B-21 Wines, Inc. v. Bauer
Fourth Circuit Upholds Differential Wine-Shipping Scheme.
Vol. 136 No. 8
Constitutional Law
Mazo v. New Jersey Secretary of State
Third Circuit Holds that New Jersey's "Consent Requirement" for Ballot Slogans is Content Neutral.
Vol. 136 No. 8
Tangibility and Tainted Reliance in Dobbs
Response to Precedent, Reliance, and Dobbs
Vol. 136 No. 7
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Supreme Court distinguished between different kinds of reliance interests — some that would support preserving a judicial precedent,...
Removal Rehashed
Response to The Executive Power of Removal
Vol. 136 No. 7
Introduction We are grateful to the Harvard Law Review Forum for the chance to respond in these pages to The Executive Power of Removal....
Precedent, Reliance, and Dobbs
Vol. 136 No. 7
Abstract Our system of stare decisis enables and encourages people to rely on judicial decisions to form expectations about their legal rights and duties...
Dialectal Due Process
Vol. 136 No. 7
The principle of the arbitrariness of the sign is not doubted by anyone, but it is often easier to discover a truth than to...
Romer Has It
Vol. 136 No. 7
A quick scan of LGBTQ-rights victories from the last two decades paints an indisputable picture of progress, a triumphant string of Supreme Court decisions...
Fifth Amendment Rights as Abortion Rights
A Black woman arrives at a hospital in South Carolina with a medical emergency. She is having labor pains, and the medical staff ask...
Constitutional Remedies: In One Era and Out the Other
Vol. 136 No. 5
“It is a settled and invariable principle,” Chief Justice Marshall once wrote, “that every right, when withheld, must have a remedy.” Not quite. Although some view the idea of a substantive constitutional right without a remedy as oxymoronic, rights to remedies have always had a precarious constitutional status, which the Supreme Court has lately subjected to multifaceted subversion. . . .
Justice Breyer: The Court’s Last Natural Lawyer?
Vol. 136 No. 5
Natural law “still spooks many constitutional lawyers.” Justice Scalia, for example, was once asked: “Does natural law have a place in interpreting the Constitution?”...