Nine Cases From OT 2021 Term For The Barnett/Blackman Supplement

Dobbs, Bruen, Kennedy, Carson, WV v. EPA, City of Austin, Shurtleff, Torres, and Vaello-Madero.

Every summer, we prepare the supplement for the Barnett/Blackman casebook. In recent years, we have tried to edit the cases on the same day they are decided. This year, the back-to-back Dobbs/Bruen drops delayed our schedule. We have now finished our review. Here are the nine cases that will be in the supplement.

• Carson v. Makin
• City of Austin v. Reagan National
• Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
• Kennedy v. Bremerton School District
• New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen
• Shurtleff v. City of Boston
• Torres v. DPS
• U.S. v. Vaello-Madero
• West Virginia v. EPA

What a momentous term! If I had to predict, about half of these cases will make their way into the fifth edition of the casebook. Dobbs overruled Roe. Carson completes the trilogy that began with Trinity Lutheran and Espinoza. Kennedy finally interred Lemon, and more importantly, eliminated the Lemon defense. Bruen finally decided the issues left unresolved in Heller and McDonald. Torres v. DPS may represent a new schism on the Court with sovereign immunity. And West Virginia may be the first step (or at least half a step) to a reinvigoration of the non-delegation doctrine.

The fifth edition of the casebook should be published in 2026--just in time for the Semiquincentennial. What will constitutional law look like for the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence?

Comments

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

" In recent years, we have tried to edit the cases on the same day they are decided. "

Why not switch to hypermode and edit the cases within 15 minutes of release?

I doubt the professor(s) choosing this textbook would be discouraged.

[blue heron]

Your back must hurt from all the self congratulations you administer.

[SRG]

In a few years, most of this will be done by AIs, and Prof Blackman will merely have to edit.

[myself]

So according to the SCOTUS the Republican President has the powers to exclude a religious group from the US.

However, the Democratic President is forced to not only implement a probably illegal Remain in Mexico policy, but to negotiate with Mexico in order to continue implementing that policy.

[SMP0328]

SCOTUS ruled in favor of Biden's ending of the Remain in Mexico policy.

[myself]

Sorry, the SCOTUS (narrowly) ruled that Biden can probably end Remain in Mexico eventually, but only after it goes to back to the court that blocked it and that court doesn't come up with another ridiculous excuse to keep it in place.

So in a few weeks the courts will probably allow the President to stop breaking the law.

[Brett Bellmore]

Ah, technically the courts will probably allow the President to resume breaking the law. Since letting them into the US is a preliminary to bussing them off to random locations within the US and losing track of them, instead of holding them until a determination can be made as to eligibility to remain.

[Sebastian Cremmington]

According to Justice Thomas we have always had the right to “keep and carry guns”…is “keep and bear” a superior right to “keep and carry”?? Such a head scratcher. 😉