Constitutional Law Commons^™

Personal Jurisdiction And The Fifth Amendment, Scott Dodson

ConLawNOW

The Supreme Court has avoided clarifying the relationship between federal-court personal jurisdiction, congressional statutes, and the Fifth Amendment. Until now, that is. In June 2025, the Court decided two important cases involving constraints on a federal court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction outside of Rule 4(k)(1)(A), which typically ties federal-court personal jurisdiction to state-court personal jurisdiction. This brief essay explains and analyzes those cases, situating them in the Court’s larger agenda for personal jurisdiction. It also discusses some open questions raised by the decisions and the role that personal jurisdiction in the United States may now play on the global stage.

Constitutional Futurism As Pedagogy, Jeremiah Chin

Articles

Constitutional Law has transformed from a course on history to a discussion of current events. Cases like Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo reveal that the study of constitutional law is not a static, or even linear, discussion of constitutional text and history. Law is a shifting, changing enterprise that reflects social constructions of power, authority, and identity. How do we teach, learn, and understand constitutional law that is so laden with history, riddled with theories of consistency and adherence to precedent, but ultimately subject …

Louisiana's Ten Commandments Statute: With Litigation Updates From Arkansas And Texas, Carl H. Esbeck

Faculty Publications

Legislators in conservative states are drawn to a belief that the Ten Commandments [“10/Cs”] underscore American’s moral, jurisprudential, and historical heritage. First the State of Louisiana, and thereafter Arkansas and Texas, enacted legislation requiring the posting of the 10/Cs in every public school and university classroom in the state. This quickly brought on legal challenges by students and their parents, along with a smattering of local clerics, together contending that these laws were unconstitutional, most prominently violations of the Establishment Clause. State attorney generals leaped to defend these statutes making the facial assertion that the 10/Cs are not so much …

The Reverse Onus At Bail For Intimate Partner Violence: An Unconstitutional And Ineffective Measure, Ella Peterson

Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies

The recently adopted reverse onus at bail for repeat intimate partner violence is a piece of performative legislation that is ineffectual and may harm those it seeks to protect. Part I of this paper provides an overview of intimate partner violence in Canada in order to contextualize s. 515(6)(b.1) of the Criminal Code. Part II is a Charter assessment of the reverse onus provision at issue, focusing on sections 7 and 11(e). Part III concludes with a critique of the effectiveness of the reverse onus, which fails to address the root causes of intimate partner violence.

The Collapse Of Negara Hukum: How Indonesia’S Rule Of Law Has Been Shaped By Embedded Oligarch Politics?, Herlambang Perdana Wiratraman

The Indonesian Journal of Socio-Legal Studies

This article argues recent performance of the rule of law in the 25-years period after Soeharto’s authoritarian regime. Why has there been a weakening of civil liberties, while on the other hand the oligarchic power and authoritarianism strengthens the current Indonesia’s politics. This article examines the prevalence of arbitrary practices, not only in the fair procedural process of law enforcement, but also why it is so easy to pass anti-democratic laws that contradict the principles of the rule of law. By referring to three specific case studies: free expression, academic freedom and press freedom, this article found that politics in …

Constitutional Futurisms, Jeremiah Chin

Articles

How do we reckon with the past? The Supreme Court’s recent embrace of originalism as a mode of constitutional analysis relies almost exclusively on a view of history and tradition that would bind us to an understanding of principles and ideals that legitimized the exclusion of minority voices. Cases such as New York State Pistol and Rifle Ass'n v. Bruen use flavors of originalism as a framework to define rights and governmental powers through their historical antecedents, but this broad standard of interpretation is notably absent in the Court’s recent discussions of histories and traditions of racism in the United …

Popular Originalism, Thomas G. Donnelly

BYU Law Review

Scholars are obsessed with the Roberts Court’s recent turn to history and tradition. But another source of authority has also emerged as an important feature of the Roberts Court’s approach to constitutional cases. In previous work, I have referred to this source of authority as popular meaning. While original meaning identifies the best reading of the Constitution’s text at the time of its ratification, popular meaning draws on sources of authority outside the courts to capture the constitutional views of the American people today. In this Article, I demonstrate how interpreters might draw on the Constitution’s popular meaning to help …

Eviscerating The State: The New Oligarchic And Authoritarian Project To Undermine American Constitutional Democracy, Jean L. Cohen

Emancipations: A Journal of Critical Social Analysis

No abstract provided.

Wake Up: How Application Of Garcetti To Public Educator Speech Harms Educators And Students Through The Lens Of Florida's Individual Freedom Act, Lindsay Mccarthy

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Nearly twenty of the nation’s states have enacted some kind of law that limits the teaching of controversial topics like race, gender, and politics. Within the last three years, these laws have become more commonplace as social movements like Black Lives Matter and #MeToo have brought topics like systemic racism and gender inequality to the nation’s attention. As the country becomes more polarized, state legislatures—typically conservative ones—have resorted to these censorship laws to fight back against the perceived indoctrination of children. The state that has gained the most notoriety for such laws is Florida. In 2022, Florida passed a …

Cross-Talk, Alicia Bannon, John Q. Barrett, Tyler Rose Clemons, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii, Mark C. Niles

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

John Q. Barrett (“JQB”)

We now enter the exciting segment of the program called cross-talk.

Tyler Rose Clemons (“TRC”)

One of the things that this conversation has brought up for me is whom is the Court overturning precedent on behalf of? What interest? Whose interest is it that the Court is acting to vindicate when it says we got it wrong before, and it is so important that we get it right that we are willing to take this supposedly drastic remedy of overturning our own precedent?

What I was thinking about immediately during Judge Livingston’s remarks was West …

Stare Decisis And The 1l Classroom: Can Legal Reasoning Be Taught Without Judicial Respect For Precedent?, Mark C. Niles

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

I began my career as a law professor in 1998 and, in every year but one, since then I have taught at least one first-year required law school course. I have taught Civil Procedure each of these years and some version of a required Constitutional Law course in about half of them. I want to say just a little bit about stare decisis and its importance in our legal system from the perspective of a law professor teaching first-year students.

I have found that although teaching Civil Procedure involves a focus on a range of substantive issues including judicial …

Stare Decisis And Zombie Laws, Alicia Bannon

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In recent years, the Supreme Court has shown little interest in stare decisis—the principle that courts should honor precedent—as an animating value in constitutional interpretation. This has put many fundamental rights in a vulnerable posture. This Essay focuses on one underappreciated dimension of the decline in respect for stare decisis as it relates to fundamental rights: the relationship between stare decisis and what I will call, and what others have called, “zombie laws.”

Zombie laws are laws that were rendered inoperative by courts but never rescinded; for example, an abortion ban that became unenforceable after Roe v. Wade. …

Doubting Thomas And Questioning Stare Decisis Under The Roberts Court, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

“[S]tare decisis is ‘not an inexorable command.’ ” Frankly, every time I read these words in a judicial opinion of late, I shudder. And, in fact, it seems like I am reading these words— and shuddering—with increasing regularity.

First off, of course it is not. At times, the Supreme Court has sanctioned manifest injustices in the law. The prime example is the Court’s 1896 decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, which sustained racial segregation under the Fourteenth Amendment. With the blessing of the judiciary, this interpretation of the Reconstruction Constitution supported a regime of racial segregation until, more than …

On Stealth Overruling, Tyler Rose Clemons

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

From Loper Bright v. Raimondo to Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Roberts Court has shown itself more than willing to overturn longstanding pillars of American jurisprudence explicitly. While such cases and other pathbreaking opinions have understandably garnered the lion’s share of attention, the Court has also demonstrated an increased willingness to tweak, modify, or even functionally overrule doctrines without expressly stating that it is doing so. I call this phenomenon “stealth overruling.”

A Conversation About Stare Decisis, The Honorable Debra Ann Livingston, John Q. Barrett

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

John Q. Barrett (“JQB”)

Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston, welcome back to St. John’s.

The Chief Judge has been a friend to us for many years. It is an honor to host someone of her talent and someone in her position: the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

We’re going to have a conversation for the first part of the program, about judging, her work, and stare decisis.

But first, we need to meet you and hear a little bit about your background—where you are from—and the path that took you to the …

Rethinking The Applicability Of Section 8 Of The Canadian Charter For The Information Age And Beyond, François Tanguay-Renaud

All Papers

The Supreme Court of Canada’s interpretation of the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure guaranteed by section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has remained fairly stable since the adoption of the Charter. Or at least, that is how the Court’s section 8 jurisprudence to date makes it seem. Yet, in some recent decisions dealing with digital communications and the internet—culminating in the 2024 case of R. v. Bykovets—the Court has, implicitly, brought into question the foundational principle based on which the right has historically been circumscribed. Or so I argue in …

Constitutionalizing Traveling Feminisms In Kenya, Nkatha Kabira

Cornell International Law Journal

This Article uses selected provisions of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 to argue that although elaborate legal and institutional frameworks for promoting women’s empowerment have been adopted in Kenya’s legal framework, implementation of these provisions remains a challenge. Why is the law in the books so different from the law in action? This is the question this Article seeks to address. By mapping out how feminist ideas travel through collective action, colonial encounters, local, regional and world conferences, legislation, and other means, the Article demonstrates that the reason why implementation remains a challenge is that these ideas are often in …

Volume 48 Masthead

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Keynote Address: Community Over Constitution, Riddhi Mukhopadhyay

Seattle University Law Review

In this keynote address, Riddhi Mukhopadhyay challenges the veneration of the U.S. Constitution by highlighting its origins in exclusion and its continued failure to protect marginalized communities. Drawing from her experience in civil legal aid and gender justice, she argues that the Constitution was drafted to consolidate power among white, wealthy men and continues to reflect that legacy through racial, gender, and class-based inequities. While acknowledging the significance of constitutional amendments and landmark cases, Mukhopadhyay emphasizes that meaningful change has always come from community-led action, not top-down reform. Additionally, Mukhopadhyay calls on lawyers and legal advocates to center community, practice …

The Lost Child: A Critique On Transracial Adoption Rhetoric, Hallie Conyers-Tucker

Seattle University Law Review

Transracial adoption in the United States reflects a deeply rooted history of colonialism, cultural assimilation, and racial hierarchy, masked by rhetoric focused on the “best interest of the child.” The author critiques that rhetoric and traces how adoption practices and policies, both domestic and international, have evolved to reinforce systemic inequities. Through historical analysis of the forced adoption of Native American, Black, and Asian children, it reveals how the best interest standard has been wielded not to protect children but to uphold political and racial ideologies. The author argues that the prevailing adoption framework relies on child-saving and color-blind narratives …