Constitutional Law Commons^™

Utopia Exercise Interactive Workshop, Bernadette Barton

Justice Festival at Morehead State University

A PowerPoint presentation, titled "Utopia Exercise Interactive Workshop," given by Bernadette Barton at the Justice Festival held on the campus of Morehead State University on October 8, 2024.

Cy Pres Silliness: Remedies That Do Not Remediate The Harm, Phil Pillari

Northwestern University Law Review

Class actions play an important role in civil litigation, but they suffer from a serious problem. No matter how many plaintiffs are in the class, the individual claims are often miniscule, which can make distributing the inevitable settlement futile. Very few people make a claim, and it often costs more to mail the check than the check is worth. To solve this problem, Steven Shepherd proposed importing the cy pres doctrine (a trusts and estates device that allows courts to rewrite an unenforceable trust) into the class actions context. Shepherd’s framework instructs courts to devise the next best alternative for …

Judicial Preferences And Aggrandizement Effects, Jason Marisam

ConLawNOW

Scholars increasingly portray the Supreme Court as power hungry and self-aggrandizing. This aggrandizement literature, though, lacks a robust causal theory. This essay argues that judicial aggrandizement is not the product of a power-maximizing agenda but a function of judicial preferences and legal background conditions. Aggrandizement occurs in cases where legal background conditions do not align with judicial policy preferences and the justices assert power to create their preferred policy outcomes. This theory has significant prescriptive and normative implications. For example, counterintuitively, this essay shows that more judicial aggrandizement could be a sign of a healthier institution under some conditions.

Rethinking The Fundamentals: Applying The Evolving Standards Of Decency Test To The Court’S Evaluation Of Fundamental Rights., Nick Wolfram

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

In 1910, the Supreme Court recognized in Weems v. United States that a constitution “must be capable of wider application than the mischief which gave it birth.” This principle led to the creation of the Court’s two-pronged “evolving standards of decency,” test: (1) evidence of an objective indicia of a national consensus, and (2) the reviewing court’s own independent judgment. To this day the Court has yet to apply this test outside of the Eighth Amendment context. But can the “evolving standards of decency,” test identify and protect other fundamental rights? This Article explores how the Court could apply the …

The Constitutional Right To Peremptory Challenges In Jury Selection, Richard Lorren Jolly

Vanderbilt Law Review

The peremptory challenge is one of the oldest and most well-established jury selection procedures. Its use dates back to the earliest days of English common law, and it was a firmly established and protected practice at the United States’ founding and into the early twentieth century. But while peremptory challenges are foundational, they remain perhaps the most controversial aspect of jury selection today. This is because they are regularly used by the government and private parties to advance racist, sexist, and bigoted ends. For this reason, over the last three decades, calls to abolish the practice have been regularly made …

Book Review: John Paul Stevens, The Making Of A Justice: Reflections On My First 94 Years, New York, Little, Brown And Co., 2019, Pp. 549, $35.00 (Hardback), Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The autobiography of Justice John Paul Stevens, published just a few months before he died, is an enticing travelogue for Supreme Court nerds. Other travelers may want to pick a different landscape.

The Process Before The Promise: Ensuring Indigenous Recognition From The Chilean Constitution, Michaela Mazzeo

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I of this Note provides a background and overview of the relatively recent surge in the constitutionalization of indigenous rights and recognition in Latin America, and the state of constitutional reform in Chile. Part II lays out a theoretical understanding of the powers of a constitution as a mechanism for societal reformation and as a platform for bringing legal claims, as played out in Brazil and Bolivia. Part III demonstrates the ways in which practical manifestation of that theoretical power stops short. More specifically, both intentional and incidental barriers dampen the effectiveness of the constitutional mechanism for ensuring indigenous …

Masthead

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Editor-In-Chief’S Foreword, Megan Stupi

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

The Ninth Circuit’S Rfra Standard Of “Substantial Burden” As Applied To Native American Sacred Sites, Erik Renner

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

This paper focuses on the Ninth Circuit’s understanding of the “substantial burden” standard under RFRA as it is applied to Native American sacred site cases. This paper looks at the old Ninth Circuit’s standard as set out in Navajo Nation, and its new standard as set out in Apache Stronghold. By understanding how the courts, specifically the Ninth Circuit, have limited their definition of the “substantial burden” under RFRA in sacred site cases, this paper will argue that the standard should be expanded to include “preventing religious exercise.” This expansion of what is a “substantial burden” under RFRA will better …

Popularity Contest: Is An Independent Judiciary Compatible With Popular Constitutionalism?, Lulu S. Faulk

Indiana Law Journal

Can the theory of popular constitutionalism—where the people have authority to shape constitutional law—exist alongside judicial independence? On the surface, these two ideas seem like contestants in a popularity contest: Popular constitutionalism embraces the will of the people in defining constitutional law, while judicial independence insists that judges disregard any and all external pressure in an effort to uphold the tenets of the Constitution even when they are unpopular. The contrast of these competing ideas is all the more evident with recent Supreme Court decisions such as Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, demonstrating a deviation from majority opinion in …

Table Of Contents - Cardozo Journal Of Equal Rights & Social Justice, Vol. 31, Iss. 1

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Obvious Violation Exception To Qualified Immunity: An Empirical Study, Bailey D. Barnes

Washington Law Review

Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil suits for discretionary actions, as long as the violated right is not clearly established. A right is deemed established when every reasonable official would understand it based on precedent, placing it beyond debate, such that only the plainly incompetent may be held liable. Consequently, even when an act infringes on one’s civil rights, a court may deny relief owing to a lack of factually comparable precedent. However, in 2020, the Supreme Court indicated its distrust for overreliance on precedent in certain contexts. In Taylor v. Riojas, the Court held that prison officials …

Transportation Racism And State-Created Danger: A Civil Rights Litigation Strategy For Pedestrians Harmed By Traffic Violence, Riley Freedman

Washington Law Review

Pedestrian fatality rates in the United States are markedly high compared to peer nations and are on the rise. The distribution of these deaths shows an alarming racial gap: Black pedestrians are twice as likely to be killed compared to white pedestrians. One significant factor that explains the disparity is the greater presence of wide, high-speed roads—built to move traffic quickly at the expense of pedestrian safety—in Black neighborhoods. In some cases, there is evidence that governments intentionally placed roads through and around Black neighborhoods for racially discriminatory reasons.

This Comment argues that a pedestrian harmed or killed by a …

Let Sleeping Dogs Lie: A Comparative Analysis Of The Dormant Commerce Clause And Internal Trade Barrier Mitigation, Naman Patel

Washington Law Review

The Dormant Commerce Clause jurisprudence of the United States has been one of the most widely criticized doctrines of American constitutional law. However, most of these criticisms fail to consider the economic implications of the Dormant Commerce Clause, namely the benefits this doctrine has provided in facilitating internal free trade amongst the states. This Comment argues that the Dormant Commerce Clause has given American courts an effective tool to promote interstate free trade by removing state regulations that create non-tariff barriers to trade. To support this assertion, this Comment utilizes a comparative constitutional analysis to examine how the constitutional systems …

Theistic Illiberal Constitutionalism: A Review Of Adrian Vermeule’S Common Good Constitutionalism, Kyron J. Huigens

Articles

Adrian Vermeule’s Common Good Constitutionalism drew a remarkable amount of attention from constitutional law scholars when it was published in 2020. About eighteen months later, Vermeule published a piece complaining that the critics had missed the point, that they had ignored the natural law jurisprudence that grounds the work. He was correct. This Review addresses Vermeule’s natural law jurisprudence, emphasizing the fact that it is a religious natural law jurisprudence. His arguments are in the tradition of ScholasticismAristotelian logic incorporated into Christian theology by St. Thomas Aquinas. Scholasticism is a remarkably weak foundation for constitutional jurisprudence. It is a vast …

Is The Constitution Of 1787 A White Supremacist Document? Against Essentialism In Constitutional Interpretation, David S. Schwartz

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

A curious convergence is emerging in legal academia around the conclusion that the 1787 Constitution is a white supremacist document. Although most originalists would deny that contention, their methodology strongly favors, if it does not compel, an agreement with progressive, “neo-Garrisonian” scholars that the Constitution of 1787 is indeed a white supremacist document. Both the neo-Garrisonian and originalist elements of this implicit convergence stem from their “essentialism” in Constitutional interpretation: the idea that the Constitution or its terms or provisions carry a uniquely and objectively correct meaning, invariant over time, and independent of our evolving normative commitments.

This Article argues …

Section Three Of The Fourteenth Amendment: Insurrection, Mark A. Graber

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The public, scholarly, and legal debate over whether former president Donald Trump is eligible to hold office under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment has focused far more on technical legal questions than on whether Trump engaged in an insurrection. Scholarly and public commentary rarely examines the constitutional/ common law of insurrection, preferring instead to examine whether Trump is exempt from Section Three because Section Three either exempts presidents or the presidency from disqualification or because Section Three is not self-executing. Trump v. Anderson (2024) focused on state incapacity to disqualify “oathbreaking insurrectionists” rather than on whether Trump was an …

Life, Liberty, And Freedom From Non-Consensual Pelvic Exams?, Michaela Cotton

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

[T]here is a need for the federal government to intervene and finally ban the practice of performing non-consensual pelvic exams, and it can do so under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees the right to refuse involuntary medical treatment. Part I will provide a brief overview of pelvic exams and informed consent; Part II draws on policy considerations for banning this practice and tackles counter-arguments; Part III will discuss the relevant federal law and case precedent; Part IV demonstrates how federal law applies to non-consensual pelvic exams; and, finally, Part V will further explain the need …

Balancing Tradition And Inclusion: Framework Principles For An Afghan Accord, M. Hamed Isar

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article examines the turbulent constitutional history of Afghanistan and proposes a pragmatic constitutional framework balancing Islamic principles with rights, protections, and constraints on power. After analyzing the Taliban’s current extraconstitutional rule and ideological objections to an inclusive order, it makes the case for principled compromise. The first step to constitutional reform for Afghanistan is to recognize that Afghans, the Taliban, and the international community pay a high price for disregarding law and accountability in governance. To that end, this Article canvasses the many factors that could motivate the Taliban to accept the rule of law, despite the constraints it …