In recent years, the Supreme Court of the United States has expressed profound skepticism of congressional action that risks intruding upon the operation of state governments. Simultaneously, the Court has taken a dim view of federal efforts to...
Resurgent rhetoric equating border crossing with invasion and migrants with criminality has fueled a new wave of state criminal-immigration legislation. Although scholars have extensively critiqued crimmigration—the long-running fusion of...
Institutional reform litigation (IRL) includes lawsuits brought to reform dysfunctional government bureaucracies. These cases attempt to improve prison conditions, the operation of child welfare systems, the provision of indigent defense, and other...
Article III standing is supposed to shut the courthouse doors to ideologically motivated plaintiff s with no personal stake in their litigation and open its doors to good-faith plaintiff s with a real risk of future injury—but the doctrine sometimes...
The United States oft en styles itself a haven for the freedom of religion and equal justice. In spite of these lofty ideals, U.S. courts oft en apply the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment unevenly, protecting Old World religions but not...
Federal appellate courts label most opinions as “non-precedent.” The label is supposed to have no doctrinal impact. But in the context of qualified immunity, the non-precedential label dramatically impacts doctrine. Th is Article first examines the...