Constitutional Law Commons^™

Title Ix And Official Policy Liability: Maximizing The Law’S Potential To Hold Education Institutions Accountable For Their Responses To Sexual Misconduct, Erin E. Buzuvis

Faculty Scholarship

Title IX, the federal statute that prohibits sex discrimination in education, plays a key role in institutional accountability for sexual misconduct that is perpetrated by a school’s students, faculty, and staff. The Supreme Court has confirmed that Title IX includes an implied right of action for money damages when the institution had actual notice that sexual harassment had occurred, or was likely to occur, and responded to that threat with deliberate indifference. But the deliberate indifference standard has proven to be a high and unpredictable bar for plaintiffs. For this reason, many institutions required the threat of government enforcement—issued in …

Reconstructing Racially Polarized Voting, Travis Crum

Scholarship@WashULaw

Racially polarized voting makes minorities more vulnerable to discriminatory changes in election laws and therefore implicates nearly every voting rights doctrine. In Thornburg v. Gingles, the Supreme Court held that racially polarized voting is a necessary—but not a sufficient—condition for a vote dilution claim under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The Court, however, has recently questioned the propriety of recognizing the existence of racially polarized voting. This colorblind approach threatens not only the Gingles factors but also Section 2’s constitutionality.

The Court treats racially polarized voting as a modern phenomenon. But the relevant starting point is the 1860s, …

A Well-Rounded Argument: How Skinner And Obergefell Make Medical Requirements For Surrogacy Contracts Unconstitutional, Amanda Grau

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

No abstract provided.

Symbolism And The Thirteenth Amendment: The Injury Of Exposure To Governmentally Endorsed Symbols Of Racial Superiority, Edward H. Kyle

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

One of the debates often encountered by native southerners centers around our historical symbols. There are heated opinions on both sides of the issue as to what these symbols mean and whether they should be allowed to be displayed. The latter question has begun making its way into the courts, with many southern symbols and memorials being accused of promoting the philosophy of racial supremacy. Despite the growing public concern, modern courts refuse to rule on the question. They claim they are forestalled by Article III’s standing requirement that plaintiffs must have suffered a concrete injury in fact. They state …

Conceptualizing Appealability: Resisting The Supreme Court's Categorical Imperative, Richard L. Heppner Jr.

Law Faculty Publications

This paper draws on insights from cognitive psychology to understand how courts conceive of categories of orders. Cognitive psychologists have shown that people understand the world using not only "classical categories" based on logical definitions, but also "conceptual categories" based on fuzzier, intuitive concepts of similarity and typicality. This paper approaches appealability as a two-step process-first, categorizing the order and, second, applying the appropriate doctrine. Previous interventions have focused on whether different doctrines use rules or standards at the second step. This paper focuses on the initial categorization step.

This paper makes two contributions to the study of federal appealability. …

Ai Report: Humanity Is Doomed. Send Lawyers, Guns, And Money!, Ashley M. London

Law Faculty Publications

AI systems are powerful technologies being built and implemented by private corporations motivated by profit, not altruism. Change makers, such as attorneys and law students, must therefore be educated on the benefits, detriments, and pitfalls of the rapid spread, and often secret implementation of this technology. The implementation is secret because private corporations place proprietary AI systems inside of black boxes to conceal what is inside. If they did not, the popular myth that AI systems are unbiased machines crunching inherently objective data would be revealed as a falsehood. Algorithms created to run AI systems reflect the inherent human categorization …

The Lost Promise Of Lambert V. California, Cynthia Alkon

Faculty Scholarship

This Article will start with a brief overview of the Lambert case. It will then discuss the differing views on how to interpret this relatively short case. Next, it will review the cases citing to Lambert that illustrate the narrow approach that courts have taken when applying this case. Finally, it will offer some thoughts on how Lambert could have played a role in preventing some of the excesses of mass incarceration, but failed.

The Traditions Of American Constitutional Law, Marc O. Degirolami

Faculty Publications

This Article identifies a new method of constitutional interpretation: the use of tradition as constitutive of constitutional meaning. It studies what the Supreme Court means by invoking tradition and whether what it means remains constant across the document and over time. Traditionalist interpretation is pervasive, consistent, and recurrent across the Court’s constitutional doctrine. So, too, are criticisms of traditionalist interpretation. There are also more immediate reasons to study the role of tradition in constitutional interpretation. The Court’s two newest members, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, have indicated that tradition informs their understanding of constitutional meaning. The study of traditionalist …

Discrimination, The Speech That Enables It, And The First Amendment, Helen Norton

Publications

Imagine that you’re interviewing for your dream job, only to be asked by the hiring committee whether you’re pregnant. Or HIV positive. Or Muslim. Does the First Amendment protect your interviewers’ inquiries from government regulation? This Article explores that question.

Antidiscrimination laws forbid employers, housing providers, insurers, lenders, and other gatekeepers from relying on certain characteristics in their decision-making. Many of these laws also regulate those actors’ speech by prohibiting them from inquiring about applicants’ protected class characteristics; these provisions seek to stop illegal discrimination before it occurs by preventing gatekeepers from eliciting information that would enable them to discriminate. …

A Different Approach To The National Gun Control Debate: Whether Direct Negotiations Between Interest Groups Can Facihtate The Creation Of Meaningful Legislative Policy, Arielle Kraus

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

This Note aims to shed light on a different approach to the national gun debate. The Background of this Note will explore the origin of the gun debate from both sides, the evolution of both the Gun Rights Lobby, spearheaded by the NRA, and the Gun Control Lobby, and the ways in which their evolutions have impacted the national debate today. The current state of the gun debate addresses the relationship between the polarity of the extreme positions and the political climate. Moderate democratic voices have seemed to disappear altogether, and in their place, extremists on both sides have filled …

Why Can't We All Just Cher?: Drag Celebrity Impersonators Versus An Ever-Expanding Right Of Publicity, Emily Hoenig

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Law, Structural Racism, And The Covid-19 Pandemic, Ruqaiijah Yearby, Seema Mohapatra

All Faculty Scholarship

Racial and ethnic minorities have always been the most impacted by pandemics because of: disparities in exposure to the virus; disparities in susceptibility to contracting the virus; and disparities in treatment. This article explains how structural racism, the ways in which laws are used to advantage the majority and disadvantage racial and ethnic minorities, has caused these disparities. Specifically, this article focuses on how employment, housing, health care, and COVID-19 relief laws have been manipulated to disadvantage racial and ethnic minorities, making minorities more susceptible to COVID-19 infection and death. This article uses Blumenshine’s 2008 framework to outline how structural …

Stopping The Resurgence Of Vaccine-Preventable Childhood Diseases: Policy, Politics, And Law, Hillel Y. Levin, Stacie Patrice Kershner, Timothy D. Lytton, Daniel Salmon, Saad B. Omer

Scholarly Works

Mandatory vaccination programs in the United States are generally successful, but their continued success is under threat. The ever-increasing number of parents who opt their children out of vaccination recommendations has caused severe outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. Public health advocates have pushed for changes to state laws, but their efforts have generally been unsuccessful. We suggest that their lack of success is due to public health advocates’ failures to contend with the features of the political system that impede change and to propose reforms that are ethically defensible, efficacious, and politically feasible. Based on our earlier public health studies, ethical …

The New "Essential": Rethinking Social Goods In The Age Of Covid-19, Olatunde C.A. Johnson

Faculty Scholarship

The Covid-19 crisis has laid bare the fragility of social insurance systems in the United States and the lack of income security and basic benefits for many workers and residents. The United States has long had weaker protections for workers compared to other liberal democracies racial and economic disparities among those most affected by these dislocations (analyses are hampered by a paucity of demographic data). Those who were socially and economically vulnerable before the pandemic (for example due to homelessness, immigration status, or incarceration) are likely to suffer the most harm. Changes in workplace conditions as a result of the …

War Powers: Congress, The President, And The Courts – A Model Casebook Section, Stephen M. Griffin, Matthew C. Waxman

Faculty Scholarship

This model casebook section is concerned with the constitutional law of war powers as developed by the executive and legislative branches, with a limited look at relevant statutes and federal court cases. It is intended for use in Constitutional Law I classes that cover separation of powers. It could also be used for courses in National Security Law or Foreign Relations Law, or for graduate courses in U.S. foreign policy. This is designed to be the reading for one to two classes, and it can supplement or replace standard casebook sections on war powers that are shorter and offer less …

Unraveling Williams V. Illinois, Edward K. Cheng, Cara C. Mannion

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This Essay addresses one of the key evidentiary problems facing courts today: the treatment of forensic reports under the Confrontation Clause. Forensics are a staple of modern criminal trials, yet what restrictions the Confrontation Clause places on forensic reports is entirely unclear. The Supreme Court’s latest decision on the issue, Williams v. Illinois, sowed widespread confusion among lower courts and commentators, and during the 2018 Term, Justices Gorsuch and Kagan dissented to the denial of certiorari in Stuart v. Alabama, a case that would have revisited (and hopefully clarified) Williams.

Our Essay dispels the confusion in Williams v. Illinois. …

Precedent, Non-Universal Injunctions, And Judicial Departmentalism: A Model Of Constitutional Adjudication, Howard M. Wasserman

Lewis & Clark Law Review

This Article proposes a model of constitutional adjudication that offers a deeper, richer, and more accurate vision than the simple “courts strike down unconstitutional laws” narrative that pervades legal, popular, and political discourse around constitutional litigation. The model rests on five principles: 1) an actionable constitutional violation arises from the actual or threatened enforcement of an invalid law, not the existence of the law itself; 2) the remedy when a law is constitutionally invalid is for the court to halt enforcement; 3) remedies must be particularized to the parties to a case and courts should not issue “universal” or “nationwide” …

The Contributions Of William Funk To American Constitutional Law Scholarship, William D. Araiza

Lewis & Clark Law Review

This Essay discusses the contributions of Professor William Funk to American constitutional law scholarship on the occasion of a festschrift held in his honor at Lewis & Clark Law School on April 5, 2019. Reviewing Professor Funk’s varied scholarship reveals his careful, attentive, and even-handed approach. The Essay concludes by comparing Professor Funk’s style of constitutional law scholarship to the approach to substantive due process embraced by Justice David Souter in his classic concurring opinion in Washington v. Glucksberg. Just like Justice Souter’s analysis in Glucksberg, Professor Funk’s scholarship seeks justification for rules in the results they generate, rejects arid …

The Constitutional Convention And Constitutional Change: A Revisionist History, Matthew Steilen

Lewis & Clark Law Review

How do we change the Federal Constitution? Article V tells us that we can amend the Constitution by calling a national convention to propose changes and then ratifying those proposals in state conventions. Conventions play this role because they represent the people in their sovereign capacity, as we learn when we read McCulloch v. Maryland.

What is not often discussed is that Article V itself contains another mechanism for constitutional change. In fact, Article V permits both conventions and legislatures to be used for amendment, and, as it happens, all but one of the 27 amendments to the Constitution have …

Multidistrict Litigation And Personal Jurisdiction, Zachary T. Nelson

Lewis & Clark Law Review

Under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, a court cannot lawfully adjudicate a party’s rights or obligations unless, among other things, that court possesses sufficient personal jurisdiction over the party. The means by which a court may obtain such jurisdiction have grown increasingly narrow in recent years. Parallel to that trend has been the meteoric rise of multidistrict litigation (MDL), in which the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transfers and consolidates numerous civil cases in a single federal court that, in many instances, lacks personal jurisdiction over one or more parties. Although MDL is statutorily limited to “pretrial proceedings,” 97% …