Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Agency Deference After Loper: Expertise As A Casualty Of A War Against The “Administrative State”, Michael M. Epstein

Brooklyn Law Review

Chevron deference has been a foundational principle for administrative law for decades. Chevron provided a two-step analysis for determining whether an agency would be given deference in its decision-making. This deferential test finds its legitimacy on the grounds of agency expertise and accountability. However, when the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in Loper Bright Enterprise v. Raimondo, it positioned itself to potentially overrule or severely limit Chevron. An overruling of Chevron would place judicial deference to administrative agency decisions in peril by allowing courts to substitute their own views over the informed opinions of agency experts. This …

Clarett, Moultrie, And Applying The Nonstatutory Labor Exemption To Professional Sports’ Draft Eligibility Rules, Mathew Santoyo

Brooklyn Law Review

Collective bargaining is the mechanism by which major sports leagues and their players unions have negotiated the terms and conditions of employment for many decades. One standard provision of these collective bargaining agreements is a draft eligibility rule governing the conditions by which prospective athletes are eligible for the league’s entry draft. These collective bargaining agreements exists at the intersection of two somewhat discordant areas of law: antitrust and labor law. Under antitrust law, Congress enacted a policy favoring competition and prohibiting unreasonable restraints on trade. On the other hand, under labor law, Congress enacted a policy favoring collective bargaining. …

When Life Takes Your Lemons: Resolving The Legislative Prayer Debate In School Board Settings In Light Of Kennedy V. Bremerton School District, Jordan Halper

Brooklyn Law Review

The COVID-19 pandemic fanned the flames of a fire that had been slowly but steadily burning since 2016, arming the loudest warriors of America’s endless culture war with a slew of new divisive issues. Virtually overnight, parental rights groups began capitalizing on the frustration in their communities in order to spur political change, training their ire toward public schools. What began as a crusade against mask mandates and vaccines manifested into a well-funded effort by ultraconservative groups to undermine the public education system as a whole. Against this backdrop, the legislative prayer exception—which was meant to sanction the practice of …

The Major Questions Doctrine’S Domain, Todd Phillips, Beau J. Baumann

Brooklyn Law Review

In West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court elevated the major questions doctrine to new heights by reframing it as a substantive canon and clear statement rule rooted in the separation of powers. The academic response has missed two unanswered questions that will determine the extent of the doctrine’s domain. First, how will the Court apply the doctrine to a range of different regulatory schemes? The doctrine has so far only been applied to nationwide legislative rules that are both (1) economically or politically significant and (2) transformative. It is unclear whether the doctrine applies to alternative modes of regulation …

Haaland V. Brackeen—A Window Into Presenting Tribal Cases To The Court, Ian Heath Gershengorn

Connecticut Law Review

In this Essay, as I did at the Connecticut Law Review’s Symposium, I draw on my experience representing Tribes in Haaland v. Brackeen to discuss more broadly the effective presentation of tribal arguments to the Court. I touch briefly on four main topics. First, I discuss how we collaborated with amici to ensure that the Court would have the full context as it considered the issues in Brackeen. Second, I discuss how we thought about preparing for the argument and the particular importance of understanding the practical operation of the Indian Child Welfare Act. Third, I offer a few observations …

The Original Meaning Of Commerce In The Indian Commerce Clause, Gregory Ablavsky

Connecticut Law Review

In Haaland v. Brackeen, the Supreme Court returned to the foundational question of federal authority over relations between the United States and Native nations, long known as “Indian affairs.” The decision reaffirmed well-established precedent affirming broad federal authority in the area, but it also underscored ongoing disagreement, as Justices Gorsuch and Thomas offered lengthy and dueling investigations of the original understanding.

This Essay explores one aspect of that history: the original meaning of “commerce” in the Indian Commerce Clause. Nearly a decade ago, I wrote an article that sought, as its title indicated, to move “beyond the Indian Commerce Clause.” …

Waiting For Mahanoy: Examining The Still-Unsettled Jurisprudence Of Online Student Speech, Emily Erickson, Matthew D. Bunker

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article first explores the constitutional background of student speech rights, beginning with the Tinker decision and continuing through early court attempts to analyze online, off-campus cases. Next, it examines Mahanoy itself, unpacking the frustratingly murky majority opinion written by Justice Stephen Breyer. The Article then breaks new ground by exploring court decisions in the years since Mahanoy, as jurists continue trying to identify First Amendment boundaries in student speech cases involving bullying, threats, and otherwise offensive speech. A concluding section synthesizes the state of the law and offers perspectives on this vital area of constitutional concern.

This abstract …

An Analysis Of A Changing Supreme Court Viewed Through Students For Fair Admissions V. President And Fellows Of Harvard College, Reed Fagg

Finance Undergraduate Honors Theses

An analysis of the Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Admissions v. the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill to better understand the changes in the Supreme Court. Breaking down of the argument and a study of societal impacts.

From Poll Tests To The Purcell Doctrine: Merrill V. Milligan And The Precarious Preservation Of Voting Rights, Charis Franklin

Fordham Law Review

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 (“the Voting Rights Act”) is one of the primary vehicles by which plaintiffs receive injunctive relief ahead of elections. More specifically, § 2 of the Voting Rights Act allows plaintiffs to challenge gerrymandered maps before they are used in contentious elections. However, Justice Kavanaugh’s reframing of the Purcell doctrine in Merrill v. Milligan weakened § 2’s ability to interrupt the use of these maps. This Note discusses how Justice Kavanaugh’s interpretation of the Purcell doctrine recenters the doctrine on bureaucratic inconvenience rather than voter enfranchisement, restricting voters’ access to relief prior to elections. Furthermore, …

303 Creative Llc, Public Accommodations Law, And The Many Possible Futures Of Rights, Jacob Eisler

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The unifying theme of the contributions to this Collection of Essays on 303 Creative LLC, which emerged from a panel held at the 2024 American Association of Law Schools meeting, is that while 303 Creative LLC may have brought these themes forward, their full expositions lie in the hands of Supreme Court jurisprudence that is yet to come...

In exploring these possibilities, this Collection seeks to anticipate what might come next for both the First Amendment and public accommodations law.

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

The Limits Of Lochnerism, Lucien Ferguson

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Lochnerism thesis is among the most influential constitutional theories to emerge in recent years. It argues that the judiciary increasingly protects private business from public regulation by enshrining and expanding liberty of contract rights under the First Amendment. Using 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis as a case study, this Essay explores the limits of Lochnerism as a theoretical framework. It argues that, while productively illuminating the judiciary’s attack on the administrative state and democratic processes, the theory may also displace concerns over the concrete harms experienced by vulnerable communities. To bring these harms back into view, this Essay suggests …

Standpoint Epistemology, The First Amendment, And University Affirmative Action, Paul Gowder

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Egalitarian legal scholars understandably might have been troubled by the end of June 2023, when, on two successive days, the Supreme Court appeared to put an end to public as well as to private university affirmative action on a theory of race discrimination in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, then appeared to put an end to the application of anti-discrimination law to any private enterprise that could be characterized as “expressive” in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis. Yet the June 30 case, I shall contend, has the potential to undermine the negative impact of the June 29 …

Blunt Speech Rights, Nicholas Almendares

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

There is a lot to be said about the Supreme Court’s decision in 303 Creative LLC. In the wake of the decision there will be a range of commentaries like those presented in this Issue. I want to draw attention to a particular aspect of the opinion, part of a broader trend in the Court’s First Amendment jurisprudence, towards blunt, sweeping rules. By a blunt rule, I mean a simple, coarse one that lacks nuance or distinctions. Blunt rules, by their nature, tend to be sweeping: nuance, that is, distinguishing cases based on various factors, limits the scope of …

First Amendment Defenses To Alien Transportation Crimes, Charquia Wright

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Florida law now prohibits the transportation of undocumented aliens into the state. Briefings characterize these laws as unconstitutionally preempting federal immigration law and federal due process rights. Despite this emphasis on due process, field, and conflict preemption unconstitutionality, few have addressed the First Amendment implications of human smuggling prosecutions of natural and some corporate persons. The Supreme Court’s Free Exercise precedent protects the religious freedoms of natural persons and some corporations. Under state alien transportation laws, these freedoms cease to exist. Because the Supreme Court has extended these religious protections to some corporations, they too are entitled to First Amendment …

Immoderate Moderation: Chief Justice Roberts's Concurrence In Dobbs, Thomas J. Molony

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Chief Justice John Roberts attempted to chart a middle way in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. But there are times when you must choose a side. This was one of them.

The Chief Justice has been a consistent proponent of judicial restraint since he joined the United States Supreme Court in 2005. For him, one of the key characteristics of restraint is deciding no more than necessary to resolve a case. In Dobbs, he insisted that the Court did not need to overrule Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in full to uphold Mississippi’s fifteen-week …

The Anti-Innovation Supreme Court: Major Questions, Delegation, Chevron And More, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court of the United States has generally been a very aggressive enforcer of legal limitations on governmental power. In various periods in its history, the Court has gone far beyond enforcing clearly expressed and easily ascertainable constitutional and statutory provisions and has suppressed innovation by the other branches that do not necessarily transgress widely held social norms. Novel assertions of legislative power, novel interpretations of federal statutes, statutes that are in tension with well-established common law rules and state laws adopted by only a few states are suspect simply because they are novel or rub up against tradition. …

The Consequences Of Homophobia: Analysis Of Discriminatory Medical And Legislative Policies And Their Influence On Health Disparities, Kaiden J. Fandel

Honors Thesis

Are there specific roots that influence the introduction and incorporation of discriminatory medical policies? What are the sources of such stigma, discrimination, and prejudice, in what forms does such discrimination take place, and what negative impacts does such hatred have on health outcomes, quality of care, and health disparities? Through a review of existing literature on this topic, intertwining the examination of the evolution of discriminatory policies and other explanatory literature in the United States, this thesis aims to answer the questions above, and explain the roots of such homophobic discrimination and its prevalence in the United States. Through the …

The Anti-Innovation Supreme Court: Major Questions, Delegation, Chevron, And More, Jack M. Beermann

William & Mary Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States has generally been a very aggressive enforcer of legal limitations on governmental power. In various periods in its history, the Court has gone far beyond enforcing clearly expressed and easily ascertainable constitutional and statutory provisions and has suppressed innovation by the other branches that do not necessarily transgress widely held social norms. Novel assertions of legislative power, novel interpretations of federal statutes, statutes that are in tension with well-established common law rules, and state laws adopted by only a few states are suspect simply because they are novel or rub up against tradition. …

American Handling Of Holocaust Property Takings: What We Can Learn From International Policies, Matthew Franks

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

The Supreme Court decision in Federal Republic of Germany v. Philipp and US enforcement of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act have made it extremely difficult for Holocaust survivors and their families to recover lost and stolen property from during the World War II era. Other countries, such as the United Kingdom, France, and Germany, have had great success in this arena through various methods. This Note explores the ways in which US jurisprudence continues to make recovery inaccessible, while highlighting the specific processes these few European countries have created to foster recovery. Finally, this Note argues that the US must …

Amending The Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act To Promote Accountability For Violations Of Peremptory Norms Of International Law, Joshua Newman

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

The current state of the United States legal system, and international law at large, fails to afford victims of violations of international law with proper redress, when those violations were facilitated by a domestic taking. The Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act provides foreign sovereigns immunity from the jurisdiction of United States courts when those foreign sovereigns effectuate of a violation of international law through domestic takings. Courts have attempted to circumvent the restrictions of the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act with exceptions such as the genocide exception. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Federal Republic of Germany v Philipp renounced the …

The Mismeasure Of Puerto Rico: Xenophobia And The Moral Bankruptcy Of U.S. Colonialism, Ernesto Sagás, Ediberto Román

Journal of Law and Policy

This Article examines the racialization of Puerto Ricans within the legal context of the colonial relationship between the United States and its largest colony. The first section examines the first half century of U.S. rule (1898-1952) and how colonial administrators typically used arrogance and paternalism, the self-proclaimed white superiority of the ruling class, and the presumed inferiority of the subjects and their incapability to become full members of the United States, to justify colonial rule. The second section describes the establishment of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in 1952, a legal fiction designed to instill in Puerto Ricans and the …

Constitutional Rights And Remedial Consistency, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Scholarship

When the Supreme Court declined definitively to block Texas’s S.B. 8, which effectively eliminated pre-enforcement federal remedies for what was then a plainly unconstitutional restriction on abortion rights, a prominent criticism was that the majority would have never tolerated the similar treatment of preferred legal protections—like gun rights. This refrain reemerged when California enacted a copycat regime for firearms regulation. This theme sounds in the deep-rooted idea that judge-made law should adhere to generality and neutrality values requiring doctrines to derive justification from controlling a meaningful class of cases ascertained by objective legal criteria.

This Article is about consistency, and …

The Perennial Eclipse: Race, Immigration, And How Latinx Count In American Politics, Rachel F. Moran

Faculty Scholarship

In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Evenwel v. Abbott, a case challenging the use of total population in state legislative apportionment as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The plaintiffs sued Texas, alleging that the State impermissibly diluted their voting power because they lived in areas with a high proportion of voting-age citizens. When total population was used to draw district lines, the plaintiffs had to compete with more voters to get their desired electoral outcomes than was true for voters in districts with low proportions of voting-age citizens. The Court rejected the argument, finding that states enjoy …

The Rise, Fall, And Rise Of Cyber Civil Libertarianism, Hannah Bloch-Wehba

Faculty Scholarship

Using sexual speech as its focal point, this essay explores the ambiguous legacy of cyber civil liberties and the ascent of alternative paradigms for digital freedom. From its inception, cyberlaw was characterized by a moral panic over sexual speech, pornography, and the protection of children familiar to First Amendment scholars. Important civil libertarian victories recognized that sexual speech and pornography were constitutionally protected from state intervention. The civil libertarian paradigm saw government regulation as the primary threat to free speech online, the marketplace as the more appropriate mechanism for regulating expression, and courts as the rightful arbiters of these disputes. …

Foiled Foia: The Excessive Exemption, Edward L. Wilkinson Jr.

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Freedom of Information Act permits requestors access to government information unless an exemption applies. Exemption (b)(3)(B) permits the government to protect information if there is a specific reference to a FOIA exemption in the withholding statute. Congress created this new requirement in 2009 in order to remove decision making power from administrative agencies and courts and reserve the power to disclose or withhold information with the legislative branch. This exemption poses problems to courts when there is a clear intent to protect information in the withholding statute without a clear reference to Exemption (b)(3)(B). As a result, courts have …

How Close Is Close Enough: A Step-By-Step Analysis To Resolve The Circuit Split Created By Misunderstanding The Spokeo Ruling, Cason Shipp

St. Mary's Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Questioning The Legitimacy Of The Expedited Removal Process – The Tall Task Of Protecting The Constitutional Rights Of One Of America’S Most Marginalized Groups, Jacob J. Bourquin

Cleveland State Law Review

This Note explores the origin and development of 8 U.S.C. § 1225—a heavily debated facet of the United States’ immigration law. Section 1225, colloquially referred to as the “expedited removal process,” has been interpreted to permit low-level immigration officers to summarily remove certain “arriving” noncitizens from the United States without affording them the procedural due process protections guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution to all individuals present in the United States. This Note posits that the current interpretation of § 1225, particularly the interpretation of “is arriving,” and application of the expedited removal process is inconsistent …

Public Accommodations And The Right To Refrain From Expressing Oneself, Mark Strasser

Cleveland State Law Review

The United States Supreme Court has been unable to articulate a coherent position when addressing the right of individuals to refrain from expressing themselves. The Court has applied various tests inconsistently—emphasizing principles in some cases, ignoring them in subsequent cases, and then emphasizing them again in later cases as if those principles had always been applied. The Court’s approach is incoherent, offering little guidance to lower courts except to suggest that public accommodations laws may soon be found inconsistent with First Amendment guarantees.

The Dueling First Amendment Clauses: Are They In Tension, Or Do They Work Together?, James Black

Helm's School of Government Conference - 2021-2024

The Establishment and Free exercise clauses of the First Amendment respectively state that Congress does not have the ability to pass a law that would either establish a national religion or prohibit the free exercise of any religion. While some legal scholars have given a more secular interpretation of the Establishment Clause, suggesting that there is no place for Christianity or any other religion in the public square or to influence American government, this is in conflict with interpretation by a substantial number of legal experts and constitutional scholars living both in and before the modern era, some of whom …

"Money That Flows In The Shadows": Citizens United, Dark Money, And The Need For Rhetorical Competence, Kristy Kocot

James Madison Undergraduate Research Journal (JMURJ)

The 2010 United States Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. FEC, has the potential to present a significant threat to American democracy. The landmark decision removed limits on corporate contributions, allowing disproportionate dark money influence from corporations in American political campaigns. This paper explores the ethical dilemmas of the Citizens United decision, drawing from peer-reviewed scholarly journals, legal documents, and advocacy organizations to highlight the negative impact that dark money has on American politics. Citizens United and its aftermath demonstrate the necessity for rhetorical competence in a democracy with broad protections for individual and corporate speech. The paper argues …