SLR Online

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

Hosie

Essay

Factual Revisionism: Precedent Subversion and the “Kavanaugh Stop”

by  Duncan Hosie  

In his Essay, Duncan Hosie identifies and theorizes “factual revisionism,” a method through which an appellate judge mischaracterizes a lower court’s factfinding, which manipulates how precedent is applied, while maintaining the appearance of continuity. Hosie argues Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence in Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo altered Fourth Amendment jurisprudence by inaccurately characterizing the record and controlling precedent to permit detentive stops based solely on ethnicity and demographics, illustrating the significant consequences of these so-called “Kavanaugh stops” for federal immigration enforcement and of factual revisionism for the rule of law. 

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

jeferson-santu-foIagXPFXls-unsplash

Essay

Property v. Guns: The Level-of-Generality Problem in Wolford

by  Maureen E. Brady  

In Wolford v. Lopez, the Supreme Court will examine whether states can require property owners to consent before armed individuals enter publicly-accessible private property. Maureen Brady argues this highlights the "level-of-generality problem" rooted in the Court's historical framework from New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, particularly in relation to firearm regulations. Brady examines the differing interpretations of Founding-era hunting laws and the implications of property ownership signals, concluding that courts should be transparent about their level-of-generality choices and acknowledge how these choices reintroduce means-ends reasoning under another name.

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

Police Car 412×274

Essay

The Emerging Firearms Hypocrisy of Terry: The Fifth Circuit in United States v. Wilson

by  Aliza Hochman Bloom  

Terry v. Ohio’s flexible reasonable-suspicion rule is colliding with the post-Bruen expansion of public carry. In United States v. Wilson, the Fifth Circuit held that suspected concealed gun possession—presumptively lawful in Louisiana—could not alone justify a stop, yet it sustained the seizure by relying on Mr. Wilson’s social associations and arrest history. Professor Hochman Bloom argues this emerging “firearm exceptionalism” elevates guns over other lawful acts and entrenches Terry’s racialized, hindsight-driven policing.

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

Train – 412×274

Essay

A Remedy Inherited: State Law, Universal Vacatur, and the Meaning of “Set Aside”

by  Fred Halbhuber  

Introduction This past June, in a decision already heralded as marking a “landmark shift in administrative law,” the Supreme Court in Trump v. CASA, Inc. held that federal courts “likely” lacked the power to issue universal injunctions. Universal injunctions, the 6-3 majority concluded, likely exceeded the equitable authority that Congress had bestowed on the federal courts…

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

Image

Essay

Threats to Contraception

by  Deborah Tuerkheimer  

Many question the future of the right to contraception after Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, but Deborah Tuerkheimer argues that the more immediate threats lie beyond the Supreme Court. Contraceptive access is eroding through three interconnected forces: post-Dobbs funding cuts and clinic closures, expanding parental- and conscience-based claims, and misinformation-driven cultural shifts that invite restrictive regulation. Together, these developments imperil contraception even as formal protections remain intact.

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

SCOTUS

Symposium – Executive Overreach and the Rule of Law in Trump II

Remedies in the First Hundred Days of Trump II: A Gently Adversarial Collaboration

by  Samuel L. Bray & James E. Pfander  

In Trump’s second term, courts face mounting pressure to issue broad, sweeping remedies in response to clear executive overreach. While Samuel Bray and James Pfander often disagree about judicial authority to issue universal injunctions, they join forces in this adversarial collaboration to explore modern application of equitable traditions. Where do they agree and where precisely do their views diverge?

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

Symposium – Executive Overreach and the Rule of Law in Trump II

The Removal Question: A Timeline and Summary of the Legal Arguments

by  Aditya Bamzai & Peter M. Shane  

Aditya Bamzai and Peter Shane trace the enduring debate of the President’s removal power. Together they provide a comprehensive yet succinct history of this question from the First Congress to Trump’s latest removals, then offer their competing interpretations of how history and doctrine define the limits of executive power today.

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

Symposium – Executive Overreach and the Rule of Law in Trump II

Executive Branch Attacks on January 6 Prosecutors: A Notable Case of Democratic Backsliding

by  Sonia Mittal  

Sonia Mittal–a senior January 6 prosecutor–details the firings, demotions, and investigations of DOJ prosecutors. Mittal argues these executive actions are part of a systemic attempt to “capture the referees,” a term used by political scientists to describe authoritarian consolidation, and highlights the dangers of politicizing law enforcement, especially when career officials face reprisals for impartial legal work.

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

Symposium – Executive Overreach and the Rule of Law in Trump II

How a Rule 23(b)(2) Class Action Could Save Law Firms from Trump

by  Nora Freeman Engstrom, Jonah B. Gelbach & David Marcus  

As Trump targets law firms with punitive executive orders, firms face a familiar dilemma: all would benefit from resistance, but acting alone may risk everything. This Essay diagnoses the legal profession’s collective action problem and prescribes a united, classwide solution.

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

Symposium – Executive Overreach and the Rule of Law in Trump II

National Security or Nothing to See? Clearances as the Site of Executive Overreach

by  Shreeya Singh  

Can courts review the President’s retaliatory decision to revoke security clearances? In this Essay, Stanford J.D. Candidate Shreeya Singh argues Supreme Court precedent says “yes,” but a recent court decision seems to effectively immunize the executive branch from judicial scrutiny in these cases in the name of national security.

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

Symposium – Executive Overreach and the Rule of Law in Trump II

Trumpian Impoundments in Historical Perspective

by  Zachary S. Price  

Reviving Nixon-era arguments, the Trump Administration claims the power to unilaterally withhold congressionally appropriated funds. In this Essay, Zachary Price dismantles the constitutional and practical case for presidential impoundment, and warns that letting the executive control the purse would threaten separation of powers and undermine democratic accountability.

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

k. Meyler Newseum 1

Symposium – Executive Overreach and the Rule of Law in Trump II

Leveraging Institutions: Imposing Unconstitutional Constraints on Individual Speech through State and Private Organizations

by  Bernadette Meyler  

President Trump has leveraged federal funds to induce private entities, like universities, to suppress individuals’ free speech. Bernadette Meyler proposes extending the “independent constitutional bar” test—traditionally applied to states—to private funding recipients when individual rights are affected. Otherwise, the federal government may evade accountability when it acts through intermediaries to circumvent constitutional limits.

Volume 78 (2025-2026)

n. Zambrano 1

Symposium – Executive Overreach and the Rule of Law in Trump II

Due Process or the Rule of Law? Americans Speak a Different Legal Language

by  Diego A. Zambrano  

Drawing on global political histories, Diego Zambrano explores why many democracies abroad rally around “the rule of law,” while Americans reach instinctively for “due process.” He argues that distinction isn’t just rhetorical: it may leave Americans less equipped to recognize and resist attacks on democratic institutions.

Volume 78 (2025-2026)