Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Ford Motor Company V. Montana Eighth Judicial District, Maddie Rudge

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mississippi V. Tennessee, Jackson W. Welsh

Tennessee Law Review

The Supreme Court's decision in Mississippi v. Tennessee quietly marked a potential turning point for the once antiquated doctrine of equitable apportionment. This doctrine provides a framework for resolving disputes over the allocation of resources, usually water, that cross state boundaries, and has done so since the early 20th century. In this article, we will delve into the history of equitable apportionment, examining its evolution from 1907 to the present day. We explore the key cases that have slowly broadened the doctrine, with a particular focus on Mississippi v. Tennessee and its implications for the future of equitable apportionment. Through …

West Virginia V. Epa, Troy C. Book

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ncaa V. Alston (Case Notes), Carson Blakely

Tennessee Law Review

In August 2013, I was a thirteen-year-old immersed in the world of NCAA Football 14, a popular video game by Electronic Arts (EA). Through my digital replicas and the actual Tennessee Volunteer football players, my friends and I led the Vols to three consecutive BCS National Championships. My fictional character, a top running back, won three Heisman Trophies, which remains my greatest athletic accomplishment to date. Then, EA announced the discontinuation of the NCAA Football franchise, leaving millions of digital coaches, including myself, perplexed.1 Little did I know that the issue at hand was the complex legal realm of Name, …

Social Media On Trial: How The Supreme Court Could Permanently Alter The Future Of The Internet By Limiting Section 230'S Broad Immunity Shield, J. Tyler Wampler

Tennessee Law Review

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has allowed the internet to develop and flourish at an unprecedent pace. The law has been interpreted broadly to grant immunity to interactive computer services like social media platforms from liability for content posted by users. Wielding this immunity, internet platforms are empowered to act innovatively without fear of frivolous lawsuits. However, there are ongoing concerns that this broad interpretation shields modern tech companies from liability for actions that were never intended to be protected.

Two companion cases interpreting Section 230 are currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, where the Court is being …

Google Llc V. Oracle America, Inc., Elizabeth Spica

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ncaa V. Alston, Emma S. Fowler

Tennessee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reasonable Classification Versus Equality Under The Indian Constitution, Jahnavi Sindhu, Vikram Aditya Narayan

National Law School Journal

This article critiques the standard of review most prominently applied in cases involving claims of violations of Article 14 of the Constitution: the reasonable classification test. We argue that this test is woefully inadequate in appreciating and protecting the wide-ranging nature of the right to equality. Through an examination of the origins of the reasonable classification test, we demonstrate the weak justifications initially advanced by the Indian judiciary to import it from dated United States (US) case law. Further, we highlight the substantial weaknesses of the test and explain how it precludes the judiciary from safeguarding the content of substantive …

Brief For Amicus Curiae Professor Derek T. Muller In Support Of Respondents, Daniel M. Sullivan, Daniel M. Horowitz, Derek T. Muller

Court Briefs

No. 21-1271
Timothy K. Moore v. Rebecca Harper

On Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of North Carolina

From the Summary of Argument

The petition for certiorari in this case presents the question whether the phrase “Legislature thereof” in the Elections Clause of the Constitution bars state courts from regulating the contours of Congressional redistricting pursuant to state constitutions. But Congress has spoken, too. It has regulated the manner of drawing congressional districts by federal statute. See 2 U.S.C. § 2c. Congressional redistricting in a State now takes place pursuant to this federal statutory directive, which contemplates a role …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Jewish Coalition For Religious Liberty, Islam & Religious Freedom Action Team Of The Religious Freedom Institute, And Notre Dame Law School Religious Liberty Clinic In Support Of Petitioners, John A. Meiser, Nicole Stelle Garnett

Court Briefs

No. 22-238
Charter Day School, Inc. v. Bonnie Peltier

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

The Fourth Circuit’s gross misapplication of state-action doctrine contradicts decades of precedent and expands the doctrine beyond its breaking point. If not corrected, that analysis would also endanger many vital public services provided by religious charitable groups and undermine this Court’s recent free-exercise cases in the process.

Brief Of Religious Liberty Scholars And Employment Law Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Douglas Laycock, John A. Meiser, Richard W. Garnett

Court Briefs

No. 22-174
Gerald E. Groff v. Louis DeJoy

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

This case is an ideal vehicle for correcting an error that has undermined protection for religious workers across the country, in defiance of clear statutory text and underlying principles of religious liberty.

Original(Ism) Sin, G. Alex Sinha

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

During President Trump’s term in office, the Senate confirmed nearly 250 of his federal judicial nominees, including 3 to the Supreme Court of the United States. That number amounts to nearly a third of the federal judiciary’s roughly 800 active members. By and large, the judges nominated by President Trump purport to apply some form of originalist constitutional interpretation or construction, though the subject of originalism featured perhaps most prominently at the confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett, whom President Trump nominated in October of 2020 to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Whatever one thinks of the vast literature …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Religious Freedom Institute In Support Of Petitioner, John A. Meiser, Nicole Stelle Garnett, Richard W. Garnett Iv, Francesca Genova Matozzo

Court Briefs

No. 21-1405
Lester J. Smith v. Timothy Ward

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

Lester Smith comes to this Court in unusual circumstances: the district court found that the Georgia Department of Corrections offered no rationale that could justify its prohibition on beards longer than half an inch under RLUIPA, and yet— without disputing that finding—the Eleventh Circuit ruled that the State may still enforce the half-inch limitation against Smith. The Eleventh Circuit’s denial of any relief from what has been shown to be …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Arbitration Scholars And Practitioners In Support Of Petitioners, Sarah A. Dowd, Eric B. Fisher, Travis A. Gonyou, Diane Desierto

Court Briefs

No. 21-1244
Beijing Shougang Mining Investment Company, Ltd. v. Mongolia

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

Parties to international arbitration and arbitral tribunals themselves value predictability and dependability. This is especially so for threshold questions concerning the authority of an arbitral tribunal to decide disputes over its own jurisdiction. Among international arbitration scholars and practitioners this threshold question is often known by the German term kompetenz-kompetenz, referring to the issue of competence to determine the competence of an arbitral panel to decide a dispute. …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Notre Dame Law School Religious Liberty Initiative In Support Of Petitioner, Nicole Stelle Garnett, Richard W. Garnett Iv, Francesca Genova Matozzo, Steven A. Engel, Michael H. Mcginley

Court Briefs

No. 21-418
Joseph A. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District

On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

This case offers the Court a much-needed opportunity to resolve the longstanding confusion caused by its conflicting and erroneous interpretations of the Establishment Clause. Although recent decisions clarify that the government may not suppress private religious expression, the Court has yet to clear away an undergrowth of older precedents that are often read to suggest the opposite. Rather than permit those outdated decisions to persist and perpetuate confusion, the Court should …

Is A Locomotive In Use And Therefore Subject To Locomotive Inspection Act Liability When It Makes A Temporary Stop?, Anne Marie Lofaso

Law Faculty Scholarship

Case at a Glance: LeDure v. Union Pacific Railroad Company. Bradley LeDure, a long-time locomotive engineer for Union Pacific, slipped on the slick surface of a locomotive while it was idle but powered on, seriously injuring himself. If Union Pacific violated safety regulations under the Locomotive Inspection Act, then it would be negligent per se. But that theory of liability is only available if the locomotive was in use at the time of the accident. The case presents a question of statutory interpretation of the term use.

Brief Of Amici Curiae International Law Scholars In Support Of Petitioners, Beatrice Lindstrom, Tyler R. Giannini, Diane A. Desierto

Court Briefs

No. 21-995
Budha Jam v. International Finance Corporation

On Petition For Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The District Of Columbia Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

The animating purpose of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1602-1611 (1976), is to remove immunity and preferential treatment for sovereign entities when they engage in private conduct such as commercial activity. In other words, sovereigns acting as private actors should be treated as private actors. The decision below undermines this raison d’être of the FSIA while raising an important and unsettled question: whether a …

The Supreme Court Needs Diversity In More Ways Than One, Benjamin H. Barton

Tennessee Law in the News

Professor Barton recently authored an op-ed, "The Supreme Court Needs Diversity in More Ways Than One," which ran in the January 30th edition of the The Wall Street Journal. The piece is based on his new book The Credentialed Court.

Evolving Standards Of Irrelevancy?, Joanmarie Davoli

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Textualism, Dynamism, And The Meaning Of "Sex", Bill Watson

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

A recent Article by Professors William N. Eskridge, Brian G. Slocum, and Stefan Th. Gries critically examines textualism, both in general and as applied in Bostock v. Clayton County. This Essay makes three points in reply. First, the authors criticize strawman versions of textualism that no mainstream legal interpreter claims to hold. Second, the authors’ examples of “societal dynamism” do not put any pressure on textualism properly understood. And third, the authors’ corpus-linguistics analysis of the word “sex” is, from a textualist perspective, irrelevant to the issue in Bostock.

No [Concrete] Harm, No Foul? Article Iii Standing In The Context Of Consumer Financial Protection, Annefloor J. De Groot

Georgia Law Review

In the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, the Court held that a bare procedural violation of a federal consumer protection statute is not enough to satisfy Article III’s standing requirement because the alleged injury is not sufficiently concrete. This decision resulted in a sizeable circuit split regarding standing under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, with some circuit courts interpreting the holding as narrowing the scope of standing for consumer protection claims, and others maintaining a broader interpretation, allowing plaintiffs to obtain redress for violations of consumer financial protections laws.

In its 2021 ruling in …

Nfib V. Osha: A Unified Separation Of Powers Doctrine And Chevron's No Show, Randolph J. May, Andrew K. Magloughlin

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

Facts Versus Discretion: The Debate Over Immigration Adjudication, Jayanth K. Krishnan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Justice Amy Coney Barrett recently issued her first majority-led immigration opinion in Patel v. Garland (2022). As background, some immigrants looking to avoid deportation may apply for what is called “discretionary relief’ (e.g., asylum or adjustment of status) initially in an immigration court and then, if they lose, at the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). These immigration forums fall under the Department of Justice. Prior to Patel, immigrants who lost at the BIA could then ask a federal circuit court to review the factual findings of their case. Now, after Justice Barrett’s decision, Article III review is no longer available …

Does U.S. Federal Employment Law Now Cover Caste Discrimination Based On Untouchability?: If All Else Fails There Is The Possible Application Of Bostock V. Clayton County, Kevin D. Brown, Lalit Khandare, Annapurna Waughray, Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt, Theodore M. Shaw

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This article discusses the issue of whether a victim of caste discrimination based on untouchability can assert a claim of intentional employment discrimination under Title VII or Section 1981. This article contends that there are legitimate arguments that this form of discrimination is a form of religious discrimination under Title VII. The question of whether caste discrimination is a form of race or national origin discrimination under Title VII or Section 1981 depends upon how the courts apply these definitions to caste discrimination based on untouchability. There are legitimate arguments that this form of discrimination is recognized within the concept …

To Trust Or Not To Trust: Native American Healthcare Improvement In The Supreme Court’S Hands, Katherine Graham

Georgia Law Review

The United States federal government’s relationship with Native American tribes has long been tenuous. Despite years of unjust and inhumane treatment of Native Americans by the government, Congress has attempted to rectify or limit the government’s harm to Native American people but has fallen short of upholding all agreements intended to improve United States-tribal relations. In particular, the government has not always followed treaties between the government and tribes, and the United States Supreme Court has failed to protect Native American rights in many cases. Central to this issue is the 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie, in which the United …

“A Force Created”: The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce And The Politics Of Corporate Immunity, Myriam E. Gilles

Articles

Upon its founding in 1912, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce was conceived as a “force created” to exert “a beneficent influence upon our national life” by integrating the views of the business community into governmental policies and regulations. That a force was created is beyond question. Beneficence is a separate issue.

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Notre Dame Law School Religious Liberty Initiative In Support Of Petitioners, Nicole Stelle Garnett, Richard W. Garnett Iv, John A. Meiser, Steven A. Engel, Michael H. Mcginley, Eric D. Hageman, Justin M. Romeo, Lincoln Davis Wilson

Court Briefs

No. 20-1800
Harold Shurtleff v. City of Boston

On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

Invoking the specious rationale of “government speech,” the City of Boston unconstitutionally singled out religious expression for hostile treatment. By lumping speech based on “religion” together with speech deemed “inappropriate,” “offensive,” “discrimin[atory],” or “prejudice[d],” Pet.App.20, the City adopted the increasingly common view that promoting our Nation’s vibrant pluralism requires the exclusion of religious perspectives from the public square. But that view is antithetical to the Founders’ conception of religion as central—not peripheral—to …

Court Packing As An Antidote, Rivka Weill

Cardozo Law Review

Court packing is considered the nuclear weapon that may unleash total chaos on the American constitutional system. Even in the face of a highly controversial appointment process to the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2020 presidential election season, scholars caution against the wisdom and utility of resorting to court packing. This Essay makes three bold arguments: First, a President may nominate a candidate to the Supreme Court at any time, including their last year in office; this is true both empirically and normatively. It is the Senate’s responsibility to ensure the people’s will is not frustrated. Second, never since the …

Court Packing Is A Chimera, Brian L. Frye

Cardozo Law Review

The dream of the 1930s is alive in Washington. Democrats see Republicans hemorrhaging voters as Trump struggles with the economy and the pandemic and are salivating at the prospect of retaking not only the White House, but also the Senate. Of course, you should never sell a bearskin until you’ve caught the bear. But even a blowout victory can’t get Democrats the prize they really want, a Supreme Court majority. So, in back-to-the-future fashion, many progressives are pushing the idea of court packing. After all, in politics, rules are made to be broken.

The Iron Rule, Jacob Bronsther, Guha Krishnamurthi

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.