Constitutional Law Commons^™

An Originalist Case For Birthright Citizenship Of Unlawful Immigrants' Children: Anti-Gypsy And Anti-Chinese Restrictions As Context, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

The Trump administration and other opponents of birthright citizenship for the children of “unlawful immigrants” make the following originalist claim about the Fourteenth Amendment: Even if the clause meant birthright citizenship, it applies today only to “lawful immigrants,” because the category of “unlawful immigrant” or “illegal immigrant” did not exist in the 1860s, when the clause was written and ratified. Opponents also argue that the Fourteenth Amendment’s citizenship clause originally implied a “loyalty” or “allegiance” requirement.

These assertions are historically inaccurate.

To the contrary, the concept of “unlawful immigrants” existed in the 1850s-60s, and Americans ratified birthright citizenship without indicating …

A Historical Case For A Robust But Non-Remedial Seventh Amendment, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

In Jarkesy, the Supreme Court rightly held that the Seventh Amendment required a jury trial for a case fundamentally similar to common law fraud, and it rightly limited the scope of the “public rights” exception to the Seventh Amendment. Grounded in historical and originalist methods, this essay makes four suggestions after Jarkesy:

1. Following Jarkesy, the judiciary should continue a more robust enforcement of the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. The courts should eliminate the “public rights” exception to the Seventh Amendment, which does not appear to have an original link to the Seventh Amendment. The …

One Hundred Years Of Morales Y Benet V. La Junta Local De Inscripciones: The Use Of The Insular Cases To Deny Women’S Voting Rights In Puerto Rico, Joel Andrews Cosme-Morales

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

The centenary of

Morales y Benet provides an opportunity to reflect on the inequalities women faced under Puerto Rican colonialism in the early 20th century, shaped by the legal imperialism of the United States over the archipelago. This article explores the holding in Morales y Benet v. La Junta Local de Inscripciones and its impact on women’s lives during the last 100 years.

The decision in

Morales y Benet came at a time when women in the mainland United States had already secured the right to vote, following decades of suffrage activism that culminated in the passage of the Nineteenth …

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

Faculty Scholarship

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 …

What Is The Distribution Of National Historical Parks?, Randall K. Johnson

Faculty Works

In an increasingly polarized nation, which no longer can reach any consensus about what is meant by the term “common good,” it might be wise to extend additional protections to national monuments from executive branch interference. But prior to doing so, the U.S. Congress may want to undertake some additional research work. Such research could build on the existing charge of the National Park Service as well as other interested parties. By doing so, Congress gains insight into whether and how this federal legislature should expand protections for national historical parks.

My article explains, at least in part, how Congress …

Is It Time To Revive The Privileges Or Immunities Clause?, Hwi Won Kim

Maurer Theses and Dissertations

Is it time to revive the privileges or immunities clause?

I argue it is. But in a distinct way from what other legal scholars have suggested. Today, two ideas dominate discussion of the Privileges or Immunities clause of the 14th Amendment. First, the Supreme Court rendered it a nullity in the Slaughter-House Cases (1873). Second, any attempt to revive it, most prominently Justice Thomas's recent concurrence in McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), necessarily means an abandonment of modern rights now protected by Due Process or Equal Protection. The first, in essence, argues the Clause is already dead, while the …

We The Voters: A Response To Professor Douglas, Jonathan L. Marshfield

UF Law Faculty Publications

A Response to Professor Joshua Douglas's Article, The Power of Electorate Under State Constitutions, 76 Fla. L. Rev. 1679 (2024).

To Insure Domestic Tranquility And Provide For The Common Defence: The Preamble’S Concern With Internal And External Threats, Stuart Ford

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Masthead

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Editor-In-Chief’S Foreword, Megan Stupi

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Default Is No Option: The Unconstitutionality Of The Debt Limit Law, Fred A. Slone

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

This article demonstrates conclusively the unconstitutionality of a widely feared default on the public debt due to the debt limit.

First, we find that Article I of the Constitution granted Congress no power, express or implied, to provide for a default by the United States. Under the principles of constitutional law established by the Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison (1803), any law outside the powers of Congress is void. Thus, the unconstitutionality of a default may be readily established pursuant to Article I, with additional support from the Tenth Amendment.

Furthermore, we find that the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments …

Reevaluating Fourth Amendment Protections In The Digital Age, Tiffany Benjamin

UC Law Constitutional Quarterly

No abstract provided.

Heat Camps: Juvenile Curfews, Extreme Heat & The Eighth Amendment, Norrinda Brown

Washington and Lee Law Review

For decades, in the summertime, America has confined certain of its youth in what are essentially open-air heat camps. In city after city, camp-form is established through the enactment of warm-weather juvenile curfews which keep the youth at home or in state-sponsored centers during summer nights and, increasingly, during days as well. Local governments justify these curfews with general notions of “public safety,” including to protect the youth they confine. But the laws are not benevolent. Reducing youth mobility by curfew results in exclusion, oversurveillance, and potentially lethal heat punishment of the youth, possibly in violation of the Eighth Amendment. …

The Children’S Lawsuits: Building A Global Movement In Law And Society, Mary Christina Wood

Washington and Lee Law Review

This essay describes the Atmospheric Trust Litigation (ATL) campaign, spearheaded by Our Children’s Trust, consisting of climate cases brought by youth premised on the public trust principle and, later, on express constitutional rights. The essay characterizes the cases as (1) accomplishing a “rights turn” in environmental law by invoking constitutional claims rather than statutory claims that previously marked almost all environmental litigation; (2) establishing a unified global framework of climate responsibility by depicting the planet’s atmosphere as a global public trust asset which all governments have an obligation to protect; and (3) galvanizing a youth climate movement centered on the …

Alabama’S Ivf Immunity Law: A Constitutional License To Kill?, Dani Wasshausen

Washington and Lee Law Review

In today’s post-Dobbs world, states may freely define fetal “persons” and those fundamental rights afforded to them, but not without consequence. The Supreme Court of Alabama’s groundbreaking decision in LePage v. Center for Reproductive Medicine, P.C., holding that frozen embryos are “children” under the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act, led fertility clinics and services across the state to close. These in vitro fertilization (IVF) providers feared liability exposure because their standard practices—including embryonic fertilization, testing, cryopreservation, and transfer—inevitably result in damage or death to embryos. The Alabama Legislature swiftly responded by enacting a law granting broad civil and criminal …

Foreword: Children And Constitutions In The Anthropocene Era, Catherine Smith

Washington and Lee Law Review

In Spring 2025, the Washington and Lee Law Review held its Lara D. Gass Symposium, Children and Constitutions in the Anthropocene Era. It consisted of a keynote address by Julia Olson, Co-Executive Director and Chief Legal Counsel of Our Children’s Trust, and three panels: “Children, Climate Change, and State Constitutions”; “The U.S. Constitutions and the Meaning of ‘We the [Young] People’”; and “Youth-Powered Litigation and Global Constitutionalism.” The heavily attended Symposium was a tour-de-force in the field of children’s rights.

As climate chaos mounts, young people around the world are pressing courts to reconceptualize the meaning of liberty, equality, and …

"What Shall Be Orthodox" In Polarized Times: Overview And Response To Commentators, Linda C. Mcclain, James E. Fleming

Faculty Scholarship

“If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.” Justice Robert Jackson wrote this celebrated passage in his majority opinion in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), which protected the First Amendment right of Jehovah’s Witness children not to participate in a compulsory flag salute in public schools. In recent years, protests against imposed orthodoxy—usually invoking Barnette—have occurred in …

Guardrails For Discretionary Powers: A Case Comment On The State Of Tamil Nadu V The Governor Of Tamil Nadu And Another, Pranav Verma

National Law School Journal

This Case Comment argues that by prescribing timelines for the president and the governors to grant or withhold assent to bills in The State of Tamil Nadu v the Governor of Tamil Nadu, decided in April 2025, the Supreme Court did not exceed its constitutional role, as argued by some critics. Instead, it applied established administrative law principles—relevant considerations, natural justice, and absence of mala fides—to the specific power of granting or withholding assent to bills. These principles have been long used to guide the other powers of the president, the governors, and the speaker/chairman. The court thereby reinforced …

The Indian Fourth Branch: Developing A New Institutional Morality, Abhinav Ravi

National Law School Journal

Contemporary discourse on democratic decline in India has often emphasised the need for stronger fourth branch institutions to safeguard constitutional democracy. However, fourth branch institutions are marked by a fundamental tension. They are deeply embedded in the very political contexts that they are designed to resist. The operational independence of fourth branch institutions is not merely a function of their design (that is, their structural independence), but also of the political climate, institutional leaders, and informal organisational factors.

Similar design features can produce divergent outcomes across time and contexts, with institutions displaying distinct phases of assertiveness and accommodation. While institutional …

Making The Margins Visible: Dignity At Work And The Promise Of Puttaswamy—Review Of Gendered Bodies And Worlds Of Labour: Reconceptualizing Dignity After Puttaswamy Vs Union Of India, Shreya Shree

National Law School Journal

This review examines Kalpana Kannabiran and Devi Jagani’s reimagination of dignity as a framework for securing justice in gendered labourscapes. By centering a broad and dynamic understanding of dignity as a right, an inherent characteristic, and an enabling condition for rights-talk, the book advances new ways of articulating rights-claims through an intersectional and interdisciplinary reading of the Indian Constitution. The review highlights the significance of this approach in renewing understandings of the worker, labour, discrimination, and rights, while exploring its possibilities and limits in confronting violence and injustices embedded in gendered labour relations within the domestic sphere and beyond.