, then, is a short exploration of the case’s recent (re)entry into our historical consciousness. Tracing this phenomenon highlights (at least for me) some potential difficulties embedded in the interaction between legal advocacy and what we know about the past.

This abstract …

Learning To Read Like An Eighteenth-Century Lawyer: The Historical Critique Of Originalism Revisited, Saul Cornell

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Historians have been among the fiercest critics of originalism. Among the many virtues of Jack Balkin’s book, Memory and Authority, is the deft way he analyzes and dismantles these efforts to insulate originalism from historical critique. In a short essay, it would be impossible to fully acknowledge the sophistication of Balkin’s analysis. Instead, I would like to build on his impressive achievement by pointing out additional problems with the originalist response to historical critique.

This abstract has been taken from the author's opening paragraph.

Shared Memories And Constitutional Foundations, Sanford Levinson

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

It is significant that the first word in the title of Jack Balkin’s new book [Memory and Authority] is “memory.” A repeated theme of the book is that what binds a nation—or a constitutional order—together is shared memories around which diverse individuals can gather together and therefore establish themselves as a community. Balkin refers to an impressive array of sources with regard to the topic of “public memory,” but I want to concentrate on one of them, which is cited but not extensively discussed. That is Ernest Renan’s famous speech, delivered at the Sorbonne in Paris on March …

Reproductive Injustice, Feminist Resistance, And The Uses Of History In Constitutional Interpretation, Serena Mayeri

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I examines the erasure of constitutional memory about reproductive injustice and feminist mobilizations and the benefits of recovering these histories. Part II explores how cases involving women’s subordination provide particularly effective illustrations of the anti-democratic, even absurd, results the current supermajority’s approach to history-and-tradition is designed to produce. Part III concludes with a brief discussion of some sites for the expansion of constitutional memory about reproductive control and freedom.

This abstract has been taken from the author's introduction.

Law And Equity On Appeal, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Faculty Publications

Most lawyers know that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure merged the divergent trial procedures of the common law and of equity, but fewer are familiar with the development of federal appellate procedure. Here too there is a story of the merger of two distinct systems. At common law, a reviewing court examined the record for errors of law after the final trial judgment. In the equity tradition, an appeal was a rehearing of the law and the facts that aimed at achieving justice and did not need to await a final judgment. Unlike the story of federal trial procedure, …

Follow The Bloody Brick Road: Bleeding Kansas And The Emancipation Proclamation, Margaret Hu

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

To help illuminate Balkin’s project of Memory and Authority, this brief Essay considers a slice of American memory from Kansas’ historical archives and other primary sources, and examines its unique role in the Civil War. Specifically, it excavates the influence of Kansas’ leaders as advisors to President Abraham Lincoln. Prior to and during the Civil War, Lincoln relied upon the guidance of senior leaders from Kansas on matters ranging from guarding the White House, war strategies, the recruitment of former enslaved persons to the war effort, and the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation as a part of an effective …

Section Three Of The Fourteenth Amendment: Insurrection, Mark A. Graber

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The public, scholarly, and legal debate over whether former president Donald Trump is eligible to hold office under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment has focused far more on technical legal questions than on whether Trump engaged in an insurrection. Scholarly and public commentary rarely examines the constitutional/ common law of insurrection, preferring instead to examine whether Trump is exempt from Section Three because Section Three either exempts presidents or the presidency from disqualification or because Section Three is not self-executing. Trump v. Anderson (2024) focused on state incapacity to disqualify “oathbreaking insurrectionists” rather than on whether Trump was an …