Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Certiorari Transparency, Alexandra L. Klein, Michael L. Smith

Scholarly Articles

Amid increasing controversy over the Supreme Court’s amassing of power, rejection of precedent, reliance on the shadow docket, and Justices’ undisclosed acceptance of lavish gifts, legal scholars, commentators, and politicians have called for bold and far-reaching reforms to the Court, including term limits for Justices, stripping the Court of jurisdiction in certain cases, and adding Justices to the Court. This Article proposes a more subtle reform to the Court’s proceedings: the Court should make its certiorari de-terminations, in which it decides which cases to take up and review, public. Currently, the Court exercises near-complete discretion over the cases it decides …

The People, The Branches, And The Pearl Of Independence, Brian C. Murchison

Scholarly Articles

What will be the fate of the independent agencies?  Since 1887, Congress has seen fit to address an array of contemporary issues by creating expert federal agencies, such as the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, and others.  The principal officers of these agencies are appointed by the President on advice and consent of the Senate, serve limited staggered terms, are bipartisan in the sense that only a bare majority of the agency’s officers can be members of the same political party, and are “independent” in the sense that the officers are removable only …

The Unmaking Of Section Two, Maureen Edobor

Scholarly Articles

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act now stands at a paradoxical crossroads. Though it remains the statute’s central protection against racial vote dilution after Shelby County v. Holder, it is increasingly undermined by a constitutional framework that treats race-conscious remedies as suspect rather than necessary under Section 2. This Essay argues that Section 2 is being quietly unmade—not through direct invalidation, but through the convergence of Equal Protection Doctrine, racial-gerrymandering jurisprudence, and an ascendant commitment to colorblind constitutionalism. Tracing the Fifteenth Amendment’s original design and Congress’s expansive enforcement authority, the Essay situates Section 2 within a constitutional tradition …

Qui Tam Relators As Article Iv Officials, Chad Squitieri

Scholarly Articles

Since the earliest days of the republic, Congress has empowered private plaintiffs—called qui tam relators—to bring claims in court on behalf of the United States. Today, qui tam litigation accounts for billions of dollars in judgments and settlements each year. But despite qui tam’s modern significance and historical pedigree, its constitutionality has recently been questioned. To wit, several sitting Supreme Court Justices have suggested that qui tam violates the President’s Article II authority because it empowers private relators—who are neither appointed nor supervised by the President—to enforce federal law. Following similar logic, a lower federal court recently ruled a prominent …

Brief Of Civil Procedure Professors Suzette Malveaux, Alan Trammell, Alexi Pfeffer-Gillett, And Doug Rendleman As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents: Trump V. Casa, Trump V. Washington & Trump V. New Jersey, Suzette M. Malveaux, Alan Trammell, Alexi Pfeffer-Gillett, Doug Rendleman

Scholarly Articles

Nationwide injunctions are constitutional. Their core feature—courts’ power to render decisions that directly benefit nonparties—is consistent with traditional equitable practices. Accordingly, the Article III “judicial power” comprehends such remedies. Nationwide injunctions also comport with Article III’s case-or-controversy requirement, including constitutional standing.

Broad remedies are sometimes necessary, especially when government actors willfully disregard people’s rights, and the usual tools of aggregate litigation (such as class actions) are not practically available to vindicate those rights. Moreover, courts can readily navigate prudential concerns about nationwide injunctions, from fears of judge shopping to prematurely freezing the law. Courts remain attuned to these concerns, and …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Scholars For The Advancement Of Children’S Constitutional Rights And Students Engaged In Advancing Texas In Support Of Respondents: Mahmoud V. Taylor, Catherine E. Smith, Tanya Washington, Jeremiah Chin, Sarah Medina Camiscoli, Travis F. Chance

Scholarly Articles

Amici are members of Students Engaged in Advancing Texas and United States legal scholars of children and the law, education law, family law, and anti-discrimination law.

Students Engaged in Advancing Texas is a nonprofit organization founded by young people to develop civic leadership and belonging and represents students of various faiths and identities who have an interest in the outcome of this case.

Amici draw this Court’s attention to the constitutional harms that public school students and LGBTQ+ students and students with LGBTQ+ parents would bear should the Court grant Petitioners’ injunctive relief.

Dobbs And The New Doctrine Of Stare Decisis, Russell A. Miller

Scholarly Articles

Alongside the historic and troubling annulment of the half-century-old Substantive Due Process right to abortion, Dobbs produced another significant outcome. To get its substantive constitutional law result, the Court’s majority also had to reconceive—and significantly weaken—the doctrine of stare decisis. This was necessary because, following Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, the constitutional right to abortion largely depended on respect for precedent as the basis for its survival. To overturn Roe, the Dobbs majority had to blast through the established practice of precedent and articulate a new doctrine of stare decisis. It seems that precedent was meant to …

Title 18’S Property Conundrum, Karen E. Woody, Joshua L. Clardy

Scholarly Articles

“Property,” in legal terms, carries significant weight. Once an object is heralded as “property,” that object becomes a step closer to being afforded the protections of the Constitution, offered equitable remedies at a court’s disposal, or even subjected to taxation by the state or federal government. Defining an object as “property” also puts it within the reach of the Title 18 property fraud statutes. Title 18’s fraud statutes have been often lauded by federal prosecutors for their “extraordinary utility.” In their current iteration, these statutes criminalize schemes to defraud “money,” “property,” and “the intangible right of honest services.” But what …

Kennedy V. Louisiana And The Future Of The Eighth Amendment, Alexandra L. Klein

Scholarly Articles

In 2023, Florida passed a law permitting the imposition of the death penalty for the rape of a child under twelve. Tennessee enacted a similar law in 2024. These laws conflict with Kennedy v. Louisiana, a 2008 decision in which the Supreme Court held that imposing the death penalty for the rape of a child violated the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause because it was inconsistent with the evolving standards of decency. Legislators in Florida and Tennessee have expressed their hope that the Supreme Court will overrule Kennedy v. Louisiana. These laws, which resemble state attempts …

The Supreme Court During Covid-19: Keeping Its Head When Those About It Were Losing Theirs, Timothy C. Macdonnell

Scholarly Articles

Alexander Hamilton's Federalist No. 78 suggests that one of the reasons for a life-tenured judiciary whose pay cannot be altered is because "judges may be an essential safeguard against the effects of occasional ill humours in the society." Our Nation's history is replete with instances of ill humor leading to violations of constitutional rights. Wars, epidemics, natural disasters, civil unrest, and economic crises all demand governments to act and act swiftly. But courts, and particularly the United States Supreme Court, are necessary to check governments when they go too far in contending with an emergency.

Historically the country's courts have …

The Inconvenience Doctrine, Alexi Pfeffer-Gillett

Scholarly Articles

In a nation of stark inequalities, the Roberts Court is often portrayed as siding with the wealthy and powerful. Many scholars argue that the Court has abandoned legal principles altogether and instead simply chooses winners and losers based on the conservative majority’s political agenda. Meanwhile, scholarly examinations of the legal reasoning underlying the Court’s most impactful decisions are largely confined to specific subject areas. Such compartmentalized analyses, though, overlook broader patterns in the Court’s rulings that transcend substantive legal boundaries.

This Article bridges the gap in these parallel conversations by connecting the Roberts Court’s reasoning across many legal fields with …

Answered By Text, Jennifer L. Mascott, Eli Nachmany

Scholarly Articles

This Essay takes stock of a pivotal moment at the Court: statutory interpretation at center stage in administrative law. The U.S. Supreme Court’s most recent Term saw numerous landscape-shifting administrative law decisions. The most widely discussed was the Court’s elimination of 40-year-old Chevron deference in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. The Court’s decisions also effected significant change in the scope of Seventh Amendment jury trial rights and the length of time that individuals, businesses, and associations have to challenge agency actions. But taken together, the Court’s decisions did not radically restructure the administrative state on constitutional grounds. Despite the substantial …

A More Luminous Beacon, William M.M. Kamin

Scholarly Articles

Over the Supreme Court’s past four Terms, federal post conviction habeas corpus has been placed on the chopping-block. Its fate hangs in the balance of an historical debate over the maxim, oft recited by the Court between 1830–1953, that post conviction habeas reaches only “jurisdictional defects” — as opposed to “mere error” — on the part of the convicting court. Justices Gorsuch and Thomas maintain that “jurisdiction” carried then the same narrow meaning it does now: power ab initio over the offense charged and the defendant’s person. Justices Kagan and Jackson contend that, in this context, “jurisdictional defect” was understood …

Race Without Racism: Religious School Curricula And The Race-Neutral Legacy Of Brown, Vania Blaiklock

Scholarly Articles

Current conversations about race and equity curricula in primary and secondary education exclude examining religious curricula because of their private classification. Yet, this omission prevents us from exploring how religious curricula might mirror the legal transformation of Brown’s racial equality legacy to constitutional race neutrality. This Article brings religious curricula into these conversations by specifically linking the Court’s race-neutral transformation of Brown to the way religious curricula frame discussions about race without racism. Throughout the Article, I argue that the Court’s transformation of Brown is not just a top-down legal framework but also a bottom-up educational ideology. By making …

What Roosevelt Did To Brown V. Board Of Education, Or Race And Court Packing, Jill M. Fraley

Scholarly Articles

Roughly one-third of American schools remain segregated. Scholars have offered a variety of explanations, mostly social and cultural, but sometimes legal, for why desegregation did not proceed effectively after Brown v. Board of Education. This Article articulates a less expected and previously undocumented cause: President Roosevelt's prior attempt at court packing slowed--even derailed--desegregation.

The story of what Roosevelt's court packing did to make the work of integration harder is a cautionary tale, particularly for those who want to alter the U.S. Supreme Court now in furtherance of a modern cause. The only reasonable route for reforming the Supreme Court must …

The Purpose And Practice Of Precedent: What The Decade Long Debate Over Stare Decisis Teaches Us About The New Roberts Court, Russell A. Miller

Scholarly Articles

The Supreme Court’s tectonic decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health upended the Doctrine of Substantive Due Process by radically reinterpreting the doctrine of stare decisis. The Court’s established practice regarding stare decisis should have operated to preserve the fifty-year-old abortion jurisprudence. But we should have seen this change coming. Although there has been an intense and involved debate over the purpose and practice of precedent for generations, that debate shifted at the beginning of 2018. Four approaches to stare decisis emerged along a continuum, from complete abandonment of the doctrine and incremental erosion to modernized adherence to precedent. This …

Brnovich: Extratextual Textualism, Maureen A. Edobor

Scholarly Articles

This Article provides a comprehensive analysis of Brnovich v. Democratic National Convention, which purports to create a new standard for Section 2 claims under the Voting Rights Act, by situating the critique in the ratifying-era history and original intentions of the VRA’s constitutional counterpart, the Fifteenth Amendment. Brnovich is necessarily examined through a historical and political framework, identifying throughlines from the Reconstruction Era original intentions for the Fifteenth Amendment, distilled from Congressional debates, the VRA’s initially expansive Supreme Court interpretation in South Carolina v. Katzenbach, and Congress’ Section 2 amendments in 1982, rebuking the Court’s attempts to erode the legal …

Amicus Brief Of Children’S Rights Legal Scholars And Advocates As Amici Curiae In Support Of Neither Party: Trump V. Anderson, Catherine Smith, Jeremiah Chin, Philip L. Gregory, Mathew W. Dos Santos, Julia A. Olson

Scholarly Articles

Amici write, not to urge a particular merits outcome to the questions presented, but to advocate for a judicial review process that (1) is true to constitutional text and this Court’s precedent, (2) accounts for non-voting children and future generations who fall within the protections of the counter-majoritarian provisions of the Constitution, and (3) embraces the perpetuity principle over the political question doctrine.

"Appropriate" Appropriations Challenges After Community Financial, Chad Squitieri

Scholarly Articles

The standard federal agency must come to Congress each year, hat in hand, and request another round of congressional funding. This annual appropriations process ensures that Congress maintains at least some influence over the vast array of rules and regulations that govern Americans' daily lives. Sure, Congress might have delegated broad authority to administrative agencies to develop national policy on Congress's behalf. But an agency reliant on annual appropriations is an agency with the financial incentive to exercise its delegated authority with an eye toward pleasing congressional appropriators. The annual appropriations process is therefore a sensible (even if insufficient) step …

Thoughts On Law Clerk Diversity And Influence, Todd C. Peppers

Scholarly Articles

It is my great good fortune to have been asked to comment on the remarkable Article Law Clerk Selection and Diversity: Insights from Fifty Sitting Judges of the Federal Courts of Appeals by Judge Jeremy D. Fogel, Professor Mary S. Hoopes, and Justice Goodwin Liu. Drawing on a rich vein of data gathered pursuant to a carefully crafted research design and extensive interviews, the authors provide the most detailed account to date regarding the selection criteria used by federal appeals court judges to select their law clerks. The authors pay special attention to the role that diversity plays in picking …

Traditionalism Rising, Marc O. Degirolami

Scholarly Articles

Constitutional traditionalism is rising. From due process to free speech, religious liberty, the right to keep and bear arms, and more, the Court made clear in its 2021 term that it will follow a method that is guided by “tradition.”

This paper is in part an exercise in naming: the Court’s 2021 body of work is, in fact, thoroughly traditionalist. It is therefore a propitious moment to explain just what traditionalism entails. After summarizing the basic features of traditionalism in some of my prior work and identifying them in the Court’s 2021 term decisions, this paper situates these recent examples …

Brief Of Law And Business Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents: Macquarie Infrastructure Group V. Moab Partners, L.P., Sarah C. Haan

Scholarly Articles

Amici are scholars at American law schools whose research and teaching focus on federal securities regulation and the governance of public corporations. Three of the authors appearing as counsel on this brief have together submitted to this Court briefs on prior occasions as amici in cases arising under the federal securities laws on behalf of law and business faculty.2 All of us have written and/or taught extensively about the SEC’s system of disclosure and our experience includes service in positions that allowed for the participation in the evolution of the system of disclosure developed by the Securities and Exchange Commission. …

The October 2021 Term And The Challenge To Progressive Constitutional Theory, J. Joel Alicea

Scholarly Articles

This Essay examines the ways in which the Supreme Court's October 2021 Term challenges core theoretical commitments of progressive constitutional theory. Progressive constitutional theory originated in the progressive political theory of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Accordingly, progressive constitutional theory shares progressive political theory's commitments to two propositions: rationalism and individualism. These commitments lead to an understanding of history as moving in a particular direction--one that is generally in line with progressive ideology. The originalist and traditionalist approaches of the Court's October 2021 decisions call into question the progressive confidence in the direction of history while simultaneously rejecting …

The Chief Justice And The Page: Earl Warren, Charles Bush, And The Promise Of Brown V. Board Of Education, Todd C. Peppers

Scholarly Articles

In October Term 1954, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding the implementation of the Brown decision. The resulting opinion is commonly referred to as “Brown II.” In his unanimous opinion, Chief Justice Earl Warren ordered local school districts to desegregate their schools “with all deliberate speed.” Supporters of immediate integration were dismayed by the vague language, which ultimately allowed southern states to use a variety of tactics to deliberately evade and resist the Court’s mandate that public schools be desegregated.

What has been forgotten in the discussion of Brown II and the “all deliberate speed” standard is that …

We Shouldn't Need Roe, Carliss Chatman

Scholarly Articles

In the face of state-by-state attacks on the right to choose, which result in regular challenges to Roe v. Wade in the U.S. Supreme Court, this essay asks whether Roe is needed at all. Decades of state law encroachments have caused Roe to fail to properly protect the right to choose. Building on prior works that challenge the premise of fetal personhood and highlighting the status of Roe-based rights after decades of challenges, this essay proposes an alternative solution to Roe. Federal legislative and executive efforts, including the Women’s Health Protection Act, are necessary to ensure the right …

Gertrude Jenkins, Unplugged, Todd C. Peppers

Scholarly Articles

Gertrude Jenkins worked for U.S. Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone until his death in 1946. Adept at multi-tasking, she also ran a boarding house to make more money. A position as a floating secretary was created for Jenkins at the Court, and she worked in other chambers as well as the Court library until October 1949, when she accepted a position in Justice Frankfurter’s chambers. Jenkins retired in August 1953.

Gertrude Jenkins’s letters neither shed light on the grand constitutional issues of her day nor provide insights into the justices’ jurisprudential views. They will not cause historians to radically reevaluate …

Arthur A. Thomas: A Hero Of A Valet, Todd C. Peppers

Scholarly Articles

During his time on the Supreme Court, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. was the beneficiary of adulation from his legal secretaries (today we refer to them as law clerks) and young legal scholars, like Felix Frankfurter and Harold Laski. While the Justice basked in the warm glow of their hero worship, he was quick to point out to them that “no man is a hero to his valet.” The phrase was not original to Holmes, although the expression sounds like it sprang from his clever mind. The underlying meaning is simple—the servant tending daily to his employer sees flaws and …

On Lenity: What Justice Gorsuch Didn’T Say, Brandon Hasbrouck

Scholarly Articles

This Essay was first published online at 108 Va. L. Rev. Online 239 (2022).

Facially neutral doctrines create racially disparate outcomes. Increasingly, legal academia and mainstream commentators recognize that this is by design. The rise of this colorblind racism in Supreme Court jurisprudence parallels the rise of the War on Drugs as a political response to the Civil Rights Movement. But, to date, no member of the Supreme Court has acknowledged the reality of this majestic inequality of the law. Instead, the Court itself has been complicit in upholding facially neutral doctrines when confronted with the racial disparities they create. …

Major Problems With Major Questions, Chad Squitieri

Scholarly Articles

This July in West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court formally recognized the “major questions doctrine.” That doctrine, which can be traced to a 1986 law review article published by then-Judge Stephen Breyer, calls on courts to consider a legal question’s “political importance” when interpreting statutes.

The major questions doctrine is a product of legal pragmatism—a theory of statutory interpretation advanced by Justice Breyer which often elevates statutory purpose and consequences over text. The doctrine is inconsistent with textualism—an interpretive theory that emphasizes statutory text, structure, and history to understand a statute as the public originally understood it. The takeaway …

Brief Of Black Women Law Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Students For Fair Admissions, Inc. V. President And Fellows Of Harvard College And Univ. Of N.C., Suzette Malveaux

Scholarly Articles

Amici are Black women law scholars who, based on their professional and personal experiences, share a deeply rooted commitment to defending the legality of race-conscious admissions policies in educational institutions across the country. They submit this brief to present their unique and vital perspective on the history, constitutionality, and importance of race-conscious programs like those adopted by Harvard University and the University of North Carolina (“UNC”).