Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Illiberalization Of American Election Law: A Study In Democratic Deconsolidation, James A. Gardner

Journal Articles

For many years, the dominant view among American election law scholars has been that the U.S. Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisprudence of democratic practice got off to a promising start during the mid-twentieth century but has since then slowly deteriorated into incoherence. In light of the United States’ recent turn toward populist authoritarianism, that view needs to be substantially revised. With the benefit of hindsight, it now appears that the Supreme Court has functioned, in its management of the constitutional jurisprudence of democracy, as a vector of infection—a kind of super-spreader of populist authoritarianism.

There is, sadly, nothing unusual these days …

A Personal Journey Through The Rule Of Law In The South Pacific, W. K. Hastings

Judicature International

No abstract provided.

November 1, 2021: The Migration Of New Content To Bruceledewitz.Com, Bruce Ledewitz

Hallowed Secularism

Blog post, “The Migration of New Content to bruceledewitz.com“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.

Here's What's At Stake In Texas Abortion Case Before U.S. Supreme Court, Bruce Ledewitz

Newspaper Columns

Collected biweekly contributions to the Pennsylvania Capital-Star, a nonpartisan, nonprofit news site.

The Jury Trial Reinvented, Christopher Robertson, Michael Elias Shammas

Texas A&M Law Review

The Framers of the Sixth and Seventh Amendments to the United States Constitution recognized that jury trials were essential for maintaining democratic legitimacy and avoiding epistemic crises. As an institution, the jury trial is purpose-built to engage citizens in the process of deliberative, participatory democracy with ground rules. The jury trial provides a carefully constructed setting aimed at sorting truth from falsehood.

Despite its value, the jury trial has been under assault for decades. Concededly, jury trials can sometimes be inefficient, unreliable, unpredictable, and impractical. The COVID–19 pandemic rendered most physical jury trials unworkable but spurred some courts to begin …

A Reasonable Possibility Of Refoulement: The Inadequacies Of Procedures To Protect Vulnerable Noncitizens From Return To Persecution, Torture, Or Death, Lexie Marilyn Ford

Texas A&M Law Review

Due primarily to increases in individuals fleeing violence and turmoil in Central America, over 40% of noncitizens arriving in the United States are put on a fast-track removal process and subsequently claim fear of returning to their home countries. A decade ago, the number was only 5%. This influx of asylum-seekers at the border has led to tension between those who wish to protect them and those who view such migrants as “invaders.” In 2019 and 2020, the Trump Administration proffered sweeping regulatory changes with the aim to substantively and procedurally restrict noncitizens’ access to protection from persecution and torture …

Ag-Gag Illustrated, Jodi Lazare, Petroglyph Comics

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

In February 2021, Professor Jodi Lazare was contacted by Petroglyph Comics, a social justice comic studio, that wanted to turn her research on Canadian ag-gag legislation into a comic, accessible to all. The resulting comic is based on two articles by Prof. Lazare, the first published in the Alberta Law Journal and the second currently under review at a second Canadian law journal. Both articles combine her interests in animal law and constitutional law to suggest that recently adopted legislation limiting access to and information about industrially farmed animals in Canada constitutes an unjustified limit to the constitutional right …

Dipak Patel V. The Minister Of Finance And The Attorney General Ccz 5 Of 2020 [2021], Chanda Chungu

SAIPAR Case Review

The Constitutional Court judgment of Dipak Patel v. The Minister of Finance and the Attorney General dealt with an application by Dipak Patel who sought, inter alia, a declaration that the failure by the Minister of Finance to bring all public debt that was contracted by the Executive to the National Assembly for approval was contrary to the Constitution. This case review seeks to provide a lucid and clear analysis of the Constitutional Court judgment, discussing the soundness of the court’s reasoning and approach to the issue of how public debt should be contracted.

Dipak Patel V. The Attorney General [2020] Ccz 005, Josiah Kalala

SAIPAR Case Review

In 2016, the Constitution of Zambia was amended, introducing a provision that required the National Assembly to approve all debt before it was contracted. The Constitutional amendment also introduced a requirement that legislation relating to the contraction and guaranteeing of debt should provide the category, nature and other terms and conditions of a loan, grant or guarantee that will require approval by the National Assembly before the loan, grant or guarantee is executed. Unfortunately, since the constitutional amendment in 2016, the government of Zambia acquired numerous loans without the approval of the National Assembly of Zambia. The Petitioner, a former …

Confrontation’S Multi-Analyst Problem, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman

Texas A&M Law Review

The Confrontation Clause in the Sixth Amendment affords the “accused” in “criminal prosecutions” the right “to be confronted with the witnesses against” them. A particular challenge for courts over at least the last decade-plus has been the degree to which the Confrontation Clause applies to forensic reports, such as those presenting the results of a DNA, toxicology, or other CSI-type analysis. Should use of forensic reports entitle criminal defendants to confront purportedly “objective” analysts from the lab producing the report? If so, which analyst or analysts? For forensic processes that require multiple analysts, should the prosecution be required to produce …

Regulating Armed Private Militia Gatherings: A Constitutional State-Level Proposal To Promote Public Safety In A Post-Heller World, Sean Tenaglia

William & Mary Law Review

“Yesterday, in my view, was one of the darkest days in the history of our nation.” President Joseph R. Biden spoke these words following the January 6, 2021 riots at the U.S. Capitol Building that left five people, including a police officer, dead. The mob that stormed the Capitol sought to prevent Congress from certifying then-President-elect Biden’s Electoral College victory. In the weeks following the riot, investigators began arresting rioters associated with extremist right-wing militia groups, such as the Oath Keepers and Three Percenters. While January 6, 2021, can accurately be labeled a dark day in American history, the events …

Board Gender Diversity: A Path To Achieving Substantive Equality In The United States, Kimberly A. Houser, Jamillah Bowen Williams

William & Mary Law Review

While the European Union (EU) was founded on the concept of equality as a fundamental value in 1993, the United States was created at a time when women were considered legally inferior to men. This has had the lasting effect of preventing women in the United States from making inroads into positions of power. While legislated board gender diversity (BGD) mandates have been instituted in some EU countries, the United States has been loath to take that route, relying instead on the goodwill of corporate boards, with little progress. On September 30, 2018, however, California enacted a law that has …

Reconsidering Section 1983'S Nonabrogation Of Sovereign Immunity, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Scholarship

Motivated by civil unrest and the police conduct that prompted it, Americans have embarked on a major reexamination of how constitutional enforcement works. One important component is 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which allows civil suits against any “person” who violates federal rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has long held that “person” excludes states because Section 1983 flunks a condition of crystal clarity.

This Article reconsiders that conclusion—in legalese, Section 1983’s nonabrogation of sovereign immunity—along multiple dimensions. Beginning with a negative critique, this Article argues that because the Court invented the crystal-clarity standard so long after Section 1983’s enactment, the caselaw …

Menstrual Dignity And The Bar Exam, Margaret E. Johnson, Marcy L. Karin, Elizabeth Cooper

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines the issue of menstruation and the administration of the bar exam. Although such problems are not new, over the summer and fall of 2020, test takers and commentators took to social media to critique state board of law examiners’ (“BOLE”) policies regarding menstruation. These problems persist. Menstruators worry that if they unexpectedly bleed during the exam, they may not have access to appropriately sized and constructed menstrual products or may be prohibited from accessing the bathroom. Personal products that are permitted often must be carried in a clear, plastic bag. Some express privacy concerns that the see-through …

Judicial Populism, Anya Bernstein, Glen Staszewski

Faculty Scholarship

Discussions of populism generally focus on politics. This Article identifies a related phenomenon in law. Judicial populism uses political populism’s tropes, mirrors its traits, and enables its practices. Like political populism, judicial populism insists that there are clear, correct answers to complex, debatable problems. It disparages the mediation and negotiation that characterize democratic institutions and rejects the messiness inherent in a pluralistic democracy. Instead, it simplifies the issues legal institutions address and claims special access to a true, single meaning of the law.

In this image, there is no room for legitimate disagreement. Writers in this vein often accuse those …

Separate But Free, Joshua E. Weishart

Law Faculty Scholarship

“Separate but equal” legally sanctioned segregation in public schools until Brown. Ever since, separate but free has been the prevailing dogma excusing segregation. From “freedom of choice” plans that facilitated massive resistance to desegregation to current school choice plans exacerbating racial, socioeconomic, and disability segregation, proponents have venerated parental freedom as the overriding principle.

This Article contends that, in the field of public education, the dogma of separate but free has no place; separate is inherently unfree. As this Article uniquely clarifies, segregation deprives schoolchildren of freedom to become equal citizens and freedom to learn in democratic, integrated, …

There Is Only One Texas Constitution, Joshua Morrow

St. Mary's Law Journal

The pre-ratification text of the Texas Constitution appeared throughout the state in conflicting English-and foreign-language copies. Some commentators argue that it is impossible to know which copy the people ratified, or even that Texas does not have a constitution. These arguments create theoretical problems, because courts interpreting the constitution assume that it consists of fixed and determinable text. And the principle of popular sover­eignty precludes denying that the constitution exists. The conflicting copies also create practical problems. Are the legislature’s acts void for failing to include a Spanish-language enacting clause? May the state imprison citizens for debt, since the German …

Parity As Comparative Capacity: A New Empirics Of The Parity Debate, Meredith R. Aska Mcbride

University of Cincinnati Law Review

In 1977, Burt Neuborne published an article in the Harvard Law Review proclaiming that parity was a “myth”—that state courts could not be trusted to enforce federal constitutional rights. For the next 15 years, the question of parity (the equivalence of state and federal courts in adjudicating federal causes of action) was at the forefront of federal courts scholarship. But in the early 1990s, the parity debate ground to a halt after important commentators proclaimed it an empirical question that, paradoxically, could not be answered by any existing empirical methods. This article argues that proposition was unfounded at the time …

When The Conditions Are The Confinement: Eighth Amendment Habeas Claims During Covid-19, Michael L. Zuckerman

University of Cincinnati Law Review

The COVID-19 pandemic cast into harsher relief much that was already true about mass incarceration in the United States. It also cast into harsher relief much that was already true about the legal barriers confronting people seeking to make its conditions more humane. This Article offers a brief overview of the legal landscape as the COVID-19 crisis arose and then surveys eight prominent federal cases involving Eighth Amendment claims related to COVID-19 outbreaks at carceral facilities, most of which included significant litigation over whether they could secure release through habeas corpus. The Article then distills six key tensions from these …

Reviving The Poll Tax: Voter Id And Debt Laws, Cynthia Boyer

ConLawNOW

In the United States, disenfranchisement is deeply rooted in history as a form of punishment—a dual penalty. In the late nineteenth century, the poll tax first emerged to restrict voting and limit the expansion of suffrage to Black men. Primarily aimed at minorities, these laws on disenfranchisement became a significant barrier to U.S. ballot boxes. Even though the poll tax was finally outlawed in federal elections in 1964, nowadays it takes another subtle form through the prism of voter identification laws. Thirty-five states currently have voter ID laws, with varying criteria and accepted forms of documentation, thus requesting or requiring …