Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Constitutional Court Of Kosovo In Comparative Perspective, Christie S. Warren

Faculty Publications

...presented at the Solemn Ceremony of the 14th Judicial Year of the Constitutional Court, held on 23 October 2023 in Prishtina and on the occasion of the International Conference “Contribution of Constitutional Courts in the protection and strengthening of the fundamental values of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental human rights and freedoms”, organized on 24 October 2023 in Prishtina.

Second Amendment Immigration Exceptionalism, Pratheepan Gulasekaram

Publications

This Essay critiques the decision to uphold federal gun restrictions on unlawfully present noncitizens on the basis of "immigration exceptionalism." It argues that courts should avoid applying bespoke constitutionalism to criminal laws, including gun laws, simply because the law regulates noncitizens. This Essay shows why such exceptional modes misapprehend long-decided Supreme Court cases and well-established legal doctrine. Further, it warns that an exceptional approach to Second Amendment claims by unlawfully present noncitizens cannot be cabined to either firearms or the unlawfully present. Rather, it portends a wider gulf in constitutional protections for all noncitizens across a variety of fundamental criminal …

A Qualitative Analysis Of Section 1983 Filings By Incarcerated Plaintiffs, Hollie Macdonald

Theses and Dissertations

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic was a “watershed moment" in human history, transcending its role as a mere health crisis to reveal deeper fissures within societies. The present retrospective longitudinal study examined COVID-19 as an “era” of complexity utilizing it as an intermediate construct that delineates “pre-COVID” and “post-COVID.” In order to understand the impact of the COVID-19 era, the design of the study and hypotheses stem from an assumption of the interconnectedness of issues related to health, social justice, racial justice, politics, and information dissemination.

This study utilized both manifest and latent content analysis to explore the most …

Standing Without Injury, Jonathan Adler

Faculty Publications

This Article seeks to assess Judge Newsom’s proposed injury-less approach to standing in federal court. Part I of this Article provides a brief overview of current standing doctrine, the requirements of standing consolidated in Lujan, and how these requirements have been interpreted and applied by the Supreme Court. Part II describes Judge Newsom’s critique of contemporary standing doctrine and outlines the two primary components of his proposed alternative: 1) elimination of the standing requirement in favor of a simple cause-of-action requirement and 2) recognition of an external constraint on standing derived from Article II, rather than Article III.

Part …

Public Protest And Government Immunities, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

This Article presents the findings of a quantitative and qualitative study of the application of qualified immunity and other governmental immunities in the context of public protest. Relying on three unique datasets of federal court decisions examining First Amendment and Fourth Amendment claims, the Article concludes that public protester plaintiffs face an array of obstacles when suing state, local, and federal officials for constitutional injuries. Quantitative findings show that protesters’ claims are frequently dismissed under qualified immunity doctrines and that plaintiffs also face strict limits on municipal liability, new restrictions on First Amendment retaliation claims, and the possible extinction of …

Revocation At The Founding, Jacob Schuman

Michigan Law Review

The Supreme Court is divided over the constitutional law of community supervision. The justices disagree about the nature of a defendant’s liberty under supervision, the rights that apply when the government punishes violations, and the relationship between parole, probation, and supervised release. These divisions came to a head in 2019’s United States v. Haymond, where the justices split 4–1–4 on whether the right to a jury trial applies to revocation of supervised release. Their opinions focused on the original understanding of the jury right at the time the Constitution was ratified.

This Article aims to settle the debate over …

Movement For Quality Government V. Knesset, Esther Hayut, Yael Willner, Alex Stein, Gila Canfy-Steinitz, Yechiel Meir Kasher, Noam Sohlberg, David Mintz, Yosef Elron, Isaac Amit, Ruth Ronnen, Uzi Vogelman, Khaled Kabub, Anat Baron, Ofer Grosskopf, Daphne Barak-Erez

Translated Opinions

Movement for Quality Government v. Knesset concerned challenges to Amendment No. 3 to Basic Law: The Judiciary (the “reasonableness amendment”). In view of the controversy surrounding the amendment and the fundamental constitutional question it raised in regard to the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to review Basic Laws, the Court took the unprecedented step of sitting en banc. A translation of the official abstract issued by the Court appears here.

On January 1, 2024, a majority of the Court (12 of 15 justices) held that the Court held the authority to conduct judicial review of Basic Laws and to intervene in …

Movement For Quality Government In Israel V. The Knesset, Esther Hayut, Yael Willner, Alex Stein, Gila Canfy-Steinitz, Yechiel Meir Kasher, Noam Sohlberg, David Mintz, Yosef Elron, Isaac Amit, Ruth Ronnen, Uzi Vogelman, Khaled Kabub, Anat Baron, Ofer Grosskopf, Daphne Barak-Erez

Translated Opinions

Movement for Quality Government v. Knesset concerns challenges to Amendment No. 3 to Basic Law: The Judiciary (the “reasonableness amendment”). In view of the controversy surrounding the amendment and the fundamental constitutional question it raised in regard to the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to review Basic Laws, the Court took the unprecedented step of sitting en banc. We translate here Chief Justice Hayut's majority opinion.

On January 1, 2024, a majority of the Court (12 of 15 justices) held that the Court held the authority to conduct judicial review of Basic Laws and to intervene in exceptional, extreme cases in …

The Warrant Impact Study: Evaluating The Effects Of Bench Warrants On Individuals And Communities, Patrick C. Brayer

Faculty Works

No abstract provided.

Consent Searches As Police Violence, David B. Owens

Articles

Henderson and Krishnamurthi’s new paper—A Wolf in Sheep’s Attire: How Consent Enfeebles Our Fourth Amendment (hereinafter Sheep’s Attire)— powerfully advocates for reform to the consent doctrine. The paper is thoughtful, well-intentioned, and useful for challenging core assumptions about the law to help us evaluate how it should work. The piece is also fun to read as the authors breathe real-world insight into old doctrine. In the end, though the article flirts with a categorical rule about consent searches, and while the authors “think it categorically unreasonable for police to ask individuals to forgo their rights” in the context …

The Consequences Of Mythology: Supreme Court Decisionmaking In Indian Country, M. Alexander Pearl

Faculty Articles

Ilanoli isht unowa. We tell our own stories. A single historical event has many stories. Although this nation's official chronicle expected and even hoped for Indigenous peoples to fade away, we are still here. Our histories are marked by resistance, survival, sovereignty, and renaissance. Only now, in the later stages of the American experiment, do our histories have the chance to matter in new forms and spaces. How much these stories matter within contemporary contexts depends upon where they are spoken and more importantly, who is listening. On the pages of a U.S. Supreme Court opinion, what stories are told …

Popular Constitutionalism Inside The Courts: The Search For Popular Meaning, Thomas G. Donnelly

Law Faculty Publications

While commentators celebrate (or lament) the rise of originalism on the Roberts Court, another theory may prove as important to the future of constitutional law: popular constitutionalism. In a range of recent cases, Justices from across the ideological spectrum have proven themselves open to using sources of popular authority to address important constitutional issues. This is especially true of the two Justices at the Roberts Court’s ideological center: John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh. Even so, the question remains how best to make popular constitutionalism work inside the courts. This question has vexed popular constitutionalists since the theory’s inception. In my …

Protecting Minority Representation In An Era Of Political Polarization And The Hollowing Out Of Voting Rights Protections, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.

Law Faculty Publications

The United States Supreme Court has hollowed out various voting rights protections, leaving all voters—minority and nonminority—less protected in a politically polarized America. Surprisingly, the Court has continued to protect representation for minority race voters who live in racially polarized areas. However, minority race voters risk losing that protection, typically provided through majority-minority districts authorized under the Voting Rights Act, if they build cross-racial coalitions with their neighbors. Under the Court’s interpretation of the VRA, cross-racial voting coalitions may be less protected than local majorities comprised of a single race of voters. The loss of such protection could leave their …

The Harlan Court: A Constitutional Alternate History, H. Jefferson Powell

Faculty Scholarship

Walter Dellinger shared the widespread perception that the Burger Court was characterized by “rootless activism” rather than principled constitutional adjudication, and for him this put in question the legitimacy even of decisions that reached outcomes he thought politically or morally desirable. To explain what was wrong with such decisions, he often imagined the Court as it might have been if Justice John Marshall Harlan, who died in 1971, had lived another decade, and inspired an era of constitutional decisions deeply rooted in constitutional tradition and characterized by careful adherence to legal method. This Essay seeks to explain Dellinger’s idea and …

The Next Generation, Jeremiah Chin

Articles

What would the law look like if we let children remake it? Laws govern, classify, and circumscribe children who inherit the law and its consequences. Discourses of power invoke children as rhetorical strategies to gain political favor or obviate a position—yet children are uncritically excluded from participating in the systems that control them. Children are subjected to the laws and objects of legislation, but denied the rights, autonomy, or authority to participate in the making of law and policy. Even the conceptualization of the constitutional rights of children is treated as an assumption, ill-defined and under theorized by traditional legal …

Standing And Probabilistic Injury, Curtis A. Bradley, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

Standing to sue often turns on questions of probability. For example, public law plaintiffs must show that they are likely to be affected by allegedly unlawful government surveillance or environmental policies, and consumers may wish to sue private defendants over false credit reporting or data breaches that may or may not cause them financial or reputational harm in the future. This Article offers a framework for resolving a wide range of these “probabilistic standing” issues. Our core claim is that courts and commentators ask too much of standing doctrine in probabilistic cases. First, scholars sometimes seek a unified theory of …

Originalism And Historical Fact-Finding, Joseph Blocher, Brandon L. Garrett

Faculty Scholarship

Historical facts are more central to constitutional litigation than ever before, given the Supreme Court’s increasing reliance on originalism and other modes of interpretation that invoke historical practice and tradition. This raises a central tension. The case for originalism has rested largely on the idea that it is simultaneously fact-bound and a theory of adjudication capable of resolving questions of constitutional law. In practice, however, the historical facts central to originalism typically are not litigated in accordance with standard practices for fact-finding: introduction at trial, expert testimony, adversarial testing, deference on appeal, and so on.

In the absence of the …

Economic Security And The Separation Of Powers, Kathleen Claussen, Timothy Meyer

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power “[t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations,” but today the exercise of the foreign commerce power resides primarily with the executive branch. That transfer of control is partly the result of significant delegations of responsibility for managing foreign commerce from Congress to the executive. It is also, however, the result of the securitization of foreign commerce. The executive branch asserts that foreign commerce issues fall under its constitutional powers over foreign affairs, and, thus, that it enjoys authority over foreign commerce that exceeds the scope of congressional delegations.

This Article makes three contributions. First, …

Reflections On Race, The Constitution, And Growing Up In The Segregated South, Walter Dellinger

Faculty Scholarship

The following passages are excerpted from the manuscript entitled Balcony Reserved for White Spectators that Walter Dellinger was writing at the time of his death in February 2022. These particular excerpts were chosen first and foremost because they demonstrate Dellinger’s unwavering and lifelong commitment to the pursuit of racial justice. But they were also chosen because they illustrate the array of talents that Dellinger brought to his work—his encyclopedic knowledge of constitutional history, his powers of legal analysis and persuasion, his attunement to the latent meanings in popular culture, and last, but certainly not least, his spellbinding storytelling.

Note: The …

Sins And Omissions: Slavery And The Bill Of Rights, Richard Primus

Articles

According to the conventional story, the Constitutional Convention declined to include a bill of rights in the Constitution because it trusted the enumeration of congressional powers to do the necessary work of limiting the federal government. That conventional story is historically unfounded. It is not supported by contemporary evidence, and it was roundly disbelieved at the time. Although it is not possible to know for certain why (really, for what mix of reasons) the Framers omitted a bill of rights, it seems likely that one major reason was that formulating a bill of rights would have provoked a bitter fight …