Constitutional Law Commons^™

Deathly Delegation: Analyzing Mississippi's Execution Statute Under The Nondelegation Doctrine, Megan Meissner

American University Law Review

The nondelegation doctrine is a separation of powers principle that limits the legislative branch from delegating its legislative authority to another branch of government. Although this doctrine is more widely known for its federal use, preventing Congress from relinquishing too much of its law-making authority to administrative agencies, most states have adopted similar nondelegation principles. Mississippi’s nondelegation doctrine requires that the legislature enact laws that prescribe the basic policy decision, provide adequate boundaries for agency guidance, and do not vest an agency with arbitrary discretion.

On July 1, 2022, Mississippi enacted a new execution statute, permitting the Department of Corrections …

Command And Control: Operationalizing The Unitary Executive, Gary Lawson

Fordham Law Review

The concept of the unitary executive is written into the Constitution by virtue of Article II’s vesting of the “executive Power” in the President and not in executive officers created by Congress. Defenders and opponents alike of the “unitary executive” often equate the idea of presidential control of executive action with the power to remove executive personnel. But an unlimitable presidential removal power cannot be derived from the vesting of executive power in the President for the simple reason that it would not actually result in full presidential control of executive action, as the actions of now-fired subordinates would still …

Bastions Of Independence Or Shields Of Misconduct?: Increasing Transparency In Judicial Conduct Commissions, Katarina Herring-Trott

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Carceral Deference: Courts And Their Pro-Prison Propensities, Danielle C. Jefferis

Fordham Law Review

Judicial deference to nonjudicial state actors, as a general matter, is ubiquitous, both in the law and as a topic of legal scholarship. But “carceral deference”—judicial deference to prison officials on issues concerning the legality of prison conditions—has received far less attention in legal literature, and the focus has been almost entirely on its jurisprudential legitimacy. This Article contextualizes carceral deference historically, politically, and culturally, and it thus adds a piece that has been missing from the literature. Drawing on primary and secondary historical sources and anchoring the analysis in Bourdieu’s field theory, this Article is an important step to …

Interpleader As A Vehicle For Challenging The Constitutionality Of Private Citizen Action Statutes, Delia Parker

Fordham Law Review

The rise of vigilante-esque statutes creates obstacles for litigants seeking to challenge a statute’s constitutionality. State legislatures in Texas and California enacted laws regulating constitutionally protected activity (abortion and firearm possession, respectively) through statutes enforced solely by private actors. The state legislatures cleverly crafted Texas S.B. 8, as well as other copycat statutes, as bounty hunter statutes to block litigants’ usual path to pre-enforcement adjudication—filing a claim against the state to enjoin its actors from enforcing the improper provisions.

The Texas and California state legislatures attempted to forbid constitutionally protected conduct by granting enforcement power to an infinite number of …

A Pleasure To Burn: How First Amendment Jurisprudence On Book Banning Bolsters White Supremacy, Amy Anderson

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Levels Of Generality & Originalism: Proposing A New Way Forward As Originalism Continues To Expand, Marquan Robertson

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Allow Me To Transform: A Black Guy’S Guide To A New Constitution, Brandon Hasbrouck

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Allow Me to Retort: A Black Guy’s Guide to the Constitution. By Elie Mystal.

Status Manipulation In Chae Chan Ping V. United States, Sam Erman

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Chae Chan Ping v. United States. By Rose Cuison-Villazor in Critical Race Judgments: Rewritten U.S. Court Opinions on Race and the Law 74, 84. Edited by Bennett Capers, Devon W. Carbado, R.A. Lenhardt and Angela Onwuachi-Willig.

The Impact Of Post-Dobbs Abortion Bans On Prenatal Tort Claims, Aviva K. Diamond

Michigan Law Review

In June 2022, the Supreme Court revoked Americans’ fundamental right to abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. However, the Court said nothing about how its decision would impact tort claims related to reproductive care. Many states have since adopted near-total or early-gestational- age abortion bans, which has not only diminished access to reproductive care, but has also incidentally impaired the ability of plaintiffs to bring long-recognized prenatal tort claims. Prenatal tort claims—wrongful pregnancy, birth, and life—allow victims to recover when a medical professional negligently performs reproductive or prenatal care. This Note identifies the impact that post-Dobbs …

First Amendment Scrutiny: Realigning First Amendment Doctrine Around Government Interests, John D. Inazu

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Article proposes a simpler way to frame judicial analysis of First Amendment claims: a government restriction on First Amendment expression or action must advance a compelling interest through narrowly tailored means and must not excessively burden the expression or action relative to the interest advanced. The test thus has three prongs: (1) compelling interest; (2) narrow tailoring; and (3) proportionality.

Part I explores how current First Amendment doctrine too often minimizes or ignores a meaningful assessment of the government’s purported interest in limiting First Amendment liberties. Part II shows how First Amendment inquiry is further confused by threshold inquiries …

Out Of Bounds?: Abortion, Choice Of Law, And A Modest Role For Congress, Susan Frelich Appleton

Scholarship@WashULaw

This invited contribution to a symposium on the multiple intersections of family law and constitutional law grapples with the emerging problems of jurisdictional competition and choice of law in interstate abortion situations in the wake of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization—as abortion-hostile states seek to impose restrictions beyond their borders and welcoming states seek to become havens for abortion patients, regardless of their domicile. Grounded in a conflict-of-laws perspective, the essay lays out the interstate abortion chaos invited by Dobbs and the threat to our federal system that it presents, given Congress’s failure to codify a national right to …

The Unabridged Fifteenth Amendment, Travis Crum

Scholarship@WashULaw

In the legal histories of Reconstruction, the Fifteenth Amendment’s drafting and ratification is an afterthought compared to the Fourteenth Amendment. This oversight is perplexing given that the Fifteenth Amendment ushered in a brief period of multi-racial democracy and laid the constitutional foundation for the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This Article helps to complete the historical record and provides a thorough accounting of the Fifteenth Amendment’s text, history, and purpose.

This Article situates the Fifteenth Amendment within the broad array of constitutional provisions, federal statutes, fundamental conditions, and state laws that enfranchised—and disenfranchised—Black men during Reconstruction. This Article then performs …

Becoming The Administrator-In-Chief: Myers And The Progressive Presidency, Andrea Scoseria Katz, Noah A. Roseblum

Scholarship@WashULaw

In a series of recent cases, the Supreme Court has mounted an assault on the administrative state, guided by a particular vision of Article II. According to the Court’s scheme, known as the theory of the unitary executive, all of government’s operations must be housed under one of three branches, with the single head of the executive branch shouldering a unique and personal responsibility for the administration of federal law. The Constitution is thus said to require that the President have expansive authority to supervise or control the government’s many agencies.

Guiding each of the Court’s recent decisions is Myers …

The President Of The Senate, The Original Public Meaning Of The Twelfth Amendment, And The Electoral Count Reform Act, Derek T. Muller

Journal Articles

When Congress convenes under the Twelfth Amendment and the votes of presidential electors are counted, there are three different responsibilities to consider. First, who presides over the joint session where counting takes place, and what is the role of that presiding officer? Second, who counts the electoral votes? Third, who resolves disputes about those electoral votes?

This Essay answers those questions. First, the presiding officer in the joint session is the President of the Senate, and she acts as any other presiding officer of a legislature. She initiates actions pursuant to precedent, parliamentary procedures, and the wishes of the chamber. …

What Issues Are Fair Game In Moore V. United States?, Conor Clarke

Scholarship@WashULaw

On December 5th, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Moore v. United States, a constitutional challenge to the mandatory repatriation tax (“MRT”) in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The case raises basic questions about the scope of Congress’s taxing power, and has the potential to reshape and limit federal taxation. (Ben Silver had a nice summary of the complicated constitutional and statutory background last week, and I’ve also written about the case elsewhere. Rather than rehash those details, I will assume some basic familiarity with the case in what I say below.

The Judicial Assault On The Administrative State Regulating Upheavals In The Securities Markets And Boardrooms, Joel Seligman

Scholarship@WashULaw

The most substantial change in the United States Government has been the extraordinary growth and increased complexity of the United States Government itself. George Washington initially was President of a country with a population of about four million, eleven States, and three Cabinet Departments (State, Treasury, and War). Washington’s Government had no standing army, no Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid, and no programs addressing the environment, labor, or health. In 1791, the Treasury Department had approximately 500 employees, the War Department had 12, the State Department, 8.

Today, the National Government has twenty-four Cabinet members. In 2023, there are 2.89 …

The Right To (Unbiased) Counsel, Peter A. Joy, Kevin C. Mcmunigal

Scholarship@WashULaw

Whether a defense lawyer being biased against the accused on the basis of race and religion renders assistance of counsel ineffective is an unanswered question. One court will decide that issue when the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court renders a decision in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Dew. In this case, a court-appointed attorney, Richard Doyle, made over 20 bigoted and racist social media posts while representing his Black Muslim client, Anthony Dew. These public postings, made from 2014 through 2017, contained highly disparaging references to Muslims and Black people, including comments about Doyle’s own Black clients as “[a]ssorted thugs and bad …

Constructing The Supreme Court: How Race, Ethnicity, And Gender Have Affected Presidential Selection And Senate Confirmation Hearings, Christina L. Boyd, Paul M. Collins Jr., Lori A. Ringhand, Karson A. Pennington

Scholarship@WashULaw

In February 2022, President Joseph Biden announced his nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to serve as an associate justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. In doing so, he said this: “For too long, our government, our courts haven’t looked like America. And I believe it’s time that we have a Court that reflects the full talents and greatness of our nation with a nominee of extraordinary qualifications and that we inspire all young people to believe that they can one day serve their country at the highest level.” In the following days, Jackson’s nomination was discussed with enthusiasm, much like …

The Distribution Of Justices' Votes And Countering National Disunity, Nicholas L. Georgakopoulos

FIU Law Review

The estimation of the distribution that matches the voting of the justices of the Supreme Court shows that voting is correlated and reveals three phenomena: an outlier distribution produced by one composition of the Court, the surprising frequency of unanimous decisions, and the intensity with which the Court avoids 4–4 decisions. The intensity with which the Court avoids 4–4 splits and the strength of the drive to produce unanimous decisions seem sensitive to national disunity. At times of greater disunity, 1965 to 1975 and 2001 to 2020, the Court avoids 4–4 splits more intensely and has a greater fraction of …