Volume 112
Mar. 2024

Reversing Racist Precedent

by Ahilan T. Arulanantham
The Supreme Court has long read the Constitution to prohibit state action motivated by racial animus. Courts have applied that prohibition to various forms of governmental decisionmaking, from the individual decisions of judicial officers to constitutional amendments enacted by states. Yet courts have not applied it to their own precedent. No court, including the Supreme […]

Deny, Defund, and Divert: The Law and American Miseducation

by Janel A. George
Racial inequality in public education is not inevitable, it is constructed. The law has been elemental in crafting racial inequality in public education. In this Article, I posit that lawmakers seeking to entrench racial inequality in and through public education do so by enacting laws designed to deny Black children access to education, defund public […]

The Macroprudential Myth

by Jeremy C. Kress & Jeffery Y. Zhang
According to conventional wisdom, the 2008 financial crisis fundamentally changed how policymakers approach financial regulation. Before the crisis, regulators sought to prevent individual financial institutions from collapsing, but this “microprudential” strategy proved inadequate to stop the market-wide meltdown. In response, policymakers purportedly turned to a new “macroprudential” approach that prioritizes the stability of the financial […]

The Free Exercise Clause in Transition: Examining Religious Challenges to State Bans on Gender-Affirming Care

by Mary Borchers
When Rabbi Daniel Bogard’s child was four years old, he asked his father one night, “[D]addy, do you think God could make me over again as a boy?” Although his son’s school was supportive of his son’s transition and a local rabbi even gave him a yarmulke in the colors of the trans pride flag, Bogard […]

Too Late Not to Die: An Empirical Review of Procedural Default in Capital Habeas Cases, 2017–2021

by Jonathan Dame
What happens when a criminal defendant fails to raise a federal claim in the manner required by state procedure? In 1963, the Supreme Court made a holding on that question that has endured for more than sixty years. In such situations, the Court held, the defendant has forfeited a state remedy but has not necessarily […]