From Shadow Cabinets to Shadow Justices: Rethinking Constitutional Lawmaking

Julie C. Suk, The Shadow Court: Rescuing Democracy from the Supreme Court (2026).

Julie Suk’s forthcoming The Shadow Court: Rescuing Democracy from the Supreme Court is an invigorating intervention in the long-standing question of how to align constitutional lawmaking in the United States with democratic ideals. Suk’s book moves beyond familiar critiques of the Supreme Court’s judicial supremacy to propose a bold, institutionally imaginative solution: the Shadow Court. What makes this proposal particularly compelling is its comparative lens, drawing on constitutional designs across the world to offer concrete inspiration for reform. In an era when the Supreme Court increasingly dominates the constitutional landscape, Suk invites readers to imagine what constitutional law might look like if citizens, legislators, and other institutions could exercise more democratic influence over its creation.

At the heart of Suk’s project is the conviction that “[i]n a healthy and legitimate constitutional democracy, ‘We the People’ should have supremacy and control over constitutional lawmaking.” The book diagnoses a democratic crisis rooted in the Supreme Court’s concentration of power, much of it facilitated by the Court itself. Suk observes that the Court’s eighteenth-century design, as an Article III judiciary primarily intended for dispute resolution, is ill-suited to serve as the principal constitutional-lawmaker for a twenty-first-century, demographically complex nation. Against this backdrop, The Shadow Court pivots toward institutional innovation rather than incremental reform: it sketches out a new body capable of exercising real influence without formal coercive power, borrowing lessons from shadow cabinets in parliamentary democracies and constitutional courts abroad. Continue reading "From Shadow Cabinets to Shadow Justices: Rethinking Constitutional Lawmaking"

The Significant (and Unexpected) Causal Impacts of Common Health Conditions and Genetic Traits in Death Investigations

Britney Wilson, Predisposed: Race, Disability, and Death Investigations, 72 UCLA L. Rev. 500 (2025).

The second episode of HBO’s Emmy-winning series, The Pitt, included a storyline where paramedics bring in a woman they describe as “drug-seeking,” “uncooperative,” and “combative” after she was removed from the city bus “for disrupting and disturbing passengers.” After a tense scene in the Emergency Department, where the patient was threatened with a police call, she excruciatingly noted that her pain medicine was not working, and she has sickle cell anemia. Dr. Mohan, unlike the other healthcare professionals that the patient encountered, quickly recognizes a vaso-occlusive crisis and changes the trajectory of the patient’s treatment for the better, while informing fellow healthcare providers of the symptoms of sickle cell anemia.

Hopefully, this episode raises awareness, as shockingly, even today, reports indicate that health care providers and others remain unfamiliar with sickle cell disease, and those with the disease or trait often face mistreatment and racism in the healthcare space, increasing health disparities. Similar to The Pitt episode, Professor Britney Wilson’s article, Predisposed: Race, Disability, and Death Investigations, draws attention to a related context where those with sickle cell and other diseases face discrimination—death investigators’ use of the trait and other related conditions “as a justification for the deaths of Black people who die due to state violence or neglect” even when such a justification is not convincing. Continue reading "The Significant (and Unexpected) Causal Impacts of Common Health Conditions and Genetic Traits in Death Investigations"

Meeting the Challenge of Civic Education in Hyperpolarized Times

Elizabeth Beaumont & Eric Beerbohm, eds., Civic Education in Polarized Times (2024).

What role can civic education play in polarized times? That is the pressing question posed by Civic Education in Polarized Times, edited by Elizabeth Beaumont and Eric Beerbohm.1 As Beaumont’s introduction explains, “as political polarization has intensified across the world, civic education seems more urgent, but it has also become more challenging.” (P. 1.) The volume brings together an eminent group of education scholars, legal scholars, political theorists, and philosophers to consider challenging questions about how to carry out civic education “in a polarized era” and “for a polarized era.” (P. 2.)

The first set of questions includes the impact of polarization on efforts to teach civic education when “schools, administrators, teachers, parents, and teachers are also operating in a divided world.” (P. 2.) Questions about how to prepare students for a polarized world include determining the aims of civic education amidst hyperpolarization, what types of “civic learning” hold the greatest promise to help students prepare to navigate their way in the current political landscape, and whether civic education should seek to “reduce or counteract polarization.” (P. 2.) Continue reading "Meeting the Challenge of Civic Education in Hyperpolarized Times"

Tradition versus Equality: A feminist intervention

Rachel Bayefsky, Tradition and Feminism in Constitutional Rights Adjudication, __ Va. L. Rev. __ (forthcoming), available at SSRN (May 27, 2025).

In the post-Dobbs world, concerns over the Courts’ growing use of “history and tradition” as an interpretative tool and as a constitutional test, particular its invocation in ways that reinforce inequality, have reached an unprecedented high, and with good reason. One of the latest examples is the Supreme Court’s adoption of historical practice as a central interpretative mode in its 2025 birthright citizenship case, Trump v. CASA, which imposes limits on lower-courts’ ability to enter preliminary injunctions and opens up the possibility of discriminatory legal measures being blocked for some but enforced against others, including those in marginalized communities who lack resources to legally challenge them.

Joining a growing body of legal scholars addressing “history and tradition’s equality problem,” Rachel Bayefsky has now made a timely feminist intervention that brings conceptual clarity, methodological rigor, hope for change, and a persuasive appeal to both liberals and conservatives to move beyond the adversarial relationship between tradition and equality.1 In a world of intensified polarizations, Bayefsky’s constructive and philosophically nuanced engagement with traditionalists is especially commendable. Her proposed theory of dialectical traditionalism2 reconciles the tensions between traditionalism and feminism by providing a framework for adjudicators to engage with traditionalist reasoning without replicating and justifying the unequal past, regardless of whether they identify as “traditionalists.”3 A recent study examining the role of history and tradition in state court abortion decisions supports Bayefsky’s hope, as some of these courts have adopted a critical approach to history and tradition in protecting reproductive rights. Continue reading "Tradition versus Equality: A feminist intervention"

Rethinking Legal Careers Through the Lens of Relocation and Rerouting

Sida Liu & Anson Au, Mobility Spaces: Geographical and Professional Distances in Career Mobility, 61 The J. of Applied Behav. Sci. 195 (2025).

One of the most interesting findings of the After The JD project, which tracked the careers of a nationally-representative sample of US law school graduates who qualified as lawyers in the year 2000, was how many times they changed jobs.1 Job changes can involve different positions with status implications, as well as differences around factors like flexibility and compensation. The After The JD authors analyzed each of these kinds of moves in the framework of a social capital analysis; among their findings was the role of the prestige associated with US News rankings of law schools and American Lawyer rankings of law firms in shaping moves and opportunities.2

In Sida Liu and Anson Au’s new article, Mobility Spaces: Geographical and Professional Distances in Career Mobility, the authors consider analogous questions about lateral moves of lawyers using a different lens—that of mobility spaces. They urge that “[t]he movement of professionals is shaped not only by their social and educational backgrounds but also by the geographical and professional distances between these mobility spaces.” (P. 196.) That is, they see career moves as conveying important information through the physical and social proximity of one position to the next. Further, rather than focusing on the US as did the After The JD project, their study is based in Hong Kong. They utilize data reporting the career moves of law firm partners working in Hong Kong between 1994 and 2021, culled from the official journal of the Law Society of Hong Kong. (P. 204.) The article thus speaks empirically of a particular time and place while aiming to contribute theoretically to “enhancing our understanding of the spatial dimensions in which professional careers evolve.” (P. 196.) Continue reading "Rethinking Legal Careers Through the Lens of Relocation and Rerouting"

Burden in the Court! The Spatial Powers of Courts and Their Environment

Matthew Clair, Jesus Orozco, & Iris H. Zhang, Spatial Burdens of State Institutions: The Case of Criminal Courthouses, 99 Soc. Serv. Rev. 201 (2025).

In Franz Kafka’s haunting short story, Before the Law, an ordinary person (described as a “countryman”) seeks to enter the law only to discover a gatekeeper whose formidable personal presence and vague threats of even fiercer gatekeepers keep him stalled at the law’s entrance. The seeker spends his entire life imploring the gatekeeper to let him in, never daring to attempt to evade him. In the end, he comes to know (spoiler here) that this gate, from which he was denied entry, was made only for him.

Modern students of the legal system have long studied the role of gatekeepers, both the intermediaries like lawyers whose help is crucial to accessing justice, and institutional rules and norms that favor repeat players over first time users of the courts. Rarely, (but see, Nicole Gonzalez Van Cleve, Crook County (2016)), however, do we, like Kafka, explore the physical (and perhaps metaphysical) barriers to equal justice. In an important analysis of data from a broader ethnographic and qualitative interview based study of ordinary people’s experiences with accessing courts, Spatial Burdens of State Institutions: The Case of Criminal Courthouses, Matthew Clair, Jesus Orozco and Iris Zhang spotlight the spatial environments of court houses and how they contribute to complex patterns of inequality and paternalistic and punitive forms of poverty governance. The authors highlight two kinds of power effects of court spatial conditions. There is the direct effect on court users of the environment in and around the courthouse and how that can shape the emotional experience of accessing justice institutions. There is also a secondary effect when court-based burdens cause a person to have to seek additional state institutional intervention (like a person who loses their job because of the time involved in attending court hearings and must apply for unemployment or food support). Together, these create a distinctively spatial dimension to poverty governance. Continue reading "Burden in the Court! The Spatial Powers of Courts and Their Environment"

Judicial Sovereignty-Making at the Country’s Start

Melville’s Ishmael declares in the opening chapter of Moby Dick, “Whenever I find myself growing grim about the mouth; whenever it is a damp, drizzly November in my soul . . . then, I account it high time to get to sea as soon as I can.” In this dark February, the timing is right to take to sea—and Kevin Arlyck’s new book, The Nation at Sea: The Federal Courts and American Sovereignty, 1789–1825—is just the thing to take us there.

The Nation at Sea provides a new historical account of the federal judiciary’s early days—one that shifts the way we understand how our country took its place in the world, and how the federal courts took their place in our country. The story so often told is that the federal courts were rather quiet after they were established. They began to find their voice with Chief Justice Marshall at the Court’s helm in cases such as Marbury v. Madison and McCulloch v. Maryland. And through such cases, the story goes, the Court began establishing its role in the constitutional order and its role in American nation-building. Continue reading "Judicial Sovereignty-Making at the Country’s Start"

Stock Exchanges as Strategic Assets

Curtis J. Milhaupt & Wolf-Georg Ringe, The Political Economy of Global Stock Exchange Competition (Sep. 08, 2025), available at SSRN.

States compete with each other to attract business, and this competition often focuses on specific sectors of financial activity. States compete to be centers for asset management, for insurance, for listings, for derivatives markets, or for financial innovation. Private actors also engage in competition: stock exchanges, as for-profit businesses, seek to attract listings and trading activity, competing with other exchanges. Other market operators similarly seek to attract business. Private-sector actors develop standards and documentation to support financial market transactions.

Conventionally, academics and journalists focus on competition between stock exchanges to attract listings, but as Curtis Milhaupt and Wolf-Georg Ringe show in The Political Economy of Global Stock Exchange Competition, this only reflects a part of a much more interesting and important story, which, they argue, calls for “sustained scholarly engagement across law, economics, and international relations.” The paper convincingly shows why this is the case. Continue reading "Stock Exchanges as Strategic Assets"

Damages, Doctrine, and the Remedial Life of Forum Selection Clauses

John Coyle & Tanya Monestier, Limits on Damages for Breach of a Forum Selection Clause, (Sep. 25, 2025), available at SSRN.

Forum selection clauses are so familiar that they rarely invite fresh questions. Courts mostly enforce them after lawyers litigate motions to dismiss or transfer, and the parties move on. One remedial question, however, has long sat in plain sight: when a party breaches a forum selection clause by suing in the wrong court, why is the remedy limited by default to correcting the venue error rather than compensating the counterparty for the cost of enforcing the clause?

In Limits on Damages for Breach of a Forum Selection Clause, John Coyle and Tanya Monestier take that question seriously—and show that it was never foreclosed for particularly good reasons. The article is valuable precisely because it is doctrinally grounded, methodical, and unspectacular in the best sense: it demonstrates that even in well-trodden territory, there remain basic remedial questions worth asking, and answering, with ordinary tools of contract law. Continue reading "Damages, Doctrine, and the Remedial Life of Forum Selection Clauses"

Throwing the Supreme Court/Free Speech A Bone

Genevieve Lakier, Enforcing the First Amendment in an Era of Jawboning, __ Univ. Chi. L. Rev. __ (forthcoming, 2026), available at SSRN (Mar. 01, 2025).

Too often, our “free speech culture” gloms together private censorship and state-sponsored censorship. These things are not the same. Only one of them is prohibited by the First Amendment, and failing to differentiate between the two runs the risk of collapsing the distinction between censorship, on one hand, and on the other, private citizens exercising their own First Amendment rights (sometimes by choosing who to associate with or who to support).

That’s not to say there aren’t “free speech” risks from private power—especially in an era where control of major media outlets is concentrated in the hands of a few. And there are hard cases where it may not be clear who is driving the censorship—state actors or private ones. Continue reading "Throwing the Supreme Court/Free Speech A Bone"

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com