Constitutional Law Commons^™

Constitutional Cautions Post-Covid-19: A Proposal For 5th Amendment Protection From Police Power Overreach, Ethan Finster, Jessica Dofelmire, Editor

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

The invocation of police powers by state governments throughout the Covid-19 pandemic to restrict business activity created a legal protection around government action that prevents 5th Amendment claims. This protection persists whether or not those actions fit within precedential criteria for takings. While police powers are certainly an important aspect of governance in times of crisis, the infringement of individuals’ constitutional rights that accompanied their utilization must be addressed. Moreover, their use during the pandemic set a potentially dangerous precedent for their use in future emergencies. Considering the growing concern surrounding the adequacy of Takings Clause precedent for preventing government …

The Shadow Docket: What Is Happening And What Should Be Done, Collin Mitchell

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

In light of recent emergency decisions made by the Court ranging from issues addressing the COVID-19 pandemic, religious freedom, abortion rights, and polarized redistricting plans, the Supreme Courts use of the shadow docket has come under renewed scrutiny. This paper argues that the Court's use of the shadow docket, while permissible in the past, is threatening the legitimacy of the Supreme Court and unduly burdening the American Judicial System at large. Due to these effects, this paper advocates to reduce the Supreme Court's use of the shadow docket through the creation of a new specialized court system to handle emergency …

The Constitutionality Of The Title Ix Religious Exemption, Madelyn Jacobsen, Rebecca Batty, Editor

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

Petitioners in Hunter v. Department of Education questioned the constitutionality of the Title IX religious exemption as the basis of their 2021 class-action lawsuit. They claimed that more than 30 religious schools maintained discriminatory policies against LGBTQ students under the exemption. The religious exemption, often painted as unconstitutional discrimination, permits religious schools' adherence to sincerely held religious beliefs—and promotes a distinctive religious education that secular schools lack. This paper examines legal precedents relevant to religious freedom, higher education, and discrimination that demand the Title IX religious exemption remains in effect.

Aggregate Stare Decisis, Kiel Brennan-Marquez

Indiana Law Journal

The fate of stare decisis hangs in the wind. Different factions of the Supreme Court are now engaged in open debate—echoing decades of scholarship—about the doctrine’s role in our constitutional system. Broadly speaking, two camps have emerged. The first embraces the orthodox view that stare decisis should reflect “neutral principles” that run orthogonal to a case’s merits; otherwise, it will be incapable of keeping the law stable over time. The second argues that insulating stare decisis from the underlying merits has always been a conceptual mistake. Instead, the doctrine should focus more explicitly on the merits—by diagnosing the magnitude of …

The Dilemma Of Banned Books: Questioning The Ethics Of Censoring Literature In Schools, Kyle King

Augustana Center for the Study of Ethics Essay Contest

Literature, specifically in the form of novels, has been a vital organ of the public education system within the United States. Not only does reading such works transform us into better close readers and strengthen our vocabulary, but the texts at hand can be very essential to analyze specific contexts or issues that might have existed either throughout history or even in the present day. In today’s country, the issue of banning certain books from school curricula has become as prevalent as ever, where mostly Southern Republican officials are calling for lists of books to be restricted from teaching due …

Hidden In Plain Sight: The Dangers Of Environmental Protections Waivers, Olivia Stevens

Indiana Law Journal

When enacting both statutory and regulatory environmental protections, Congress and various agencies have recognized that emergency situations could arise that would require flexibility in the application and enforcement of those protections. Incorporating waivers into such protections provides that flexibility. However, the current state of waivers leaves them vulnerable to abuse. In this Note, I explore how a lack of procedural and substantive safeguards allows the inappropriate use of waivers to further administrative agendas in a way that poses serious risks to both environmental and human health. I then suggest remedial measures available to Congress that would strengthen environmental protections while …

The Dignitary Confrontation Clause, Erin L. Sheley

Faculty Scholarship

For seventeen years, the Supreme Court’s Confrontation Clause jurisprudence has been confused and confusing. In Crawford v. Washington (2004), the Court overruled prior precedent and held that “testimonial” out-of-court statements could not be admitted at trial unless the defendant had an opportunity to cross-examine the declarant, even when the statement would be otherwise admissible as particularly reliable under an exception to the rule against hearsay. In a series of contradictory opinions over the next several years, the Court proceeded to expand and then seemingly roll back this holding, leading to widespread chaos in common types of cases, particularly those involving …

Juvenile Solitary Confinement And The Eighth Amendment, Taylor R. Graves

Honors Thesis

This literature review examines the practice of juvenile solitary confinement, applies the United States Supreme Court’s Eighth Amendment jurisprudence, argues that the practice should be declared unconstitutional as a violation of the Eighth Amendment, and calls for a categorical ban. The Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause of the Eighth Amendment states, “nor [shall] cruel and unusual punishments [be] inflicted.” U.S. Const. amend. VIII. Juvenile solitary confinement is cruel and unusual, in violation of the Eighth Amendment, because juveniles are different. The United States Supreme Court has long recognized that juveniles should not be held to the same standards of …

A Balancing Act: Overcoming Incommensurability In Rights Adjudication, Samantha Knutson Jex

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

The Supreme Court's current system for rights adjudication is insufficient in cases where both sides feel that a fundamental right has been violated, such as Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. To overcome this insufficiency, I argue that the Court should implement a new test that is a modified combination of the Supreme Court's strict scrutiny and the test used internationally for rights adjudication--the proportionality test. I call this new test the "Incommensurability Test" and explain how it works and why it is beneficial for rights adjudication in the United States. Applying the "Incommensurability Test" would enable the Court …

Truth And Reconciliation: The Ku Klux Klan Hearings Of 1871 And The Genesis Of Section 1983, Tiffany R. Wright, Ciarra N. Carr, Jade W.P. Gasek

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Over the course of seven months in 1871, Congress did something extraordinary for the time: It listened to Black people. At hearings in Washington, D.C. and throughout the former Confederate states, Black women and men—who just six years earlier were enslaved and barred from testifying in Southern courts—appeared before Congress to tell their stories. The stories were heartbreaking. After experiencing the joy of Emancipation and the initial hope of Reconstruction, they had been subjected to unspeakable horror at the hands of white terrorists. They had been raped and sexually humiliated. Their children and spouses murdered. They had been savagely beaten …

The Neuroscience Of Qualified Immunity, Gary S. Gildin

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Qualified immunity not only absolves public officials from accountability for the damages caused when they deprive a citizen of their constitutional rights; by virtue of companion doctrines shielding governmental entities from liability, conferral of immunity leaves the victim to bear the loss. Therefore, it is essential that the contours of immunity be carefully calibrated to align with its intended purposes.

The United States Supreme Court has continuously expanded immunity to protect the exercise of discretion where, albeit acting in violation of constitutional norms, the official could have reasonably believed their conduct was constitutional. This Article exposes the implicit assumptions as …

Dobbs V. Jackson Women's Health Organization And The Likely End Of The Roe V. Wade Era, Jeffrey Hannan

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

No abstract provided.

Right Of Self, Mitchell F. Crusto

Washington and Lee Law Review

The exercise of free will against tyranny is the single principle that defines the American spirit, our history, and our culture. From the American Revolution through the Civil War, the two World Wars, the Civil Rights Movement, and up to today, Americans have embraced the fundamental rights of the individual against wrongful governmental intrusion. This is reflected in our foundational principles, including the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution, the Reconstruction Amendments, the Nineteenth Amendment, and, more recently, in the Supreme Court’s recognition of fundamental individual rights within the Constitution’s penumbras. However, there is no …

The Party Respectfully Requests A Jury Trial On All Issues So Triable: What Issues Are Triable To A Jury And What Issues Should Be Triable To A Jury? A Comment On The Right To A Jury Trial, With A Focus On Civil Trials, And When The Right Exists, Michael Downing

Mercer Law Review

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed . . . .” But what about civil prosecutions? What about prosecutions under state law, not federal? What does the universally expected “right to a jury trial” really mean or afford the parties to a trial?

Under federal law and the United States Constitution, by the time the Bill of Rights was drafted, the ideal of an accused’s right to a jury trial was already deeply rooted within …

Human Dignity As A Chameleon, Ariel L. Bendor, Michal Tamir

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

This article offers an innovative argument, according to which courts do not interpret human dignity according to an abstract theoretical position on the nature of the value only, nor subordinate themselves to the subjective purpose of the drafters of a constitution. Thus, courts-whether in the United States, where human dignity is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, or in countries where the right is constitutionally enshrined, such as Germany, South Africa, and Israel-interpret and apply human dignity on the basis of the entirety of the provisions of the particular constitution. Human dignity serves as a constitutional chameleon in the sense …

The Original Meaning Of “Due Process Of Law” In The Fifth Amendment, Max Crema, Lawrence B. Solum

Faculty Scholarship

The modern understanding of the Fifth Amendment Due Process of Law Clause is dramatically different from the original meaning of the constitutional text. The Supreme Court has embraced both substantive due process—a jurisprudence of unenumerated rights—and procedural due process—a grab bag of doctrines that touch upon almost every aspect of administrative and judicial procedures. We demonstrate that the original meaning of the Clause is much narrower. In 1791, “due process of law” had a narrow and technical meaning: the original sense of the word “process” was close to the modern sense that the word has when used in the phrase …

Second Chances: Why Michigan Should Categorically Prohibit The Sentence Of Juvenile Life Without Parole, Richard Zhao

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The United States is the only country in the world that sentences children to die in prison. This practice, known as juvenile life without parole (JLWOP), is condemned by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Yet twenty-five states still permit the sentence, and Michigan houses one of the nation’s largest JLWOP populations. Despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s ban on some forms of JLWOP, more must be done to further limit the use of this sentence. The current JLWOP sentencing scheme is untenable, imposes a significant financial burden on taxpayers, and perpetuates racial inequality. This Note explores …

The Ghost Of John Hart Ely, Ryan D. Doerfler, Samuel Moyn

Vanderbilt Law Review

The ghost of John Hart Ely haunts the American liberal constitutional imagination. Despite the failure long ago of any progressive constitutional vision in an increasingly conservative Supreme Court, Ely’s conjectures about the superiority of judges relative to legislatures in the protection of minorities and the policing of the democratic process remain second nature. Indeed, they have been credible enough among liberals to underwrite an anxious or even hostile attitude toward judicial reform. In order to exorcise Ely’s ghost and lay it to rest, this Article challenges his twin conjectures. First, the Article argues that there is little historical and no …

Leveling The Playing Field In Custody Proceedings In New York City Family Court: Enforcing The Rights Of All Parents To Notice And An Unbiased Opportunity To Enforce Their Fundamental Right To Parent Their Child, Dana Gambardella

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note argues that the Administration for Children's Services (ACS) in New York City systematically fails to notify non-respondent fathers, particularly Black fathers, of their rights and opportunities to participate in child welfare proceedings. This practice violates their fundamental constitutional right to parent and disproportionately affects low-income Black families, perpetuating racial and economic disparities in the child welfare system. The note advocates for systemic reforms, including increased accountability for ACS and the establishment of a private right of action for aggrieved parents.

Llegaron Los Federales: The Federal Government’S Prosecution Of Local Criminal Activity In Puerto Rico, Emmanuel Hiram Arnaud

Faculty Scholarship

In the midst of a debilitating humanitarian crisis in Puerto Rico and high-profile litigation concerning other U.S. territories, scholars, political leaders, and activists have elevated conversations of constitutionally sanctioned inequality into the public spotlight. With respect to Puerto Rico, these conversations focus on its current economic morass and relation to the debate over decolonization. Absent from these important discussions is the role that federal criminal law plays in manifesting Congress’ continued plenary power over U.S. territories. This Article breaks from that pattern and highlights an ignored part of federal criminal jurisprudence: the federal prosecution of local criminal activity in Puerto …