Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Cross-Talk, The Honorable Raymond J. Lohier, John Q. Barrett, Noa Ben-Asher, Margaret E. Mcguinness, Mark L. Movsesian, Michael A. Perino

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

You know what is interesting? This has been on my mind for a long time as my law clerk, Colin, knows. What you have all described in different ways, maybe with the exception of the religious rights case, but I will get to that, is a Supreme Court that either is, or perceives itself to be, unchecked by Congress and at times unchecked by the President, largely for reasons that we can discuss.

Private Securities Enforcement And The Roberts Court, Michael A. Perino

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Thank you, Judge Lohier, thank you Professor Subotnik, and thank you to everyone who put this scholarship symposium together. I am acutely aware that I am the last panelist, on the last panel, on Friday afternoon, and so, I am going to try my best to keep my comments to the allotted ten minutes.

It is important to keep two key points in mind if we are going to talk about the Roberts Court’s approach to private securities enforcement. First, the Roberts Court contains no securities experts. In fact, except for Lewis F. Powell Jr. and William O. Douglas, …

Some Brief Thoughts On The Ten Commandments In The Schools, Mark L. Movsesian

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Thank you, Judge, and I want to thank Eva for inviting me to participate and all of you for being here this afternoon.

My area of scholarly expertise is the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment. That is what I write about. So far, the Supreme Court has not taken any cases on the Religion Clauses this term, which is a little unusual. The Court has decided several important cases in this area in the last decade or so, and maybe the Court has decided to take a break this term. We will see.

But some important church-and-state issues …

Change And Continuity: Foreign Affairs And Procedure At The Supreme Court 2024–25, Margaret E. Mcguinness

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

The 100th anniversary of the founding of the Law School is a wonderful occasion to discuss how research and teaching form us as professors within the St. John’s community. I teach, research, and write about international law, international human rights, diplomacy, and the ways in which international law becomes law in the United States. I also teach civil procedure and international litigation. These two strands of my work allow me to think about the complex interplay between international law and domestic court procedure. I also have professional experience in each of these areas: First, as a career diplomat for …

From Sidewalks, Streets, And Parks To Social Media: How Should Courts Apply The Public Forum Doctrine In The Digital Age?, Laurel Wanger

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note examines the circuit split over whether government officials’ social media pages constitute public forums and analyzes how the Supreme Court settled the doctrinal uncertainty in Lindke v. Freed. Part I presents context for this issue by explaining the origins of the public forum doctrine, the ways in which government officials use social media as a means of interacting with their constituents, and the circuit split regarding the proper test to be used when deciding these issues. Part II provides an overview of the majority test used by the Second, Fourth, Eighth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits, and …

Packing Our Way To Balance: A Necessary Correction For The Supreme Court, Robert E. Wagner

St. John's Law Review

The Supreme Court is in turmoil. It has the lowest recorded approval rating in its history. Multiple decisions over the past decade made by Justices nominated by a single political party, that the majority of the country viewed as political in nature, have tarnished the reputation of what was once a beacon of justice and impartiality. The Court is increasingly seen as a partisan institution with political actors rather than the fair and honest arbiter America needs it to be. In addition to dramatically unpopular decisions, the Court has suffered increasingly hostile and political machinations in its nominating process. This …

Gilded Executive Privilege: The Unstated Evidentiary Rule In Trump V. United States, Matthew D. Woodham, Ramona C. Albin

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In Trump v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a former President has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts within his core constitutional powers, presumptive immunity for all other official acts, and no immunity for private conduct undertaken while in office. Although the Court granted certiorari to address an immunity question, it then strayed into an evidentiary one in holding certain official acts evidence to be categorically inadmissible in the prosecution of private conduct. This Article interrogates the evidentiary foundation for this lesser-explored aspect of the Trump opinion and the danger …

There's Not Enough Cement And Too Much Air In That Concrete: Addressing The Weakness Of The Supreme Court's Concrete Injury Analysis, Sidney Balaban

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

“Zombie” debt collectors—third-party entities who purchase from creditors and attempt to collect on debts that have passed the statute of limitations periods—have become a particular nuisance and source of distress to the unsuspecting consumer. A serious problem arises in some states, such as Illinois, which allow for the limitations period to restart if the debtor began making payments again or promised to make payments, giving nefarious debt collectors the chance to trick consumers into renewed legal liability—a true zombification. Fortunately, in 1978, Congress passed the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA” or “the Act”) to “eliminate abusive debt collection …

Modern Challenges To Mandatory Immigration Detention: Building Constitutional Walls Around Statutory Expansions, Timothy Zurcher

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Pierre Michel arrived in the United States from Haiti at three years old as a Lawful Permanent Resident (“LPR”). After developing substance abuse issues in his adolescence, Michel received several nonviolent criminal convictions and was detained in contemplation of his deportation. Nearly two years later, Michel was finally released after successfully petitioning for Cancellation of Removal. Michel had no opportunity to obtain his freedom sooner, despite his clear eligibility for relief. Like Michel, in 2003, student Sylvester Owino pled guilty to second-degree robbery without understanding the immigration consequences of his conviction. After serving over two years in prison, Owino …

Wake Up: How Application Of Garcetti To Public Educator Speech Harms Educators And Students Through The Lens Of Florida's Individual Freedom Act, Lindsay Mccarthy

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Nearly twenty of the nation’s states have enacted some kind of law that limits the teaching of controversial topics like race, gender, and politics. Within the last three years, these laws have become more commonplace as social movements like Black Lives Matter and #MeToo have brought topics like systemic racism and gender inequality to the nation’s attention. As the country becomes more polarized, state legislatures—typically conservative ones—have resorted to these censorship laws to fight back against the perceived indoctrination of children. The state that has gained the most notoriety for such laws is Florida. In 2022, Florida passed a …

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

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

John Q. Barrett (“JQB”)

We now enter the exciting segment of the program called cross-talk.

Tyler Rose Clemons (“TRC”)

One of the things that this conversation has brought up for me is whom is the Court overturning precedent on behalf of? What interest? Whose interest is it that the Court is acting to vindicate when it says we got it wrong before, and it is so important that we get it right that we are willing to take this supposedly drastic remedy of overturning our own precedent?

What I was thinking about immediately during Judge Livingston’s remarks was West …

Stare Decisis And The 1l Classroom: Can Legal Reasoning Be Taught Without Judicial Respect For Precedent?, Mark C. Niles

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

I began my career as a law professor in 1998 and, in every year but one, since then I have taught at least one first-year required law school course. I have taught Civil Procedure each of these years and some version of a required Constitutional Law course in about half of them. I want to say just a little bit about stare decisis and its importance in our legal system from the perspective of a law professor teaching first-year students.

I have found that although teaching Civil Procedure involves a focus on a range of substantive issues including judicial …

Stare Decisis And Zombie Laws, Alicia Bannon

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In recent years, the Supreme Court has shown little interest in stare decisis—the principle that courts should honor precedent—as an animating value in constitutional interpretation. This has put many fundamental rights in a vulnerable posture. This Essay focuses on one underappreciated dimension of the decline in respect for stare decisis as it relates to fundamental rights: the relationship between stare decisis and what I will call, and what others have called, “zombie laws.”

Zombie laws are laws that were rendered inoperative by courts but never rescinded; for example, an abortion ban that became unenforceable after Roe v. Wade. …

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

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

“[S]tare decisis is ‘not an inexorable command.’ ” Frankly, every time I read these words in a judicial opinion of late, I shudder. And, in fact, it seems like I am reading these words— and shuddering—with increasing regularity.

First off, of course it is not. At times, the Supreme Court has sanctioned manifest injustices in the law. The prime example is the Court’s 1896 decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, which sustained racial segregation under the Fourteenth Amendment. With the blessing of the judiciary, this interpretation of the Reconstruction Constitution supported a regime of racial segregation until, more than …

On Stealth Overruling, Tyler Rose Clemons

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

From Loper Bright v. Raimondo to Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Roberts Court has shown itself more than willing to overturn longstanding pillars of American jurisprudence explicitly. While such cases and other pathbreaking opinions have understandably garnered the lion’s share of attention, the Court has also demonstrated an increased willingness to tweak, modify, or even functionally overrule doctrines without expressly stating that it is doing so. I call this phenomenon “stealth overruling.”

A Conversation About Stare Decisis, The Honorable Debra Ann Livingston, John Q. Barrett

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

John Q. Barrett (“JQB”)

Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston, welcome back to St. John’s.

The Chief Judge has been a friend to us for many years. It is an honor to host someone of her talent and someone in her position: the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

We’re going to have a conversation for the first part of the program, about judging, her work, and stare decisis.

But first, we need to meet you and hear a little bit about your background—where you are from—and the path that took you to the …

Taking Stock Of Stare Decisis, St. John's Law Review Editorial Board

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This issue of the St. John’s Law Review contains remarks first presented at the Law Review’s Spring 2025 symposium. In A Conversation About Stare Decisis, St. John’s University School of Law Professor John Q. Barrett is in conversation with Hon. Debra Ann Livingston, Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, about what stare decisis means to her and how the doctrine guides her judging. This is then followed by Essays from a diverse group of constitutional law scholars on the state of stare decisis. Finally, in Cross-Talk, the essayists have a …

Power, Responsibility, And Judicial Deference To Police Expertise In Fourth Amendment Decisionmaking, Nicholas A. Kahn-Fogel

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Courts have long deferred to police expertise in Fourth Amendment decisionmaking, most prominently in their application of the reasonable-person standard in assessments of probable cause and reasonable suspicion. Scholars have often bemoaned such deference as an abdication of the judicial obligation to make independent determinations of Fourth Amendment reasonableness. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court of the United States and lower courts are unlikely to abandon their view of police officers as possessing elevated knowledge, skill, experience, and perceptual abilities that merit judicial consideration in the evaluation of Fourth Amendment probabilities. On the other hand, the Court has tended to assume …

Protecting The Anti-Oppression Legacy Of Obergefell After Dobbs, Tracy Turner

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article contributes to the task of revitalizing Justice Kennedy’s analysis after its absence from Dobbs by explaining the inadequacies not only of the Glucksberg substantive due process test, but also of the Court’s interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause. The flaws in equal protection doctrine include the Court’s overly narrow view of which groups are entitled to protection as “suspect classifications” and its failure to address unintentional government support of systemic discrimination. When these gaps in equal protection doctrine are viewed together with the gaps in the Glucksberg test for substantive due process, the need for Justice Kennedy’s …

Post West Virginia V. Epa The Administrative State’S Door Is Still Ajar, Jaclyn Lopez

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

The Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. EPA, which carves out a new rulemaking standard for Congress and federal agencies, may be as significant for its articulation of the Major Questions Doctrine (“MQD”) as it is for its treatment of Article III standing and jurisprudential mootness. This Essay examines lower courts’ subsequent treatment of West Virginia v. EPA to add dimension to the inquiry of whether the new MQD has upended the administrative state or if it is merely another arrow in the quiver for judges that prefer a weaker federal government or nondelegation altogether. It also …

West Virginia V. Epa: Maybe A Big Deal, But Maybe Not, Michael Lewyn

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court held that the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) lacked statutory authority to enact the Clean Power Plan, an EPA rule that encouraged coal-fired power plants to use non-coal sources of energy. The Court’s decision relied on the “major questions doctrine.” Under this doctrine, even if an unclear statute does not directly prohibit an administrative agency’s action, courts will reject an agency’s action when it is “asserting highly consequential power beyond what Congress could reasonably be understood to have granted.” Because the major questions doctrine is itself unclear, a variety of commentators suggested …

A More Modest Major Questions Doctrine Rooted In The Appointments Clause, Yonatan Gelblum

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In this Essay, I explore how this constitutional mandate might guide courts adjudicating disputes that arise when agencies interpret ambiguous statutes in a manner granting them powers beyond those expressly vested by Congress. In Part I, I explain when such agency assertions of authority may implicate Appointments Clause limits on office creation. I also demonstrate how the test of Shoemaker v. United States, which assesses whether expanding an officer’s authority creates a new office for Appointments Clause purposes by adding duties not “germane” to existing duties, provides a standard for judicial review of such claims. Agency claims to …

“Major Questions” Malarkey: An Arbitrary And Capricious New Doctrine For Vetoing Controversial Agency Rules, Lars Noah

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In 2022, after years of hinting at the idea, the United States Supreme Court officially adopted the “major questions” doctrine in West Virginia v. EPA. Commentators have already spilled plenty of ink trying to make sense of what this might portend, but so far seemingly everyone has accepted at face value the Court’s framing of the issue that it confronted in that case. This essay offers a slightly different perspective on the decision and suggests that closer attention to the precise nature of the question posed therein might reveal a distinctive flaw at the heart of the majority’s newfangled …

Climate Change, Democracy, And The Major Questions Doctrine, Joshua Ulan Galperin

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This brief Essay progresses in four parts. I will first argue that climate change is impacting the Court’s decisionmaking. Next, I will show that the significance of climate change as a modern political issue has caused the Court to downplay the statutory arrangement Congress created in the Clean Air Act. Third, I will suggest that the Court is not genuinely failing to appreciate the design of the Clean Air Act. Instead, the Court is aware of that design and feels the design goes beyond a constitutionally acceptable delegation of legislative power. Confronting the Nondelegation Doctrine head-on, however, would force …

Black Hole Of Administrative Law: The Threat Of An Ever-Expanding Major Questions Doctrine To The Judiciary, Fred B. Jacob

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Below, this essay explores how an aggressive major questions doctrine could extend its reach to judicial interpretation and the implications of doing so. Indeed, had the Court applied the major questions doctrine to its own judicial holdings in seminal cases such as Bostock v. Clayton County or Allen v. Milligan, it would have flunked. This is also true for West Virginia’s creation of the doctrine itself, which claimed newfound authority to transform administrative law despite Congress’s significant legislative attention to agency rulemaking.

Expansion of the major questions doctrine to cases arising in the courts’ original jurisdiction would …

Examining Patent Eligibility, Charles Duan

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

A firestorm of debate has surrounded the Supreme Court of the United States’s 2014 decision Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International on the doctrine of patentable subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. As the Court’s leading articulation of doctrine, which generally excludes from patenting abstract ideas, laws of nature, and natural phenomena, Alice has been criticized as unpredictably vague and overly constrictive of patentability, with the effect of “decimating” patents, innovation, technological investment, and even the United States’ competitiveness against other nations. To support these criticisms and calls for reform, scholars and practitioners have frequently …

Fee Shifting, Nominal Damages, And The Public Interest, Maureen Carroll

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Half a century ago, Joseph Davis Farrar sued six defendants for seventeen million dollars. Farrar had owned and operated a school for troubled teens, and after one of the students died, the State of Texas obtained a temporary injunction that closed the school. Farrar alleged that the defendants—including William P. Hobby, Jr., the lieutenant governor of Texas—had violated his civil rights in connection with the closure. After ten years of litigation, a jury ruled in favor of five of the six defendants, but it “found that Hobby had ‘committed an act or acts under color of state law that …

Education And Democracy From Brown To Plyler, Nicholas Espíritu

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Judicial review has often been cast in terms of democratic legitimacy. Democratic legitimacy is often linked to whether it institutes the will of the people through majoritarian rule and whether it creates processes for reevaluation of these prior decisions by newly constituted majorities. Judicial review of majoritarian decisions has often been criticized as a overriding or circumventing of these democratic processes. Beginning with Brown v. Board of Education, the Warren Court adopted a resolution of the “counter-majoritarian difficulty” of judicial review by tacitly accepting Justice Stone’s formulation from footnote four of United States v. Carolene Products and engaging …

Opening Remarks, Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Thank you. I am honored to be here. And there is no more fitting way to honor Michael than around the 40th anniversary of Plyler v. Doe.

This case centered on Texas statute § 21.031, which on its face, permitted the local school districts to exclude noncitizen children who entered the United States without immigration status or to charge admission for the same. The questions before the Court were: (1) whether a noncitizen under the statute who is present in the state without legal status is a “person” and therefore in the jurisdiction of the state within the meaning …

“You Don’T Bring Me Flowers Anymore”: President Clinton, Paula Jones, And Why Courts Should Expand The Definition Of “Adverse Employment Action” Under Title Vii’S Anti-Retaliation Provision, Lawrence Rosenthal

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Anti-discrimination statutes such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) prohibit discrimination based on individuals’ protected characteristics. In addition to prohibiting this type of status-based discrimination, these statutes also prohibit employers from retaliating against employees who assert their rights under the statutes or who assist others in asserting their rights.

Over the past several years, retaliation charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) have made up an increasingly high percentage of all charges filed with the agency. Specifically, …