Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Injury-In-Fact Of Nothing: Why Federal Courts Cannot Certify Classes With Uninjured Members After Labcorp, Jacob Davenport

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Enemies To Lovers: An Unsuspecting Friendship In The Journey To Save The Endangerment Finding, Sophie Ballah

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Jurisprudence Of Humanity, Tyler Rose Clemons

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development

(Excerpt)

It has become common for Supreme Court Justices—the most powerful legal actors in our society—to explain why “the law” requires them to facilitate, or at least tolerate, terrible human suffering. Such claims are wrong, not just morally but legally. More specifically, they expose the decisions of the Roberts Court as a based on a jurisprudence of nihilism, one that justifies human suffering through vague appeals to the rule of law. These appeals, in turn, thinly conceal a substantive political and moral project.

To support this claim, I proceed in five parts. Part I introduces Albert Camus’s account of nihilism …

Nonparty Claim Preclusion, Mark D. Rosen

Texas A&M Law Review

For nearly two centuries, American courts recited that the preclusive effects of a court’s final judgment were subject to a requirement of “mutuality,” meaning that a party in Lawsuit 2 who would not be bound by a judgment from a prior Lawsuit 1 could not benefit in Lawsuit 2 from the first lawsuit’s judgment either. While the Supreme Court eliminated the mutuality requirement for issue preclusion in the 1970s—paving the way for “nonmutual collateral estoppel”—to this date, the Court has not decided if mutuality remains a requirement for claim preclusion. Although many courts today insist there is no such thing …

Popular Constitutionalism In A Populist Age, Thomas G. Donnelly

BYU Law Review

Popular constitutionalism burst onto the scene as a challenge to the constitutional authority of the Supreme Court. Decades later, popular constitutionalists remain susceptible to one of the earliest (and most potent) critiques of their project—the charge that they have done far too little to explain how their theory might work in practice. With the rise of modern populism, it’s also fair to ask whether popular constitutionalism is an approach that’s capable of meeting the challenges of the current constitutional moment. In this Article, I offer a new vision for popular constitutionalism—one that shows how the theory might work in practice, …

Cornerstones And Keystones: Confronting Stealth Attacks On The Regulatory State, Michael Allan Wolf

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article is the first to identify the Roberts Court’s pattern of stealth overruling of several takings precedents by neutralizing or ignoring essential language from prior decisions. The Article explores six examples of this phenomenon and proposes a framework for identifying when a subsequent Court’s critical assessment of key language from a prior decision, whether it technically qualifies as a “holding” or not, necessitates consideration of the stare decisis factors used in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Rather than focusing on the sometimes-arbitrary distinction between holding and dictum, the Article introduces two other indicia of precedential language that …

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 …

The Unitary Executive And The Federal Reserve, Lev Menand

Fordham Law Review

The U.S. Supreme Court may soon embrace an interpretation of the U.S. Constitution that would significantly expand the power of the president over federal administrators and invalidate key provisions in dozens of federal statutes. A critical question is whether this interpretation—known as the unitary executive theory (UET)—would also render unconstitutional central bank independence (CBI), an arrangement where a country’s monetary policy is formulated by a semiautonomous body of experts insulated from partisan political pressure. Several justices have suggested that it would not, and a growing scholarly literature has proposed ways for the Court to distinguish the country’s central banking apparatus …

Chicago, Arbitrary Detention And Torture: An Examination Of Human Rights Violations And Legal Responses Under The Second Trump Administration, Gianna Keuer

Bates College Undergraduate Law Review

This paper uses a human rights-based analysis to explore the legal implications of the second Trump administration’s deportation policies, using frameworks enacted by international legal organizations and state-level bodies. Drawing upon the Convention Against Torture, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and established state policies, the paper identifies important jus cogens norms against arbitrary detention and torture. With Chicago serving as a case study, the paper explores different avenues that have been employed to counter violations of prohibitions of arbitrary detention and torture, ultimately concluding that state-level policy responses and impact litigation cases serve as a more efficacious …

The Paradox Of Equal Protection: Anti-Subordination Rhetoric In Service Of Anti-Classification Ends, Aanya Ghosh

Bates College Undergraduate Law Review

This article examines the evolution of Equal Protection jurisprudence through the competing lenses of anti-classification and anti-subordination. Anti-classification holds that the Constitution prohibits governmental use of racial categories regardless of purpose; anti-subordination holds that the Equal Protection Clause targets the perpetuation of racial hierarchy rather than the mere use of racial categories. Beginning with the foundational ambiguity of Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and tracing the doctrinal trajectory through Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007), and Students for Fair Admissions …

In Defense Of The Ten Commandments In Public Spaces: An Analysis Based On The Supreme Court’S New Judicial Standard, Songfeng Li

Arkansas Law Review

On June 19, 2024, Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry signed legislation mandating the display of the Ten Commandments in all public K-12 schools and colleges in the state. On June 21, 2024, Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick announced his intention to introduce a similar bill in the next legislative session that would require the display of the Ten Commandments in schools. Immediately after the Louisiana law’s enactment, a group of local parents with the help of multiple organizations filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block its implementation. As of today, the district court and appellate court have issued differing rulings. The …

Should Judicial Opinions Be Read Like Statutes?, Margaret H. Lemos

Northwestern University Law Review

Should judicial opinions be interpreted with an eye to their purpose, context, or the intent of their authors, or should interpreters focus on the ordinary meaning of the text? Opinions present the same sorts of interpretive puzzles as other legal texts, and yet they have been omitted from the debates over interpretive methodology that dominate the fields of constitutional and statutory interpretation. The omission is no accident: the Supreme Court has stated repeatedly—and with increasing frequency in recent years—that judicial opinions are not to be read like statutes. Yet neither courts nor commentators have explained why the principles that ground …

The Ex Parte Young Cause Of Action: A Riddle, Wrapped In A Mystery, Inside An Enigma, Andrew S. Oldham, Adam I. Steene, John W. Tienken

Northwestern University Law Review

Ex parte Young ushered in a new era of the American judicial system. Most famously, the decision allowed plaintiffs, in certain circumstances, to sue state officials without having to worry about sovereign immunity. Young’s other holding, though perhaps lesser known, is no less important: individuals, the Supreme Court held, have an equitable cause of action to sue government officials for injunctive relief.

Even today, that second holding remains something of a riddle. Did this cause of action always exist in American law? Or was it an invention of the Young Court? And, at any rate, does the Ex parte …

A Tale Of Two Credits: The Post-Nestlé Alien Tort Statute And Carbon Credit Externalities, Stephanie Mao

Northwestern University Law Review

As companies increasingly embrace carbon-neutrality commitments, many rely on the voluntary carbon market to offset their emissions rather than reduce them directly. Regulatory and consumer scrutiny has focused on the widespread use of “phantom” carbon credits, i.e., credits that fail to produce meaningful climate benefits. But less attention has been paid to what this Note terms “colonial” carbon credits: those that may technically reduce emissions but do so at the expense of communities abroad. These projects may contribute to land dispossession, human rights abuses, and threats to public and environmental health. Yet, current regulatory and legal frameworks, with their focus …

How Many Supreme Court Justices Can Stand On The Point Of A Needle? Originalist Scholarship, Political Neutrality, And Other Constitutional Nonsense, Stephen M. Feldman

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

In the 1935 article, "Transcendental Nonsense and the Functional Approach," Felix Cohen compared formalist legal reasoning, as practiced by traditional legal scholars and Lochner-era Supreme Court justices, to the philosophical musings of scholastic theologians. Unconnected to empirical reality, formalist legal reasoning was as nonsensical as a disquisition on “‘[h]ow many angels can stand on the point of a needle?’” Nowadays, originalist scholars are similarly engaged in nonsense. These scholars defend, refine, and practice originalist methods of constitutional interpretation as if the Supreme Court justices truly decided cases in accordance with the theory. Regardless, the justices—even the avowed originalists—do not consistently …

Rethinking Objectivity: The Problem Of Pretext In The Fourth Amendment, Monu S. Bedi

Indiana Law Journal

Pretextual encounters continue to erode the legitimacy of the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. Simply put, a police officer can act on personal bias or animus as long as the search or seizure is deemed “objectively reasonable.” Numerous scholars (e.g., Bennett Capers, Gabriel Chin, and David Harris) have critiqued this objective standard, contending it perpetuates discriminatory practices, particularly against communities of color. The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg herself suggested that the Court might need to reconsider the legal precedent she helped establish. More recently, Orin Kerr has also argued that the Court’s reliance on objective determinations is inconsistent with …

Does Textualism Constrain Supreme Court Justices?, James J. Brudney, Lawrence Baum

Northwestern University Law Review

A principal justification for textualism is the constraint hypothesis. Conservative Justices and leading textualist scholars contend that—in stark contrast to reliance on legislative history—focus on the ordinary meaning of enacted text leaves little room for the Justices to be policy-oriented or ideological in their interpretations. This Article represents the first systematic study probing the validity of the constraint hypothesis, one that employs both quantitative and qualitative analysis.

The Article examines the Justices’ reliance on interpretive resources in over 660 statutory decisions in the field of labor and employment, decided by the Burger Court, the Rehnquist Court, and the Roberts Court—during …

The Vanishing Enforcer: Consumer Protection In An Era Of Dual Retrenchment, Alisher Juzgenbayev

Northwestern University Law Review

Recent developments, including reductions in the federal workforce, effective suspension of certain enforcement activities, and attempted centralization of independent agency rulemaking in the White House, have significantly weakened administrative agencies. This administrative retrenchment is concerning as private enforcement of a number of consumer protection statutes has been simultaneously curtailed through the Supreme Court’s decisions in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins and TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, which dramatically narrowed plaintiffs’ standing. These decisions rely in part on a vision of strong executive authority, positing that broad private standing conflicts with an Article II framework where a politically accountable President faithfully implements laws …

"In Better Times": The Basis Of Representation And The Forgotten History Of The Fourteenth Amendment, Jessica I. Gorovitz

Fordham Law Review

Over the past several years, the U.S. Supreme Court has incorporated history into the analysis of unenumerated individual rights, like abortion, and enumerated ones, like the right to keep and bear arms. But it has not incorporated history into its approach to individual rights claims of racial discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause, a methodological gap the Court has left unexplained. Rather, it has held that the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment is to prevent racial classifications, largely citing its own precedent, eschewing the Amendment’s history. This approach conflicts with section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires states …

Against The Drafter: An Empirical And Theoretical Analysis Of The Doctrine Of Contra Proferentem, Farshad Ghodoosi, Tal Kastner

Fordham Law Review

Contra proferentem, the enduring maxim that directs courts to interpret an ambiguity in a contract against its drafter, appears simple on its face. Although it might be best known as a fundamental principle of insurance law, contra proferentem figures in courts’ interpretation of a range of contract types. As an interpretive rule of thumb that parties can easily override with a simple contract provision, the doctrine and its boilerplate antidote seem to offer a straightforward means to facilitate private ordering—a central goal of contract law.

However, neither courts’ application of the doctrine in case law nor contract drafters’ treatment …

All The King’S Lawyers, Rebecca Aviel

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Outbound Investment Restrictions And International Law’S Challenge, Harlan Grant Cohen

Seattle University Law Review

The Outbound Investment Rule, restricting U.S. investment in certain Chinese advanced technology sectors, has largely been portrayed as an incremental measure, a modest extension to fill loopholes in the existing investment screening regime. But while perhaps the logical next step in the securitization of the economy, the Outbound Investment Rule actually reflects a momentous shift in the relationship between governments and business, one playing out in the United States and around the world and worth attention. Unlike traditional investment screening, the Outbound Investment Rule operates like a sanctions regime, designed not to protect the U.S. economy, but to hamper the …

Resilient Dispute Resolution Systems For International Energy Conflicts, Guillermo J. Garcia Sanchez

Seattle University Law Review

Energy-related conflicts are on the rise, spanning diverse issues such as the impacts of rare mineral mining on local communities, the impacts of sanctions on energy investments due to the Russia-Ukraine war, and the impacts of expanded subsidies on the electric vehicle and solar panel industries. Increasingly, companies, communities, and governments are clashing over the challenges of pursuing disparate and sometimes competing energy policies. This Article argues that dispute resolution mechanisms in the energy investment sector must be fundamentally rethought. Traditional semi-adjudicatory models, which focus on winners and losers, fail to accommodate the complex and multifaceted nature of contemporary energy …

Restricting Data Flows Is A Sign Of Weakness, Nikolas Guggenberger

Seattle University Law Review

There has been a seismic shift in American attitudes toward the free flow of data across borders.  In less than a decade, the United States has transitioned from condemning barriers to digital trade to constructing a digital fortress of its own. It passed legislation requiring TikTok’s parent company to divest its U.S. operations or face a nationwide ban affecting 170 million U.S. users, citing national security concerns about its ties to China and the potential for data surveillance and content manipulation. Upon legal challenge by TikTok on First Amendment grounds, the Supreme Court affirmed the ban’s constitutionality. Recent federal legislation …

Product Nationality And Corporate Identity, Trang (Mae) Nguyen

Seattle University Law Review

Global supply chains have long depended on a deceptively technical device: the attribution of a “nationality” to goods. A trade law principle, rules of origin assign products an “economic passport” that governs how they are treated at the border, including what markets they may enter and which tariff rates apply. In recent years, however, product nationality has taken on a new and far more ambitious role. As U.S. trade policy increasingly intersects with national security and human rights policy, policymakers rely on nationality-based measures to police supply chain linkages, curb geopolitical issues, and discipline firms for their links to forced …

Global Supply Chain Resilience In Emerging Technologies: A Case Study Of Bitcoin Mining, Kishanthi Parella, Carla L. Reyes

Seattle University Law Review

The United States has put into motion bold plans in critical and emerging technologies to bolster its national and economic security.  For example, the federal government created a national bitcoin strategic reserve and a stockpile of other cryptocurrency; while several states have committed to or are considering similar goals.  However, the security of these reserves is dependent on two types of supply chains within the Bitcoin mining industry: analogue supply chains, relating to the physical components needed for Bitcoin mining, and data supply chains, relating to the complex and layered logistical network of actors that create input into the software …

Volume 49 Masthead

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 49 Masthead

A Comparative Study Of Chinese And American Approaches To Shaping International Outer Space Law And Norms, Ariel G. Silverman

Seattle University Law Review

This article explores convergences and divergencies in the United States and PRC’s responses to the stalemate in the United Nations over the future of outer space resource governance. I do so by systematically analyzing these leading space-faring nations’ policy-positions and tactics deployed to shape norms around three substantive areas of outer space resource governance: rights of ownership and scope of utilization of space resources, mechanization of the “benefits sharing” principle, and the rights and responsibilities of the private sector. I theorize that these leading space-faring nations have adopted divergent approaches due to their differing historical relationships with international law and …

Table Of Contents

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Third-Party Funding: Balancing Transparency, National Security, And Access To Justice, Victoria Shannon Sahani

Seattle University Law Review

Many lawmakers who have recently become aware of the multi-billion-dollar global third-party funding industry are raising new national security concerns that further complicate preexisting, longstanding debates about transparency, disclosure, access to justice, and the best way to regulate third-party funding. In response, this Article briefly asserts three main points relating to the question of how best to regulate third-party funding. First, this Article explains the third-party funding industry, including its global regulatory landscape and how it serves three distinct populations: consumers, businesses, and law firms. Second, this Article explains that third-party funding is one tool that can help expand access …