Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

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 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 …

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 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. …

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 …

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 …

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. …

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. …

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 …

Anti-Press Bias: A Response To Andersen Jones And West's Presuming Trustworthiness, Erin C. Carroll

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Professors RonNell Andersen Jones and Sonja R. West’s Presuming Trustworthiness is a deeply depressing read. That is what makes it so good. The article is a clear-eyed, data-driven approach to assessing just how endangered the legal status of the free press is. Given the universality of the agreement that a free press is central to democracy, Andersen Jones and West’s message is vital. Presuming Trustworthiness should raise alarms.

In response, I hope this essay can serve as a bullhorn. I want to amplify what Andersen Jones and West’s research and data bear out. Not only has the Supreme Court ceased …

The Unconstitutionality Of Underfunded Public Defender Systems, Braden Daniels

Senior Honors Theses

When a defendant is ineffectively represented by a public defender due to an underfunded public defender system, a defendant whose public defender provides him only cursory representation is entitled to a new trial only if blatantly innocent. The U.S. Supreme Court should follow its precedent and declare systemically underfunded public defender systems unconstitutional, with cases meriting reversal when the underfunding is to blame for unreasonable attorney errors, regardless of prejudice. This stems logically from the Court’s holdings in Gideon v. Wainwright, Strickland v. Washington, and United States v. Cronic. Many have argued for the reversal or modification …

Secrets Clutched In A Dead Hand: Rethinking Posthumous Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege In The Light Of Reason And Experience With Other Evidentiary Privileges, Jared S. Sunshine

Journal of Law and Health

Attorney-client privilege was held by the Supreme Court to extend beyond death in 1996, albeit only ratifying centuries of accepted practice in the lower courts and England before them. But with the lawyer’s client dead, the natural outcome of such a rule is that privilege—the legal enforcement of secrecy—will persist forever, for only the dead client could ever have waived and thus end it. Perpetuity is not traditionally favored by the law for good reason, and yet a long and broad line of precedent endorses its application to privilege. The recent emergence of a novel species of privilege for psychotherapy, …

California V. Texas: Avoiding An Antidemocratic Outcome, Jon Lucas

Journal of Law and Health

The Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) contains a section titled “Requirement to Maintain Essential Minimum Coverage.” Colloquially known as the Individual Mandate, this section of the Act initially established a monetary penalty for anyone who did not maintain health insurance in a given tax year. But with the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the monetary penalty was reset to zero, inducing opponents of the ACA to mount a legal challenge over the Individual Mandate’s constitutionality. As the third major legal challenge to the ACA, California v. Texas saw the Supreme Court punt on the merits and instead decide …

Privileges, Immunities, And Affirmative Action In Medical Education, Gregory Curfman

Journal of Law and Health

In Students for Fair Admissions v. President & Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, the Supreme Court ruled that affirmative action in university admissions, in which an applicant of a particular race or ethnicity receives a plus factor, is unconstitutional. This ruling was based on both the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This article argues that a more natural fit as the basis for constitutional analysis would be a different clause in the Fourteenth Amendment, the Privileges or Immunities …

A Trigger Warning: Red Flag Laws Are Still Constitutionally Permissible And Could Reduce The Suicide Rates In The Country's Most Vulnerable States, Joseph C. Campbell

Journal of Law and Health

Montana, Alaska, and Wyoming lead the United States in a category coveted by no one: the suicide rate. Firearm ownership drives the rate to the disproportionate level it reaches year after year and the states are left with little recourse. This article argues the usefulness and constitutionality of narrowly tailored red-flag laws aimed exclusively at reducing the rate of suicide in these mountain states. The article follows Supreme Court jurisprudence leading up to New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen and offers an analysis that complies with the hyper textualist history and tradition test laid out by Scalia in …

Tying Law For The Digital Age, Daniel A. Crane

Notre Dame Law Review

Tying arrangements, a central concern of antitrust policy since the early days of the Sherman and Clayton Acts, have come into renewed focus with respect to the practices of dominant technology companies. Unfortunately, tying law’s doctrinal structure is a self-contradictory and incoherent wreck. A conventional view holds that this mess is due to errant Supreme Court precedents, never fully corrected, that expressed hostility to tying based on faulty economic understanding. That is only part of the story. Examination of tying law’s origins and development shows that tying doctrine was built on a now-dated paradigm of what constitutes a tying arrangement. …

Admiralty, Abstention, And The Allure Of Old Cases, Maggie Gardner

Notre Dame Law Review

The current Supreme Court has made clear that history matters. But doing history well is hard. There is thus an allure to old cases because they provide a link to the past that is more accessible for nonhistorian lawyers. This Article warns against that allure by showing how the use of old cases also poses methodological challenges. The Article uses as a case study the emerging doctrine of foreign relations abstention. Before the Supreme Court, advocates argued that this new doctrine is in fact rooted in early admiralty cases. Those advocates did not, however, canvass the early admiralty practice, relying …

Pretrial Commitment And The Fourth Amendment, Laurent Sacharoff

Notre Dame Law Review

Today, the Fourth Amendment Warrant Clause governs arrest warrants and search warrants only. But in the founding era, the Warrant Clause governed a third type of warrant: the “warrant of commitment.” Judges issued these warrants to jail defendants pending trial. This Article argues that the Fourth Amendment Warrant Clause, with its oath and probable cause standard, should be understood today to apply to this third type of warrant. That means the Warrant Clause would govern any initial appearance where a judge first commits a defendant—a process that currently falls far short of fulfilling its constitutional and historical function. History supports …