Anita Krishnakumar & Victoria Nourse: The Canon Wars
Michael Ramsey
Anita S. Krishnakumar (St. John's University – School of Law) and Victoria Nourse (Georgetown University Law Center) have posted The Canon Wars (Texas Law Review, Vol. 97, No. 1, 2018) [reviewing William N. Eskridge, Jr., Interpreting Law: A Primer on How to Read Statutes and the Constitution (2016) & Antonin Scalia & Bryan Garner, Reading Law: TheInterpretation […]
Originalist Amicus Brief in the Maryland Cross Litigation
Michael Ramsey
In the American Legion v. American Humanist Association litigation at the Supreme Court, this Brief of Amici Curiae Religious Denominations and other Religious Institutions Supporting Petitioners has important originalist arguments. Here is the summary of argument: I. A plain reading of the text shows that the Establishment Clause erects a jurisdictional bar to laws “respecting an […]
Nelson Lund: The Constitutionality of Immigration Sanctuaries and Anti-Sanctuaries
Michael Ramsey
Nelson Lund (George Mason University School of Law) has posted The Constitutionality of Immigration Sanctuaries and Anti-Sanctuaries: Originalism, Current Doctrine, and a Second-Best Alternative (University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, forthcoming) on SSRN. Here is the abstract: The Supreme Court’s immigration jurisprudence is fundamentally misguided, in the sense that it has little basis in […]
Kevin Walsh Reviews Joel Paul’s “Without Precedent”
Michael Ramsey
At Law and Liberty, Kevin Walsh (Richmond): Without Evidence: Joel Richard Paul’s John Marshall (reviewing [harshly] Joel Paul, Without Precedent: Chief Justice John Marshall and His Times (Riverhead Books 2018)). From the introduction: Paul is a gifted writer and his engaging prose yields a pleasant read. But his portrait of Marshall as a man and jurist […]
Andre LeDuc Reviews Richard Fallon’s “Law and Legitimacy in the Supreme Court”
Michael Ramsey
Andre LeDuc (Independent) has posted Toward a Reflective Equilibrium: Making Our Constitutional Practice Safe for Constitutional Theory (Southern California Law Review, 2018) on SSRN. Here is the abstract: Book Review: Richard H. Fallon, Jr., Law and Legitimacy in the Supreme Court (2018) Fallon departs from the traditional traces of our contemporary constitutional theory. He is redirecting […]
Can the President Be Indicted?
Michael Ramsey
Following up on Andrew Hyman's post on indicting a sitting President, here are point/counterpoint posts from Laurence Tribe (Presidents can be indicted before impeachment) and Philip Bobbitt (Presidents cannot be indicted before impeachment). Tribe: The president and vice president run as a ticket. No president selects a vice president who wouldn’t strongly consider doing for […]
Eric Segall on Stare Decisis
Michael Ramsey
At Dorf on Law, Eric Segall: The Emperor's Stare Decisis. From the introduction: On Wednesday of last week, Mike [Dorf] wrote a typically thoughtful post [Ed.: noted here] on the difficulties originalists (and others) have when determining proper standards for the Court to use when deciding whether to overturn prior cases. One of his conclusions, […]
Lawrence Solum & Cass Sunstein: Chevron as Construction
Michael Ramsey
Lawrence B. Solum (Georgetown University Law Center) and Cass R. Sunstein (Harvard Law School) have posted Chevron as Construction on SSRN. Here is the abstract: In 1984, the Supreme Court declared that courts should uphold agency interpretations of ambiguous statutory provisions, so long as those interpretations are reasonable. The Chevron framework, as it is called, is […]
Two Unanticipated Consequences of Straying from Original Meaning: Self-Pardons and Treating Taxes Like Excessive Fines
Andrew Hyman
Can incumbent presidents be indicted? The Office of Legal Counsel has long answered in the negative. Here’s how that office persuasively reasoned in the year 2000: The Impeachment Judgment Clause provides: Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or […]
Randy Barnett: After All These Years, Lochner Was Not Crazy — It Was Good
Michael Ramsey
Randy E. Barnett (Georgetown University Law Center) has posted After All These Years, Lochner Was Not Crazy — It Was Good (Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2018) on SSRN. Here is the abstract: For this year’s Rosenkranz Debate, we have been asked to debate the question: Lochner v. New York: […]