Author name: arispitzer

The Dual-Track Independent State Legislature Doctrine Jack Foley* What’s in a word—especially when that word is of Constitutional import? In the pending case of Moore v. Harper,[1] the word at issue is “legislature,” and the question is how broadly it can be defined. Moore represents the Supreme Court’s attempt to determine the Constitutional merit of the so-called “independent state legislature doctrine” (ISLD),[2] which posits, in its broadest form, that state legislatures have plenary and exclusive […]

JLPP: Per Curiam is proud to present The Jurisprudence of Justice Samuel Alito: A Symposium. The essays in this symposium, authored by prominent federal judges and renowned academics, focus in-depth on Justice Alito’s approaches to a wide variety of areas of law. Versions of most of these essays were presented as addresses at a March 2022 symposium convened by Professor Robert P. George and Yuval Levin, co-hosted by the James Madison Program in American Ideals

The Elevation of Reality over Restraint in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Kevin C. Walsh* In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization,[1] the Supreme Court buried the constitutional right to abortion that it brought forth in Roe v. Wade[2] and breathed new life into in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.[3] Justice Alito’s opinion for the Court completely overruling Roe and Casey is an outstanding jurisprudential achievement. Alito not only completely dismantled Roe

Justice Alito’s Free Speech Jurisprudence Keith E. Whittington* When President George W. Bush nominated Samuel Alito to fill a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States in the fall of 2005, the right was amid a libertarian turn on freedom of speech and the First Amendment. An earlier generation of postwar conservatives had a distinctly ambivalent view about the First Amendment. While the core idea that freedom of speech is an important value

Reason and Fiat in the Jurisprudence of Justice Alito Adrian Vermeule* How to understand the jurisprudence of a judge or Justice as a coherent whole—coherent at least in aspiration if not execution? The difficulties are formidable because many of the institutional circumstances of judging conspire to promote the ad hoc, the pragmatic in a low sense, and the decision over the reasons for the decision. Judges do not choose their own dockets, and in the

Samuel Alito’s Conservatism—Burkean and American Adam J. White* “I am and always have been a conservative,” Samuel Alito wrote in 1985, “and an adherent to the same philosophical views that I believe are central to this Administration.” He was referring to the Reagan Administration, where he served in the Justice Department. But as he recognized, to call oneself a “conservative” is to start an explanation, not finish one. “It is obviously very difficult to summarize

An Architect of Religious Liberty Doctrines for the Roberts Court Gabrielle Girgis* Introduction: A “Practical Originalist” on the Religion Clauses Justice Alito’s work on religion law is a hallmark of his jurisprudence. He has shaped this field more than any other sitting Justice, and perhaps even more than any other member of the Court in its history. On many issues—religious neutrality and religious exemptions, church autonomy, the Establishment Clause, and more—he has authored pioneering opinions

Justice Alito: A Justice of Foxes and Hedgehogs Hon. Amul Thapar* The great Oxford philosopher Isaiah Berlin once proposed that all great writers fall into one of two camps. Some are hedgehogs; some are foxes.[1] Hedgehogs “relate everything to a single central vision.”[2] Foxes, on the other hand, reject grand theories. They “pursue many ends, often unrelated and even contradictory.”[3] While hedgehogs tend to see the world in black-and-white, foxes see it in shades of