Courts Commons^™

The Missing Constitutional Law Of Executive Conditions, Nicole Huberfeld, Matthew B. Lawrence

Faculty Articles

This Article contributes to the development of the constitutional law of executive conditions. The appropriations presidentialism of the second Trump Administration—the shift from bilateral executive/legislative cooperation and compromise in federal spending to executive unilateralism in defiance of congressional control—has forced courts into the administration of federal spending like never before. As a result, judges have been forced to confront legal questions that remained mostly dormant during the era of executive/legislative cooperation, including questions about the constitutionality of efforts to encourage through spending conditions what the federal government cannot mandate (or has not mandated) directly, like speech or silence on particular …

An Originalist Interpretation Of Article Iii Permits And Favors Bivens Actions As A Recognition Of The Intrinsic Connection Between Rights And Remedies, Shrivathsan Margam S

Mitchell Hamline Law Journal of Public Policy and Practice

The Bivens Doctrine, which stands for the principle that judges may infer private causes of action for money damages against federal officers from a constitutional text that does not expressly create such remedies, has faced attack from Originalists on the Supreme Court of the United States. Every case seeking to extend the Bivens principle to a new context meets rejection from the Court with concurrences calling for overturning it altogether. This Article will argue that an Originalist approach to interpreting the Constitution, specifically the Original Methods subset of the ascendant lens of Original Public Meaning, permits and counsels in favor …

The Fiduciary Game, Lauren R. Roth

Indiana Law Journal

Fiduciary duties are supposed to bridge the gap between public and private law. Private actors who engage in “public or quasi-public” functions (e.g., corporate directors and pension administrators) are often subject to fiduciary constraints to protect vulnerable parties who lack power in relationships with these actors. Recently, scholars have argued that both courts and legislatures have inappropriately expanded the use of fiduciary duties to purely private relationships. But what if the problem is not the expansion of fiduciary duties to private relationships, but the increasing delegation of public powers to private actors whose behavior cannot be adequately constrained by fiduciary …

Mexico’S Judicial Elections And The Politics Of Reform, Amanda Driscoll, Michael J. Nelson, Julio Ríos-Figueroa

Judicature International

No abstract provided.

Toys As Evidence, Randall K. Johnson

Faculty Works

This Essay asks and answers a single question, which was posed during a recent symposium at the National Museum of Toys & Miniatures. Could the study of revealed preferences, which is the idea that observed behaviors are the best indicator of one’s beliefs, improve our collective understanding about what constitutes unlawful discrimination in certain U.S. markets? A possible answer, which is informed by the Brown v. Board of Education decision, is the study of revealed preferences may improve our collective understanding for three reasons.

One reason is the study of revealed preferences provides a window into how some producers and …

Reimagining Self-Regulation In Sexual Misconduct Complaints: Trust Through Transfer, Allyson M. Mcbride

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

To increase trust in the judiciary’s ability to self-regulate, any formal complaints about a judge should not be handled by a colleague down the hall, but a judge from a different circuit. In this Comment, I propose automatic transfer out of circuit to improve the handling of sexual misconduct complaints specifically. I first describe the different ways judicial conduct is regulated in the federal system. I then discuss the problem of sexual misconduct in the judiciary. Finally, I outline why it is problematic for judges to adjudicate complaints about their intra-circuit colleagues and recommend that all complaints be automatically transferred …

Rewriting The Sentence: Second Look Sentencing In Rhode Island, Carter Hazzard

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Re N.O., 336 A.3d 29 (R.I. 2025)., Salvamarie Alifonso

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Interrogating The Facts Of The Case, Anna Roberts

Indiana Law Journal

Buried within many criminal judicial opinions is the origin of their “facts”—the interrogation room. Criminal law pedagogy should expose this origin. If we treat the alleged product of interrogation as “what happened,” as criminal cases (and professors) sometimes do, we obscure the ways in which interrogators are trained to incriminate and to co-create confessions. We also risk obscuring subsequent layers of reporting by police, prosecutors, or judges.

Recent scholarly literature urges criminal law professors to teach differently, warning that we distort, sanitize, and bolster the carceral state when we erase governmental agents and bypass procedure. Treating the “facts of the …

Misinformation And The Jury, Gustavo Ribeiro

Indiana Law Journal

This Article bridges critical gaps between the growing body of social science research on misinformation and the persistent challenges jurors face in evaluating potentially unreliable evidence in courtrooms. Misinformation—a pervasive issue undermining decision-making in democratic societies—mirrors the difficulties jurors encounter in distinguishing truth from falsehood amid compelling but unreliable evidence. The consequences of such challenges are dire: wrongful convictions, racial disparities, and the erosion of public trust in the legal system.

This Article is the first piece of legal scholarship to provide a comprehensive discussion of current research on the psychological mechanisms underlying susceptibility to misinformation—such as the illusory truth …

Rights Without Remedies: How Trump V. Casa Undermines Universal Injunctions And Uniform Constitutional Enforcement, Savannah Cobbs

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

Trump v. CASA, Inc. significantly reduced the remedial authority of the federal judiciary by rejecting the power of federal district courts to issue universal injunctions, a tool long used to halt widespread constitutional violations. Framed as a procedural decision about equitable remedies, the ruling severely narrows the scope of relief available in challenges to executive action. This Comment examines how the Court’s decision limits lower courts’ capacity to provide meaningful remedies and reshapes the balance of power among the branches of government. The analysis argues that the majority misapplies case law like Grupo Mexicano by imposing an unduly rigid historical …

Looking Forward, Reflecting Back: The Promise Of Dispute Resolution To Reform The Criminal Legal System, Cynthia Alkon

Faculty Scholarship

The criminal legal system in the United States is plagued by serious and systemic problems. There have been countless efforts at reform over the last many decades that have included changes in what is a crime, how crimes are punished, how prosecutors do their job, and changes in policing. Yet, despite these efforts, problems such as mass incarceration remain deeply embedded. It is easy to be swept up in pessimism when discussing the criminal legal system. Change is hard, at best incremental, and we seem to be in the beginning of an era of backlash against recent reforms. This is …

Equal Justice & Generative Ai, Milan R. Markovic

Faculty Scholarship

The United States has long suffered from unequal access to justice, with countless low-and middle-income Americans forced to navigate the legal system alone. Recently, prominent judges, lawyers, and scholars have seized on generative AI as a potential corrective. These techno-optimists maintain that ChatGPT and other large language models can demystify the law and address unmet legal needs. Chief Justice John Roberts has proclaimed that AI-based tools "have the welcome potential to smooth out any mismatch between available resources and urgent needs in our court system."

Although AI will be an increasingly important source of legal assistance for underserved populations, the …

Legalistic Noncompliance, Daniel Deacon, Leah Litman

Articles

Will the executive branch comply with court orders? That question has garnered a considerable amount of attention over the first few months of the second Trump administration. But what does it mean to comply? And what if a form of noncompliance is already occurring?

This Article documents an emerging practice that has dominated the second Trump administration's approach to unfavorable court rulings, a practice this Article calls legalistic noncompliance. Legalistic noncompliance occurs when the administration uses the language of the law as cover to claim that it is complying with court orders when in fact it is not. Drawing …

Who Gets To Sue? Legal Standing After Fda V. Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine, Rachael Houston, Robert Stephen Earnest

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

This article examines how courts are invoking FDA v. Alliance to define the limits of legal standing in litigation—specifically, in a reproductive health context. Reproductive health, as used here, encompasses a broad range of medical, legal, and policy issues related to abortion access, gender-affirming care, pregnancy, and professional regulation of services connected to reproductive decision-making. It includes the provision of and restrictions on reproductive healthcare services, the regulation of speech related to those services (e.g., advertising and advocacy), and the institutional responses to contested laws and agency rules affecting bodily autonomy, medical practice, and expressive conduct. Drawing on an original …

Let Them Hear It: Peaceful Protests Near The Homes Of Supreme Court Justices, Srikanth Reddy

Lewis & Clark Law Review

All of us—not just attorneys and politicians—need to be more critical and skeptical of the Supreme Court. Criticism by ordinary people is good and appropriate, even if it hurts the Justices’ feelings. That includes public protests. When a case matters enough to them, members of the public can and should criticize the Court and its Justices, including by peacefully gathering and protesting near a Justice’s home, or when a Justice appears out in the world.

Taking Off The “Blindfold”: Exploring Montana’S Public Trust Doctrine And The Right To A Clean And Healthful Environment After Held V. Montana, Lizzy Gazeley

Lewis & Clark Law Review

As global average temperatures continue to rise, the threat of climate change looms closer. To evade climate catastrophe, greenhouse gas emissions will need to be substantially reduced. Despite climate change’s imminent risks, in the United States, both the federal government and states remain resistant to transitioning away from fossil fuel energy sources. To combat this government inaction, some litigants have turned to an ancient doctrine. The public trust doctrine provides that sovereigns must protect natural resources from substantial impairment to ensure the public’s right to use those resources.

In Held v. Montana, youth plaintiffs alleged that the State of Montana …

The Sec And Climate Litigation, Lisa Benjamin

Lewis & Clark Law Review

The controversy surrounding the SEC’s climate-related financial disclosure rule continues. This Essay updates my previous work on this issue, where I identified two opportunities and two obstacles to the SEC promulgating final rules on climate-related financial risk disclosures. The two opportunities were a shifting political landscape under the then-Biden Administration (which took a whole-of-government approach to addressing the climate crisis) and rising investor concern over the risks that climate change posed to their investments. The two obstacles I identified were business resistance to disclosure rules, and rising judicial hostility to the SEC. Today, the political landscape has shifted dramatically and …

The Eighth Amendment And Prison Staff-To-Sentenced Prisoner Sexual Violence, Matthew Lyskawa

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, I provide the first comprehensive account of lower federal courts’ Eighth Amendment prison conditions jurisprudence regarding prison staff-to-sentenced prisoner sexual violence. I show that lower federal courts are systematically misunderstanding and misapplying Supreme Court case law in this context. The result is that sexually victimized prisoners must meet extremely burdensome doctrinal standards unique to sexual violence claims. Lower federal courts would faithfully follow Supreme Court precedent if they applied the excessive force standard to sexual assault claims and the conditions of confinement standard to sexual harassment claims. However, a faithful application of Supreme Court case law does …

Applying History As Law: The Role Of Historical Facts In Implementing Constitutional Doctrine, Joseph Blocher, Brandon L. Garrett

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court has long relied on historical evidence in constitutional cases, but recent years have seen a major change in how it does so: not only to interpret the meaning of constitutional text, but to establish doctrinal tests that call for historical evidence to be used in the application of those tests going forward. Broadly speaking, originalism has moved from the realm of legal interpretation to that of law declaration and then to law application. This transformation in the legal significance of history raises important questions for originalism as a practice of constitutional adjudication, not simply a theory …