Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Mandating Fluoride: A Constitutional Exercise Of Police Power, Anita Jahangiri

Seattle University Law Review

This Note addresses the ongoing debate over fluoridation: the regulation of fluoride levels in public water systems. Extensive research indicates fluoridation, when regulated at the recommended concentration, is both safe and highly effective in preventing dental caries. Better known as cavities, dental caries is a preventable yet widespread health issue that disproportionately affects low-income populations. Reducing dental health disparities among economic classes is a pressing public health issue. Fluoridation is not merely a policy option, but a critical, proven tool to address such disparities and uphold the collective welfare of Washingtonians. This Note focuses on fluoridation as a public health …

Neurodiversity In The Courtroom: Expanding Jury Service Accessibility Beyond Physical Disability, Samantha L. Mabe

Seattle University Law Review

The Americans with Disabilities Act has required equal access to jury service for decades; however, efforts to accommodate jurors with disabilities have been slow to develop beyond some minor accommodations for physical disabilities. While neurodivergent people frequently struggle to navigate a world catered toward neurotypical people, jury service remains inaccessible for many neurodivergent people who need accommodations to attend trial and engage in jury deliberations. If courts and advocates do not consider how to develop accommodations to secure the service of neurodivergent jurors, they will miss out on the unique skillsets that neurodivergent people can bring to resolving disputes.

Disabled …

Judging Bankruptcy Without Distress, Jack Zarin-Rosenfeld

University of Cincinnati Law Review

In Harrington v. Purdue Pharma, the United States Supreme Court rejected the bankruptcy plan of OxyContin producer Purdue Pharma, which purported to settle claims against both Purdue (the bankruptcy debtor) and Purdue’s individual owners and managers, all members of the Sackler family who had not themselves filed for bankruptcy (the Sackler Release). Concluding that the United States Bankruptcy Code does not authorize settlement of claims against non-debtors without claimant consent, the Harrington Court appeared set to stem the tide of “bankruptcy without distress,” a flourishing practice in which solvent non-debtors (like the Sacklers) would settle their liabilities within the …

Death & Taxes: Preserving The Second Amendment From "Absolute Obliteration" With Congress' Powers Of Taxation?, Christian Ketter

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Take In Case Of Emergency: Reconciling Necessity Takings With The Original Meaning Of The Takings Clause, Tony Smith

Northwestern University Law Review

Does the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause permit the state to destroy property without compensation whenever it declares an emergency? The long-standing doctrine of necessity empowers the state to do exactly that.

Courts dating back to common law England have permitted governments to claim a privilege of necessity to avoid paying for private property they destroy in times of crisis. The privilege rests on the principle that the public good sometimes outweighs the harm the individual suffers. Today’s courts and academics stretch this principle to its limits, arguing necessity should be used as a vehicle for combating all manner of social …

What On Earth Is A Burden On Interstate Commerce?, Andrew Jordan

Northwestern University Law Review

What is a burden on interstate commerce? That’s an important question under the Dormant Commerce Clause’s Pike balancing test. But it’s a question whose answer has proven elusive. This shouldn’t be a surprise. After all, states disagree about what counts as a burden or a benefit, and how much weight each has. And there aren’t any obvious constitutional principles we can point to for resolving those disagreements. Recently, some scholars have tried to ground dormant commerce doctrine in economic cost–benefit analysis. The supposed virtue of that approach is that it is neutral as to competing preferences. Thus, for the Court …

Uniformity, Loper Bright, And The National Labor Relations Board: Can The Board’S Nonacquiescence Policy Survive In A Post-Chevron World?, Alexander Macdonald

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

As chairman of the National Labor Relations Board, Donald Dotson was nothing if not controversial. Though he headed the Board for five years, he was never shy about criticizing the Board’s practices. He often argued that the Board had skewed its policies toward organized labor and inserted itself in disputes best left to private negotiation. That criticism put him at odds with his fellow Board members and frequently landed him on the wrong side of divided opinions. Even members who shared his core philosophy sometimes shied away from joining his assaults on the Board itself.

So it was on September …

What Is Trump Immunity?, Carlos M. Vázquez

Notre Dame Law Review Reflection

By definition, the immunity of a former President is not an immunity ratione personae, as this sort of immunity applies only to current officeholders. It is an immunity ratione materiae extending only to certain types of acts. The Court in Trump made clear that the immunity a former President enjoys is at least an immunity from judicial proceedings. It is for this reason that she is entitled to an immediate appeal from the denial of a motion to dismiss the claim against her. The Court left unclear whether the President’s immunity is also an immunity from primary obligations or an …

Original Public Meaning And The Rule Of Recognition, Andrew Jensen Kerr

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Framer intent no longer possesses the same cachet it once held. But Framer influence still matters for public meaning originalism, particularly for communications like The Federalist Papers, in which Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison marketed the work of the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention to state ratifying conventions and the constituencies they represented. Contemporary originalists posit that what the Constitution meant to this public audience at the time of ratification is cemented in time forever (the fixation thesis). The starting point for my analysis is the prosaic observation that our Framers occasionally changed their minds about the meaning of …

Animus, Again, William D. Araiza

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In the first week of his second term, President Donald Trump issued multiple executive orders targeting immigrants and transgender people. Additional actions targeting these and other vulnerable groups have already followed. Others may come; more generally, such orders will likely remain a part of the President’s policy agenda and governing style. These actions call for analysis of the legal tools litigants can deploy to challenge them. That call is urgent, as a response not just to the orders already issued, but to others the Administration might promulgate in the future.

One of those tools is equal protection animus. This Article …

The Roberts Court Paradox, John C. P. Goldberg, Benjamin C. Zipursky

Fordham Law Review

As perhaps the most conservative Supreme Court of the past century, the Roberts Court regularly touts its commitment to traditional ideals, including the rule of law. Yet Trump v. United States seems ready to place presidents entirely or largely above the law by granting them absolute or near absolute immunity from criminal prosecutions for official conduct. And Trump is not a one-off: from judicial recusal to qualified immunity to due process decisions, the Court frequently seems to display indifference to values of accountability and impartiality that have long been thought integral to the rule of law. What is going on? …

Emotionally Unstable: Addressing Emotional Distress As A Concrete Injury In Data Breach Cases Post-Transunion, Anna P. Cox

Fordham Law Review

Data breaches and data breach litigation are exponentially on the rise. Plaintiffs whose information is stolen in a data breach often claim emotional distress for fear of future harm the data breach may cause. However, plaintiffs who bring suit in federal court must show that they have suffered an injury in fact for purposes of Article III standing before a federal court will exercise jurisdiction. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez requires that plaintiffs who seek money damages under a theory of risk of future harm show that they have suffered a present concrete injury to …

The Presumption Against Extraterritoriality And Wire Fraud, L. Jackson Howell Jr.

Fordham Law Review

As globalization and technology increasingly blur geographic boundaries, federal prosecutors have turned to the wire fraud statute as a powerful tool for targeting transnational misconduct. Despite its popularity in international fraud prosecution, the statute’s application to foreign conduct continues to raise unresolved and pressing questions under the presumption against extraterritoriality. Specifically, courts have struggled to identify when a domestic wire communication is sufficient to bring a largely foreign fraudulent scheme within the reach of U.S. law. With the U.S. Supreme Court silent on the wire fraud statute directly, and zigzagging in its extraterritoriality jurisprudence more generally, lower courts are split …

The Evolution Of The Second Amendment And The American Gun Violence Epidemic: A Historical Analysis Of Political Self-Sabotage, Amanda Tureaud

Senior Theses

From the conception of the Bill of Rights until the 21st century, the Second Amendment was read and understood by the American population, both ordinary citizens and government officials, branches, and agencies inclusively, to allow the nation to have an armed military but not for private citizens to own and/or carry firearms. Since 2008, however, the Second Amendment has been interpreted as an absolute freedom for private citizens to own and carry semiautomatic assault weapons in the name of personal protection. This thesis holds that the evolution of society’s attitude on guns and gun control is specifically denoted by the …

The Lone Dissent, Grant Christensen, Anne Mullins

Washington and Lee Law Review

What can be learned when a Supreme Court Justice decides to write a lone dissent? There exists a powerful set of incentives for Supreme Court opinions to achieve consensus. Although closely divided cases grab news headlines, unanimous opinions are actually the most commonly issued judicial alignment, and cases in which a single Justice dissents are the most unlikely. Despite voluminous academic discussion of judicial behavior, no legal scholarship has focused on the lone dissent. This Article is designed to insert consideration of lone dissenting opinions into the broader discussion of judicial behavior.

Looking at the set of Supreme Court opinions …

Burdens Of Proof In Criminal Procedure, Eve Brensike Primus

Articles

The Supreme Court’s haphazard approach to allocating burdens of proof in criminal procedure has created a system in which constitutional rights can be rendered meaningless simply because defendants are required to prove things they cannot possibly know. Even though allocations of the burden of proof often drive litigation outcomes, the Court has failed to establish clear burden allocation structures for cases arising under the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments, leaving lower courts split about how to allocate the burdens. When the Supreme Court does allocate burdens, it often does so without explanation or consideration of key factors. Recent Supreme …

Is Your Data Good, Bad, Or Neutral?: Redefining Concreteness For Data Breach Harms, Jeeyoon Lim

Fordham Law Review

In recent years, the Supreme Court has tightened federal court standing requirements for intangible harms, including statutory harms. In TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, the Court held that a mere statutory violation, absent a common-law analogue, is not sufficiently concrete to grant standing. The Court did not provide clear guidance as to how stringent the common-law analogue analysis must be, other than that it does not require an “exact duplicate.” Because of the ever-evolving nature of digital data, data breach victims attempting to enforce their statutory right to privacy in federal court have struggled to rely on tradition and history …

Domestic Military Deployments After Trump V. United States, Chris Mirasola

William & Mary Law Review

The current legal regime governing domestic military deployments was, largely, born of the Civil War. While conflict was ongoing, Congress enacted what are now a pair of statutes criminalizing military interference with federal elections. And as a coda to Reconstruction, Congress criminalized using the military as a civilian law enforcement force. Over the past 160 years, successive Congresses and Presidents have steadily chipped away at these crucial criminal-law protections. In 2024, the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States further undermined the limitations that remained.

In Trump, the Supreme Court held that Presidents enjoy, at minimum, a presumption …

When Love Is Not Enough: The Muñoz Decision And The Erosion Of Family Unity In U.S. Immigration Law, Katerina Fernandez

Immigration and Human Rights Law Review

The Supreme Court’s decision in Department of State v. Muñoz marks a significant shift in U.S. immigration law, reinforcing the doctrine of consular non-reviewability and weakening long-standing protections for family unity. Historically, marriage and family have been recognized as fundamental rights; yet, Muñoz limits judicial oversight of visa denials, allowing for indefinite separations between U.S. citizens and their non-citizen spouses. This piece examines the ruling’s legal and human rights implications, its parallels to family separation policies, and its potential to justify future erosion of parental rights in immigration enforcement. It also examines possible legal avenues to challenge arbitrary family separations, …

2025 Supreme Court Preview Digital Notebook, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

The Containment, Floersheimer Center For Constitutional Democracy, Black Law Students Association (Blsa), Alexander Reinert, Michellle Adams, James Forman Jr.

2025–2026 Flyers

Join us for a special evening with Michelle Adams, the Henry M. Butzel Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, and former Cardozo Professor, as she discusses her acclaimed new book The Containment: Detroit, the Supreme Court, and the Battle for School Desegregation.

Michelle Adams On Detroit, The Supreme Court, And School Segregation, Floersheimer Center For Constitutional Democracy, Black Law Students Association (Blsa), Alexander A. Reinert, Michelle Adams, James Foreman Jr.

2025 Event Invitations

Join us for a special evening with Michelle Adams, the Henry M. Butzel Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, and former Cardozo Professor, as she discusses her acclaimed new book The Containment: Detroit, the Supreme Court, and the Battle for School Desegregation.

Chapter 9 Bankruptcy: The Solution That Causes Problems, Peter C. Alexander

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

There is a little-known form of bankruptcy called a “Chapter 9,” reserved for insolvent cities, villages, and other municipalities. Occasionally, one reads about a city or a county that has filed for Chapter 9 relief, like Detroit, Michigan, or Orange County, California; however, it is very hard to file a Chapter 9 case, in part, because existing law requires a municipality to obtain permission from its home state before it can file for relief in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. An additional constraint is that the only option municipalities have when seeking bankruptcy relief is to file a Chapter 9 because …

Wine Unwelcome: The Constitutional Contours Of Wine Regulation, Alexander Fallone

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

Wine retail shops face a dizzying labyrinth of state laws that severely restrict their ability to ship wine to out-of-state consumers. While the dormant Commerce Clause would normally strike down laws that impose restrictions on interstate commerce, wine (and alcoholic beverages) must contend with Section Two of the Twenty-first Amendment, which gives the states control over the importation and distribution of wine intending to be consumed within their borders. Court of Appeals cases interpreting Supreme Court precedent on the tension between the dormant Commerce Clause and Section Two have practically stripped the dormant Commerce Clause of any power. This Note …

"Tik Tok" On The Clock: It's Time To Amend Section 230, Mackenzie G. Howe

West Virginia Law Review

The Communications Decency Act (“CDA”), enacted in 1996, was designed to support the rapid growth of the Internet, advancing access to political information, educational resources, culture, entertainment, and news. However, Section 230 of the CDA includes a key provision that grants nearly absolute immunity to online platforms such as Facebook, X, and TikTok. This provision states: “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” Despite the Supreme Court’s apprehension to reexamine Section 230, the Third Circuit took a novel approach to potentially …

An In-Depth Criticism Of Shaw V. Reno, Katherine M. Perez-Oviedo

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

If I have learned one thing from my semester taking Critical Race Theory, it is that the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly issued decisions that directly impede on remedial efforts to address past racial discrimination. When the question of “how can we use the law to instill social change?” is proposed in class discussion, it is difficult to imagine a world in which the Court would support the progressive measures suggested.

Joinder, Not Jurisdiction: Toward A New Theory Of Standing, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

This Article builds on an important development in the Supreme Court’s standing jurisprudence to propose a novel theory that would allow more meaningful access to federal courts while vindicating legitimate separation-of-powers concerns. In its recent decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, the Supreme Court endorsed a theory of standing based on Article II, writing that litigation between private parties—even when explicitly authorized by Congress—can run afoul of the executive branch’s interest in “how to prioritize and how aggressively to pursue legal actions against defendants who violate the law.” This Article II move has been justifiably criticized. But it is …

Existing Together From The Beginning: Freedom To Contract And Black Mutual Aid, Cara Mcclellan

Northwestern University Law Review

In a new wave of litigation, conservative legal organizations are attempting to rely on Reconstruction-era civil rights legislation to prevent nonprofits, charities, foundations, and other privately organized groups from engaging in race-conscious work. Unlike the Supreme Court’s recent rollback of affirmative action, which dealt with universities’ ability to consider race in admissions as state actors and as recipients of federal funding, a series of lawsuits now challenge the ability of private organizations to consider race in how they invest money and resources to create social impact. Adding fuel to the fire, on January 21, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive …

Not Colorblind, Kimberly West-Faulcon

Northwestern University Law Review

This Essay criticizes the use of the term “colorblind” in reference to attacks on racial diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies. It argues it is inapt and unconscionably obtuse to use colorblindness terminology to selectively target inclusion-motivated race consciousness for automatic illegality. The Essay’s central project is to examine claims underlying attacks on racial inclusion policies such as the Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College lawsuit to expose the legal endgame that anti-DEI forces seek to make a centerpiece of America’s future. In so doing, it surfaces the differential scrutiny of race consciousness …

Standing On Stare Decisis After Students For Fair Admissions, Areeb Asif, Lindsey Roloff

Northwestern University Law Review

The Supreme Court recognized nearly half a century ago in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke that “the ‘nation’s future depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure’ to the ideas and mores of students as diverse as this Nation of many peoples.” Nevertheless, the Court seriously undercut efforts to bring such a future to life by striking down race-conscious admissions programs in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina (collectively SFFA). Though SFFA’s binding effect is limited to educational institutions, …