Many are well-acquainted with Justice Brandeis’s metaphor that states serve as laboratories o…

author. Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; Law Clerk for Just…

This Article illustrates how contracts between local governments—interlocal agreements (ILAs)—play a powerful lawmaking function yet lack democratic accountability.  It traces the problem to state statutory schemes, where checks designed to promote transparency are ignored by state officials and courts, enabling undemocratic local power by virtue of state silence.

City subunits may facilitate municipal objectives of service provision and democratic governance. Different types of subunits risk various conflicts with their constituents and the city that hosts them. This Feature analyzes sources of those conflicts and reforms to address them, and argues for city deference to subunits in limited cases.  

State-level public utility commissions regulate our energy systems. But they are often viewed as ill-equipped to address climate change. This Feature counters that conventional wisdom by uncovering a forgotten history of New York’s energy transition, revealing that public utility’s potential to facilitate a clean-energy transition is broader than we imagine.

Current law makes it easy to sue cities. Too easy. While suing federal and state governments is notoriously difficult, various doctrines open courthouse doors to taxpayers, homeowners, and politically favored groups suing local governments. These doctrines further strengthen powerful actors, weaken cities’ ability to initiate reforms, and undermine local democracy.

author. Robert R. Slaughter Professor of Law, Yale Law School; Law Clerk for Justice Sandra …

The glaring gap in tort theory is its failure to take adequate account of liability insurance. We explain how to begin filling the gap in tort theory that results from omitting consideration of liability insurance, showing how liability insurance can appropriately figure in both deontic and consequentialist theories of tort.

Universal vacatur is a legitimate part of administrative law’s remedial scheme, not a judicial invention. This Feature traces universal vacatur from the pre-APA period through Abbott Labs. It also juxtaposes the case against universal vacatur with the new major questions doctrine, showing that both centralize power in the Supreme Court.

Relying on insights from Critical Race Theory and feminist legal theory, this Note presents a historical account of the underexamined movement to end racialized apprenticeship laws in the post-slavery era. The Note argues that our shared constitutional memory has been artificially narrowed by underconsideration of freedpeople’s constitutional theories and claims.  

abstract. Employment at will is legally and politically entrenched. It is the default terminat…

abstract. Critiqued as a blank check for judicial intervention, the absurdity canon has been …

Drawing on interviews and historical accounts, this Article explains how federal agencies help states write legislation. Even as the Supreme Court has curtailed administrative power in the name of federalism, this Article shows how agency collaborations with statehouses may further values associated with federalism by encouraging accountability, deliberation, and experimentation.

Over the last two decades, U.S. courts have convicted hundreds of thousands of Latin American defendants for misdemeanor immigration crimes. This Article documents, analyzes, and draws lessons from immigrants’ defiance. In particular, the battles in California and Texas reveal several effective legal strategies for immigrant defendants to resist mass criminalization.  

The distinction between a state’s public and private acts is flimsy and unclear. Choosing to see an act as essentially private or public often obscures the other features that complicate that characterization. And selectively recognizing the private aspects of transactions has disproportionately subordinated Global South nations.  

The APA’s conventional rules stem from traditional rules of relevancy for discovery, rather than a statutory mandate. The scope of evidentiary review for constitutional claims against agencies should be determined by decision rules for a particular claim, consonant with the underlying principles of the scope of review in administrative litigation.  

Jeffrey Bellin's Mass Incarceration Nation robustly analyzes how state and federal policies have combined to drive up prison populations. Mass incarceration represents a failure of democracy, but the repressive policies of American prisons represent an even graver threat as laboratories of antidemocracy that export these policies to the body politic.

Privacy law emphasizes control over “your” data, but requiring consent for each data use is unprincipled, not to mention utterly impractical in the AI era. American lawmakers should reject the property model and use a framework that creates defined zones of privacy and clear safe harbors, irrespective of consent.

This Essay critiques the inadequacy of copyright law to address the challenges Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) poses. By analyzing copyright law’s frictions and inconsistent treatment of technical terms, and challenging the definitions of creativity, this Essay establishes a taxonomy of individual- and society-level rationales against using copyright to regulate GAI.   

AI’s increasing cognitive abilities will raise challenges for judges. “Legal personhood” is a flexible and political concept that has evolved throughout American history. In determining whether to expand that concept to AI, judges will confront difficult ethical questions and will have to weigh competing claims of harm, agency, and responsibility.

This Essay advocates for a “legal construction of technology” approach to AI speech, challenging the notion that technology disrupts law and emphasizing how law shapes technology based on societal value. Applying the method to four different legal constructions of AI, the authors examine AI within First Amendment jurisprudence, content moderation, risk regulation, and consumer protection, highlighting

A recent essay in this Journal critiques bankruptcy for limiting the litigation system’s ability to promote noneconomic public-policy goals. This Response argues that bankruptcy can and does further these public values, and that it is reasonably easy to tweak bankruptcy law to accommodate these goals more effectively.   

This Essay examines USDA programs supported by the Inflation Reduction Act and its approach toward addressing climate change and historical funding inequities for Indigenous and Black Farmers.  It also argues for how the next Farm Bill can expand upon these efforts to further address inequities and promote climate resilience.

This Essay identifies a key feature of the Court’s new history-and-tradition doctrine that has not yet attracted significant attention: outcomes in history-and-tradition cases (involving guns, abortion, etc.) are often driven by hidden, contemporary judgments about equality—judgments whose implications may extend far beyond these cases.  

foreword What is history but a fable agreed upon? —Napoleon Bonaparte. Introduct…

What is the source of jurisdictional power, or the power to say what the law is and give it force in a territory? This Article examines how this fundamental attribute of sovereignty historically arose, in America, from property and property institutions-- especially the local, mundane, overlooked and bureaucratic title registry.

For much of the twentieth century, banking law used an array of carrots and sticks to create a banking system that was both very stable and highly decentralized. This history is key to understanding how banking law has, and could again, serve Brandeisian aims.   

Like many other state constitutions, the North Carolina Constitution contains unique provisions guaranteeing individual rights not present in the U.S. Constitution. This Essay explores the extent to which political and civil rights in the North Carolina Constitution have been enforced by the state supreme court in modern times.  

This Essay examines a potential version of the “independent state legislature theory” (ISLT) that, were it adopted, could require states to adopt particular interpretive methods for state laws regarding federal elections. That ISLT variant, however, has no basis in history, federalism, or democracy.  

Applying Hayek’s theory of law and liberty to contemporary American family law, this Essay concludes that family-law scholars—especially those undertaking distributional analyses—would benefit from greater attention to the Hayekian values of predictability, adaptation, and equal application.  

Current policies help parents stay in the workforce after having children. But what about the quarter of American mothers who choose to become stay-at-home moms, then later face employment obstacles? This Essay proposes expanding worker opportunity tax credits and Title VII to help stay-at-home parents return to work when ready.  

This Essay highlights two features of modern war powers that hide from public view decisions that take the country to war: the executive branch’s exploitation of interpretive ambiguity to defend unilateral presidential authority, and its dispersal of the power to use force to the outer limbs of the bureaucracy.

Debates about war powers focus too much on legal checks and on the President’s power to start wars. Congressional checks before and during crises work better than many reformists suppose, and there are ways to improve Congress’s political checking without substantial legal reform.

The Fifteenth Amendment is usually an afterthought compared to the Fourteenth Amendment. This oversight is perplexing: the Fifteenth Amendment ushered in a brief period of multiracial democracy and laid the constitutional foundation for the VRA. This Article completes the historical record, providing an unabridged accounting of the Fifteenth Amendment’s adoption.

This Essay seeks to recover the deeply rooted connection between U.S. banking law and antitrust. It reconceptualizes banking law as a sector-specific antimonopoly regime that imposes multiple structural constraints on publicly subsidized banks’ ability to abuse their power over the supply and allocation of financial resources in a democratic economy.

Faith communities across the United States are creating affordable housing on church property. Where sincerely held religious belief inspires their efforts, faith communities can assert religious liberty protections against land-use decisions that obstruct denser, multifamily developments. Legislative reforms can help them overcome the regulatory and financial hurdles of adaptive reuse.

  The assumption that remedying racial inequality benefits only people of color while being costly to White people underlies many Supreme Court decisions. However, White people benefit spiritually and democratically from racial equality. Recognizing these benefits warrants a new theory of interest convergence and offers a promising path toward racial equality.  

This Essay defends statutes creating public nuisance and consumer protection causes of action against firearms industry actors for their failure to take reasonable measures to control the flow of their products to criminal users. Such laws are predicate statutes under PLCAA and do not infringe the Second Amendment.  

Thanks to an ambiguity in civil-rights statutes passed under Congress’s spending power, many programs enjoy ample financial benefits while avoiding the requirements of federal antidiscrimination laws. This Essay argues that the remedy lies in a statutory reading that aligns with the expansive nature of the civil-rights statutes themselves.

This Essay considers the role of prosecutors in the Supreme Court’s decades-long contraction of public corruption law. It examines how federal prosecutors’ reliance on broad theories of liability has paradoxically narrowed federal criminal law’s reach over public corruption, and considers how prosecutors might adjust their approach.   

The Supreme Court’s effort to avoid interpreting morally weighted terms like “fraud” and “honest services” has led it to make bad and confusing law in wire-fraud cases. These cases, unlike Citizens United and its ilk, are unanimous, joining liberal and conservative Justices, reflecting a shared skepticism about anticorruption law.   

In Percoco, the Supreme Court squandered opportunities to contextualize political corruption. This Essay argues that the Supreme Court should have taken judicial notice of the post-January 6 circumstances which surround the decision. This is a perilous time in American democracy for the Justices to make prosecuting corrupt campaign managers arduous.  

For the first time in years, in the Purdue Pharma opioids litigation, the Court is reviewing an unorthodox bankruptcy maneuver aimed at securing global settlement. This Essay critiques corporate defendants’ increasingly common turn to bankruptcy to shut down, or avoid altogether, complex civil litigation and the public goods it generates.   

In 303 Creative v. Elenis, the Supreme Court ruled that a business had a right to refuse to design a wedding website for a same-sex couple. But properly understood, the decision’s parameters are narrow, and the decision should have minimal effect on public accommodations laws.   

Traditionalism holds that enduring practices are the presumptive determinants of constitutional meaning and law. This Essay examines two questions: Why has traditionalism had special salience in interpreting the Establishment Clause? And is traditionalism more disposition or mood than constitutional theory, more a matter of the heart than of the head?  

The First Amendment’s religious-freedom provisions are best understood as protecting “freedom for religion”—religious liberty for the benefit of religion, for generous protection of its free exercise by individuals and groups, and for the autonomy of religious institutions. The Supreme Court’s most recent decisions appear headed in that direction.  

As the Supreme Court has sought to ground more of its constitutional jurisprudence in original understanding, it has signaled an interest in revisiting aspects of Employment Division v. Smith. This Essay assesses potential replacement doctrines and defends a historically grounded version of strict scrutiny that does not require judicial balancing.  

The Biden Administration has perpetuated many of the prior administration’s hostile policies undermining access to asylum at the southern border. This Essay first examines these policies and then identifies emerging opportunities for law school clinics to address these new challenges, including by serving asylum seekers south of the U.S.-Mexico border.  

This Article offers a history and theory of the law of deplatforming across networks, platforms, and utilities. It shows that the tension between service and exclusion is endemic to common carriers, utilities, and other infrastructural services, including technology platforms, and that the American tradition has favored reasonable deplatforming.

This Article proposes a new framework for children in constitutional law that recognizes children’s rights as developing citizens and parents’ duties to safeguard those rights. An examination of children’s First Amendment right to access ideas illustrates parents’ duty to ensure children are exposed to information critical to their democratic citizenship.    

This Feature provides the first full-length and most in-depth analysis of practice-based constitutional theories to date. It identifies and examines the primary justifications offered for such theories and shows why they are insufficient, on their own terms, to justify conforming to our social practices.

In Bearden v. Georgia, the Supreme Court held a defendant cannot be imprisoned for failure to pay a fine they could not afford. Yet, many defendants remain incarcerated because they cannot pay for Electronic Monitoring. This Comment seeks to remedy that disparity by applying Bearden to Electronic Monitoring requirements. 

Constitutions have long been understood to empower courts. We argue, however, that constitutions can also be used to de-judicialize politics. We focus on the de-judicialization strategy of adding detailed provisions to U.S. state constitutions, and demonstrate that it has been employed throughout U.S. history and is still in use today.   

This Essay draws from on-the-ground interviews and procedural-justice theory to analyze judging practices in debt-collection courts. Current practices undermine courts’ fairness and legitimacy. This Essay argues that courts must prioritize procedural justice by adopting judging practices that consider unrepresented litigants’ circumstances and require a more active judicial role.  

In Separation-of-Powers Avoidance, Z. Payvand Ahdout reconceptualizes a bevy of separation-of-powers precedents as judicial avoidance. But one of the cases she cites as a foil—Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau—is a curious fit. The removal cases are tough to categorize in the separation-of-powers corpus.  

This Essay highlights the continued invisibility of cyber gender abuse. The Supreme Court in Counterman v. Colorado regrettably exacerbated this problem. Now is time to reignite the discussion around cyber gender abuse, recognize the profound harms it causes, and pursue a reform agenda to combat it.

Like other recent corruption reversals, Percoco was less about statutory text than what the Court deems “normal” politics. As prosecutors take the Court’s suggestions of alternative theories and use a statute it has largely ignored, the Court will have to reconcile its fears of partisan targeting and its textualist commitments.

The ECRA is a major step toward preventing future election subversion. But since states and localities administer elections, its success depends on state compliance. This Essay details how states should update their election codes ahead of the 2024 elections to guarantee that the new law lives up to its promise.

This Essay explores the people’s right to amend state constitutions and threats to that right today. It explains how democratic proportionality review can help courts distinguish unconstitutional infringement of the right from legitimate regulation. More broadly, the Essay considers the distinctive state constitutional architecture that popular amendment illuminates.

Twenty years ago, in Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court overruled Bowers v. Hardwick by correcting Bowers’s mistaken historical assertions. History, as they say, repeats itself: When a future Court reconsiders Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, it will find an opinion whose historical errors dwarf those in Bowers.