Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Historical Firearm Licensing And Permitting Laws, Robert J. Spitzer

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Gives States The Green Light To Go Ham: The Dormant Commerce Clause In Renewable Energy In Light Of National Pork Producers, Ellie Carl

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

Two years ago, the Supreme Court slaughtered the Dormant Commerce Clause in its decision in National Pork Producers v. Ross. While the case is not explicitly about environmental law, it significantly affects environmental laws and policies, especially pertaining to state renewable portfolio standards. These state policies are especially prone to Dormant Commerce Clause litigation, given the interstate nature of electric grids. This paper argues that the scope of the Dormant Commerce Clause in light of this decision is appropriate for ensuring that states have adequate wiggle room in renewable energy regulation, but not an excessive amount of leeway so …

Data Privacy At The Border: How To Balance National Security Concerns And Privacy Interests When Conducting Forensic Border Searches Of Electronic Devices, Eleni Filley

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

Do you know where your phone is? Can you describe the last five pictures in your camera roll? How many websites have you visited this month? Cell phones are an extension of our person and contain some of our most private data: location, banking, loved ones, sleep statistics, reproductive information, and more. As our technology develops, so too should our laws. This Note explores the lack of privacy protections at the U.S. border and how susceptible our data is to a government search. A Supreme Court ruling recognizing the unique piece of property a cell phone represents, even at a …

Deference Or Preference: Analyzing The Treatment Of Chevron U.S.A., Inc. V. Nrdc As A Precedent At The Supreme Court, Allison Dehart

Senior Theses

Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. is one of the most cited Supreme Court cases in history, with over 18,000 citations in federal courts alone (Merrill, 2012). It has reached doctrinal status and was widely considered a vital precedent, one that guided the fields of environmental and administrative law. However, in June of 2024, the Supreme Court released their opinion in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overturned Chevron. With the ubiquity of Chevron in US Courts, this decision caused widespread confusion and worry over what would replace the precedent. In an era where environmental …

The Waiting Is The Hardest Part: The Constitutionality Of Firearm Waiting Periods, F. Lee Francis

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

This Article examines the constitutionality of firearm waiting period laws through the lens of the Supreme Court’s evolving Second Amendment jurisprudence. Although such laws are frequently defended as prudent public safety measures, their validity turns not on legislative purpose but on constitutional principle, particularly as framed in District of Columbia v. Heller and New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen.

Under those decisions, the scope of the Second Amendment is determined not by judicial balancing of contemporary interests, but by reference to the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. The Article surveys that tradition and finds no …

When Rights Require Permission: The Discriminatory History Of Licensing Laws For Firearm Possession, Bob Barr, Joseph G.S. Greenlee

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

No abstract provided.

The Wrongly Read Right: Insurrection And The Second Amendment Right To Bear Arms, Aman Mcleod, Jacob M. Jones

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Several judges and scholars have interpreted the Second Amendment as creating a right to bear arms to facilitate armed resistance against the government whenever it threatens to impose tyranny. These arguments have been made in books, scholarly articles, and court decisions. Many of the proponents of the pro-armed insurrection interpretation of the Second Amendment root this point of view in the history of the right to bear arms in the Anglo-American legal tradition. This Article argues that the Second Amendment does not create a right to bear arms to resist government authority because such a right is inconsistent with several …

Familial Fairness: Guaranteeing The Right To Counsel For Indigent Parents In Juvenile Dependency Proceedings, Jake Toth

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Fairness principles enumerated in the seminal case Gideon v. Wainwright stand for the proposition that fundamental fairness and due process require appointment of counsel for indigent litigants. However, this principle has been constrained to criminal contexts. Many other types of litigation are just as impactful as a criminal proceeding, including juvenile dependency proceedings. Nevertheless, indigent parents do not enjoy an unqualified representation right.

This Comment traces the history of the representation right and how it has been treated in a juvenile dependency context, beginning with Gideon itself and examining other cases such as Eldridge and Lassiter. It then examines …

Big Business As Gun Control, David B. Kopel, George A. Mocsary, Bhav Ninder Singh

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Gun control increasingly bypasses direct legislative enactments by co-opting the commercial marketplace. Financial institutions and insurers often face regulatory pressures, frequently articulated through vague notions of “reputational risk,” to terminate or restrict services for lawful firearms businesses and advocacy groups. The debanking tactic, seen in initiatives such as Operation Choke Point, can deny essential financial products to firearm owners, merchants, and organizations, curtailing the practical exercise of constitutionally protected rights. Simultaneously, government agencies sometimes pursue warrantless data collection from bank records and merchant category codes, building profiles of lawful purchasers and eroding privacy and due-process norms.

Social media platforms compound …

Dangerous And Unusual: How Heller’S Ahistorical Assumption Violates The Founders’ Original Intent, Oliver Krawczyk, Gilbert Ambler

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

When the U.S. Supreme Court ended its generational silence on the Second Amendment in District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court held that “a prohibition of an entire class of ‘arms’ that is overwhelmingly chosen by American society” is “invalid.” In so holding, the Court suggested that the Constitution protects only those weapons “in common use at the time,” a limitation thought to be “fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’” The Court defined none of these terms then, and it has not since.

Over a decade of constitutional infidelity ensued. …

The Invention Of The Judicial Administrative State, Marin K. Levy

Michigan Law Review

A review of The Taft Court: Making Law for a Divided Nation, 1921–1930. By Robert C. Post.

Just To Be Safe, Let’S Keep Ignoring What “Arms” Meant In 1791, Jack Thorlin

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller and reaffirmed in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen that “arms,” referred to in the Second Amendment, are common weapons useful for lawful purposes. The majority argued that militiamen fought with whatever common weapons they had on hand for civilian purposes, such as self-defense and hunting. Therefore, under Heller, only those weapons are covered by the Second Amendment. However, Heller did little to ground the “self-defense” theory of “arms” in original public meaning or even actual history. Commonality and lawful purpose have proved difficult for lower …

Brennan And State Constitutions, Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

The former Great Gorge Playboy Resort in New Jersey seems an unlikely place to help form a jurisprudential movement toward reliance on state constitutions to protect civil rights and liberties.

One need only turn back the clock to 1976 to find the story of one of the most significant moments in the rise of state constitutions. Anyone who is steeped in this movement is likely familiar with the lead article in the January 1977 issue of the Harvard Law Review, “State Constitutions and the Protection of Individual Rights.” The author was U.S. Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan Jr.

Conservative Caution V. Progressive Originalism: How Justices Barrett And Jackson Are Paving Their Own Paths On The Court, David Rudenstine, Michael Waldman, Eric Freedman, Haiyun Damon-Feng, William D. Araiza, Mark Anthony Frassetto, Jake Meiseles, Michael Pollack, Linda Greenhouse, Earl M. Maltz

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The Conservative Caution v. Progressive Originalism symposium, hosted by the Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights and Social Justice on March 7, 2025, brings together leading constitutional scholars to examine the emerging judicial philosophies of Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Through three expert panels—presidential immunity, gun rights, and judicial ideology—the symposium analyzes how both Justices are shaping contemporary originalist discourse from opposing ends of the ideological spectrum. Panelists explore the Supreme Court’s watershed decision in Trump v. United States (2024), emphasizing its unprecedented expansion of presidential immunity and its implications for separation of powers and democratic accountability. Discussions …

Put Me In, Coach: Constitutional Concerns Of Judicial Activism And Legislating From The Bench, Jacob M. Elliott

Senior Honors Theses

Unrestrained judicial activism and legislating from the bench at the Supreme Court level place federalism and freedom in jeopardy. By ignoring crucial doctrines like jurisdiction, deference, and independence, the Supreme Court has demonstrated a tendency toward reinterpreting existing Constitutional precedent as they see fit, basing judgments on extra-legal influences, and supplanting Constitutional principles with their own personal policy preferences.

Numerous cases demonstrate the looming threat of judicial overreach; these cases are often considered some of the most damaging and injurious decisions in the history of the American federal judiciary. One potential solution is to appoint justices who will operate …

The Regulatory Triad: Reimagining Environmental Law In The Post-Chevron Era, Shai Stern, Itay Biton

Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - )

No abstract provided.

Get Your Act Together: The Alternative Fines Act In Federal Prosecutions Of Corporate Environmental Crimes, Josiah B. Harmar

Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - )

No abstract provided.

Revving Up Or Stalling Out? Examining The Effectiveness Of Electric Vehicles In Combating Climate Change, Meghan E. Miller Termat

Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - )

No abstract provided.

Digital Child Labor Exploitation In Sharenting: Proposing Legislative Solutions For Enhanced Child Protection, Joana Guzman Gonzalez

University Honors Theses

This thesis explores the implications of sharenting -- the practice of sharing children's information on mass media--raises urgent concerns about child safety and potential human rights violations -- and the exploitation of children in digital spaces, focusing on the risks of privacy, safety and mental health pose by the rise of kidfluencers – children influencers under the age of 18 – and family vlog channels. Through a comprehensive literature review, the research examines children's online presence's emotional, legal, and societal impacts, drawing from case studies such as Sheri Franke, Wren Eleanor, Ryan Kaji, and JoJo Siwa. The analysis reveals a …

When Courts Collide: How Statutory Interpretation Divides The Fifth And Eighth Circuits On Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act, Delaney Cook

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.