Supreme Court of the United States Commons^™

Aggregation And The “Universal” Injunction, Portia Pedro, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

In this Essay, we begin with a brief summary of the CASA decision’s holding regarding the availability of “universal” injunctions. Part II discusses the relationship between remedies and judicial review and the important role that such injunctions play in that regard. Part III explores how class actions could serve as an alternative path for federal courts, after engaging in judicial review, to make their decisions meaningful by requiring officials to comply with the law and to cease illegal actions or policies. We also respond to several objections to the use of class actions in this context. The final Part addresses …

The Supreme Court Under Threat: Early Lessons In Judicial Self-Protection, Curtis A. Bradley, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay explores how the U.S. Supreme Court, despite being vulnerable to defiance of its decisions and political retaliation, has developed tools of judicial self-protection to preserve its institutional authority and thus its capacity to sustain the Constitution and the rule of law. Arguing that the Court performs not only a legal role that requires interpretation of the law but also a political one that demands institutional preservation, the Essay examines how the Court has historically navigated political threats by using a range of tools—including avoidance, delay, narrow rulings, strategic dicta, and rhetorical appeals. The Essay focuses on three nineteenth-century …

The Martha Wright-Reed Act: How The Fcc Took One Step Forward For Communication Equality For Deaf Individuals In Correctional Facilities And How It Could Be Expanded, Ashley Seebold

Seattle University Law Review

For decades, phone companies preyed on incarcerated individuals and their loved ones due to the lack of regulation of jail phone calls.2 In 2021, the average cost of a fifteen-minute jail phone call was about $3.3 In 2022, the average cost rose to $5.74, while some individuals faced an extreme charge of $24.82 for the same amount of time.4 In the early 2000s, consumer advocate and concerned grandmother Martha Wright-Reed called upon the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to fix the imbalance so she could speak to her incarcerated grandson.5 Eventually, in 2023, the FCC answered her call to action and …

Communicative Administration: The Administrative State Beyond Legal Administration, Daniel E. Walters

Faculty Scholarship

On many dimensions, the administrative state is at the nadir of its power. The Supreme Court has tightened administrative law controls on agency power, and the Trump Administration has stormed the bureaucracy in an unprecedented blitz designed to kneecap agency capacity and independence. For better or worse, many agencies and their civil servants are being sidelined as meaningful actors in the administration of government. Yet this familiar account doesn’t tell the entire story. At the same time that agencies are being stripped of the power to implement law—what this Article calls “legal administration”— they are steadily accumulating extensive and largely …

Making The Party Presentation Principle Safe For Originalism, Randy E. Barnett, Lawrence B. Solum

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court sometimes adheres to what it calls the “party presentation principle”—terminology that dates back to 2008. Although judicial articulations of the principle have been inconsistent and imprecise, the gist is the familiar notion that courts should resolve cases on the basis of the issues and reasons presented by the parties to the dispute. Conversely, questions not properly raised by the parties should be avoided by the Court. Thus, the Court has on several occasions declined to address arguments outside the scope of the questions raised by the parties in their petition for certiorari.

For originalists, the importance of …

Forever Is Too Long: Rethinking Consent And Genetic Privacy Under The Fourth Amendment, Abigail Oberbeck

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Injury-In-Fact Of Nothing: Why Federal Courts Cannot Certify Classes With Uninjured Members After Labcorp, Jacob Davenport

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Enemies To Lovers: An Unsuspecting Friendship In The Journey To Save The Endangerment Finding, Sophie Ballah

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Jurisprudence Of Humanity, Tyler Rose Clemons

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development

(Excerpt)

It has become common for Supreme Court Justices—the most powerful legal actors in our society—to explain why “the law” requires them to facilitate, or at least tolerate, terrible human suffering. Such claims are wrong, not just morally but legally. More specifically, they expose the decisions of the Roberts Court as a based on a jurisprudence of nihilism, one that justifies human suffering through vague appeals to the rule of law. These appeals, in turn, thinly conceal a substantive political and moral project.

To support this claim, I proceed in five parts. Part I introduces Albert Camus’s account of nihilism …

Words Matter: The Rhetoric Of National Security And The Reality Of Individual Rights, Christopher J. Borgen

Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development

(Excerpt)

While the meanings of words can be flexible or contested, they are not infinitely pliable. These limits on words and their uses help define the outer bounds of legitimate state action. However, even the written law is only as stable as our interpretation of what those words mean. There is the risk that a deliberate and persistent misuse of words by states and other actors can eventually change our understanding of the law it.

Some of my work has analyzed the use of words and phrases such as “self-determination,” “sovereignty,” and “secession.” But, in this Essay, I focus on …

Antidiscrimination, Not Anti-Dei: The Real Story Of The Supreme Court’S Recent Title Vii Precedent, Madeline Meth

BYU Law Review

For several years, my colleague and I had been litigating employment discrimination cases with facts that shocked our friends and family. For example, we fought Dallas County over a women-work-the-weekend policy that required women detention officers to work weekends while male colleagues took the weekends off. Likewise, we challenged the City of Cleveland when it moved our client, an emergency medical services supervisor, from the day shift to the night shift explicitly because he is Black. Then, in April 2024, in one of our client’s cases, Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously overruled the decades …

Popular Constitutionalism In A Populist Age, Thomas G. Donnelly

BYU Law Review

Popular constitutionalism burst onto the scene as a challenge to the constitutional authority of the Supreme Court. Decades later, popular constitutionalists remain susceptible to one of the earliest (and most potent) critiques of their project—the charge that they have done far too little to explain how their theory might work in practice. With the rise of modern populism, it’s also fair to ask whether popular constitutionalism is an approach that’s capable of meeting the challenges of the current constitutional moment. In this Article, I offer a new vision for popular constitutionalism—one that shows how the theory might work in practice, …

Nonparty Claim Preclusion, Mark D. Rosen

Texas A&M Law Review

For nearly two centuries, American courts recited that the preclusive effects of a court’s final judgment were subject to a requirement of “mutuality,” meaning that a party in Lawsuit 2 who would not be bound by a judgment from a prior Lawsuit 1 could not benefit in Lawsuit 2 from the first lawsuit’s judgment either. While the Supreme Court eliminated the mutuality requirement for issue preclusion in the 1970s—paving the way for “nonmutual collateral estoppel”—to this date, the Court has not decided if mutuality remains a requirement for claim preclusion. Although many courts today insist there is no such thing …

Rahimi's Goldilocks Dilemma: Finding The "Just Right" Age Of Tradition, James M. Handwerk

Texas A&M Law Review

Although its edges are obscured with unresolved tension, the Supreme Court’s recent sortie into Second Amendment interpretation sparked a new era of historical scrutiny. Some question whether the various difficulties present in the new framework render the doctrine unworkable. Rahimi’s Goldilocks Dilemma examines the interpretive obstacles posed by the text, history, and tradition framework, which was brought to light in New York State Pistol & Rifle Ass’n v. Bruen and United States v. Rahimi. Particularly, this Comment focuses on the role that pre-ratification history plays in finding “relevant” historical analogs. Pre-ratification history, as defined by this Comment, includes …

Open And Shut: Non-Removal Statutesand Door-Closing Penalties, Isaac Zwerling

Pepperdine Law Review

There is a longstanding tension in the Court’s treatment of non-removal statutes and door-closing penalties. On the one hand, the Court has held non-removal statutes—business registration statutes that condition a foreign corporation’s license on that corporation’s right to remove cases brought against it to federal court—pose an unconstitutional limit on federal court access. On the other, the Court has extended door-closing penalties statutes prohibiting unregistered foreign corporations from initiating an action in the forum state—to federal courts sitting in diversity. This Article surveys how the Court arrived at this puzzling result. It does so by analyzing each line of cases …

Judicial Appointments Before Vacancies, Vasan Kesavan

Pepperdine Law Review

Appointments are about power—presidential power. There is no greater presidential appointment power than the power to appoint federal judges who are expected to serve for life. Judicial appointments allow the President to shape one branch of the federal government for decades to come, perhaps decisively, thereby helping to define his legacy. Of all judicial appointments, there is nothing more significant than appointments to the Supreme Court, if the President even has the opportunity during his term. But these appointments are the most difficult for the President to make in the most partisan political period in our lifetimes. May a President, …

Corporate Employment And The First Amendment Shield Against Anti-Dei Legislation, W. Mary Blee

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

No one would have thought that a Supreme Court ruling striking down affirmative action in higher education would affect private employment. However, the ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard did exactly that. Corporate employers’ efforts to foster diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) were immediately pushed to the forefront of the political battlefield. In the eyes of Republican lawmakers and politicians, DEI efforts were akin to affirmative action, and therefore unconstitutional in the wake of Harvard. Their solution to this problem involved passing anti-DEI legislation and policies which restricted or eliminated employer’s DEI efforts under the guise of upholding …

Legal Academia And Permanent Democracy: The Fault In Our Law Schools, Sara Dillon

DePaul Journal for Social Justice

It is widely recognized that the American Constitution is failing as the foundational document of a modern democracy. Although many basic principles of constitutionalism have faded into irrelevance, with rising authoritarianism eclipsing such core ideals as judicial independence, separation of powers and restraints on arbitrary use of power, America’s nearly 200 institutions of legal teaching and scholarship have provided little in the way of proposals for urgently needed law reform. It is striking that even with so many high-powered academic institutions, so few meaningful proposals for constitutional change have been presented to the public as a way out of our …

The Search For Moby Dick: The Role Of State Law In Maritime Tort Cases, John E. Holloway

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

In 1917, the United States Supreme Court held in Southern Pacific v. Jensen that a state statute is invalid if it “interferes with the proper harmony and uniformity of [the general maritime law].” Over a century after Jensen, we still do not know the limits of this “uniformity principle.” Just two years ago, the United States Supreme Court found that this question—what is the role of state law in maritime cases?—remains “one of the most perplexing in the law.”

This Article tracks the Court’s struggle to make sense of the Uniformity principle. It surveys the Court’s inconsistent rulings and criticisms …

The Influence Of The Federalist Society On Originalism In Supreme Court Opinions, Edoardo Santopuoli

Honors Theses

This thesis will investigate the influence of the Federalist Society on the use of originalism in Supreme Court opinions. To investigate this influence, justices that served on the Supreme Court from 1994 to 2022 are categorized based on whether or not they are affiliated with the Federalist Society. Then using artificial intelligence (ChatGPT version 5.3), ten Supreme Court opinions known to be originalist are used as a baseline for artificial intelligence to know what an originalist opinion looks like. Then, all majority opinions of the Supreme Court from that timeframe are scored from 1-10, with 10 meaning an opinion is …