{"id":3756,"date":"2026-01-10T01:18:39","date_gmt":"2026-01-10T05:18:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/?page_id=3756"},"modified":"2026-03-10T14:36:42","modified_gmt":"2026-03-10T18:36:42","slug":"homepage","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"\n<div class=\"wp-block-cover alignfull is-light has-custom-content-position is-position-top-center wp-duotone-dark-grayscale\" style=\"margin-top:0;padding-top:5vw;padding-right:5vw;padding-bottom:5vw;padding-left:5vw;min-height:66vh;aspect-ratio:unset;\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"900\" height=\"598\" class=\"wp-block-cover__image-background wp-image-3741 size-full\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/Supreme-Court.jpg\" data-object-fit=\"cover\" srcset=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/Supreme-Court.jpg 900w, https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/Supreme-Court-300x199.jpg 300w, https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/Supreme-Court-768x510.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 900px) 100vw, 900px\" \/><span aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-cover__background has-background-dim wp-block-cover__gradient-background has-background-gradient\" style=\"background-color:#989791;background:linear-gradient(90deg,rgb(232,230,226) 50%,rgb(165,28,48) 50%)\"><\/span><div class=\"wp-block-cover__inner-container is-layout-flow wp-block-cover-is-layout-flow\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-group wp-container-content-9cfa9a5a is-layout-constrained wp-container-core-group-is-layout-a1274fd4 wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n<div style=\"height:65px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"alignnormal\"><div id=\"metaslider-id-3746\" style=\"width: 100%;\" class=\"ml-slider-3-107-0 metaslider metaslider-flex metaslider-3746 ml-slider has-dots-nav has-carousel-mode ms-theme-clarity\" role=\"region\" aria-label=\"Homepage Slider Duplicate\" data-height=\"400\" data-width=\"300\">\n    <div id=\"metaslider_container_3746\">\n        <div id=\"metaslider_3746\">\n            <ul aria-live='off' class='slides'>\n                <li style=\"display: none; width: 100%;\" class=\"slide-3747 ms-image \" aria-roledescription=\"slide\" data-date=\"2026-01-10 00:05:37\" data-filename=\"ian-hutchinson-U8WfiRpsQ7Y-unsplash-scaled-e1768021893164-300x400.jpg\" data-slide-type=\"image\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2025\/11\/McFadden_Foreshadow-Docket-FINAL-PRINT.pdf%20\" target=\"_self\" aria-label=\"A Response to The Foreshadow Docket\" class=\"metaslider_image_link\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/ian-hutchinson-U8WfiRpsQ7Y-unsplash-scaled-e1768021893164-300x400.jpg\" height=\"400\" width=\"300\" alt=\"\" class=\"slider-3746 slide-3747 msDefaultImage\" title=\"ian-hutchinson-U8WfiRpsQ7Y-unsplash\" \/><\/a><div class=\"caption-wrap\"><div class=\"caption\"><div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:17px;\"><strong>A Response to\u00a0<em>The Foreshadow Docket<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:14px;\">Hon. Trevor N. McFadden &amp; Vetan Kapoor<\/span><\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\">\u00a0<\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:13px;\"><a class=\"ms-custom-button\" href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/49.McFadden_Kapoor.pdf\">READ HERE<\/a><\/span><\/div> <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/li>\n                <li style=\"display: none; width: 100%;\" class=\"slide-3749 ms-image \" aria-roledescription=\"slide\" data-date=\"2026-01-10 00:05:37\" data-filename=\"patrick-tomasso-Oaqk7qqNh_c-unsplash-scaled-300x400.jpg\" data-slide-type=\"image\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2010\/01\/Sachs_4.pdf\" target=\"_self\" aria-label=\"Originalism as a Theory of Legal Change\" class=\"metaslider_image_link\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/patrick-tomasso-Oaqk7qqNh_c-unsplash-scaled-300x400.jpg\" height=\"400\" width=\"300\" alt=\"\" class=\"slider-3746 slide-3749 msDefaultImage\" title=\"patrick-tomasso-Oaqk7qqNh_c-unsplash\" \/><\/a><div class=\"caption-wrap\"><div class=\"caption\"><div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:17px;\"><strong>Originalism as a Theory of Legal Change<\/strong><\/span><\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:14px;\">Stephen E. Sachs<\/span><\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\">\u00a0<\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:15px;\"><a class=\"ms-custom-button\" href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2010\/01\/Sachs_4.pdf\"><span style=\"font-size:13px;\">READ HERE<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/li>\n                <li style=\"display: none; width: 100%;\" class=\"slide-3750 ms-image \" aria-roledescription=\"slide\" data-date=\"2026-01-10 00:05:37\" data-filename=\"giammarco-boscaro-zeH-ljawHtg-unsplash-scaled-300x400.jpg\" data-slide-type=\"image\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2024\/01\/26_47_3-Vermeule-clean-v2.pdf\" target=\"_self\" aria-label=\"Enriching Legal Theory\" class=\"metaslider_image_link\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/giammarco-boscaro-zeH-ljawHtg-unsplash-scaled-300x400.jpg\" height=\"400\" width=\"300\" alt=\"\" class=\"slider-3746 slide-3750 msDefaultImage\" title=\"giammarco-boscaro-zeH-ljawHtg-unsplash\" \/><\/a><div class=\"caption-wrap\"><div class=\"caption\"><div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:17px;\"><strong>Enriching Legal Theory<\/strong><\/span><\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:14px;\">Adrian Vermeule<\/span><\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\">\u00a0<\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\">\u00a0<\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:15px;\"><a class=\"ms-custom-button\" href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2024\/01\/26_47_3-Vermeule-clean-v2.pdf\"><span style=\"font-size:13px;\">READ HERE<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/li>\n                <li style=\"display: none; width: 100%;\" class=\"slide-3748 ms-image \" aria-roledescription=\"slide\" data-date=\"2026-01-10 00:05:37\" data-filename=\"solen-feyissa-UWVJaDvXW_c-unsplash-scaled-300x400.jpg\" data-slide-type=\"image\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2013\/10\/ManneFinal.pdf\" target=\"_self\" aria-label=\"Google and the Limits of Antitrust\" class=\"metaslider_image_link\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/solen-feyissa-UWVJaDvXW_c-unsplash-scaled-300x400.jpg\" height=\"400\" width=\"300\" alt=\"\" class=\"slider-3746 slide-3748 msDefaultImage\" title=\"solen-feyissa-UWVJaDvXW_c-unsplash\" \/><\/a><div class=\"caption-wrap\"><div class=\"caption\"><div class=\"flex flex-col text-sm pb-25\">  <div class=\"text-base my-auto mx-auto pb-10 [--thread-content-margin:--spacing(4)] @w-sm\/main:[--thread-content-margin:--spacing(6)] @w-lg\/main:[--thread-content-margin:--spacing(16)] px-(--thread-content-margin)\"> <div class=\"[--thread-content-max-width:40rem] @w-lg\/main:[--thread-content-max-width:48rem] mx-auto max-w-(--thread-content-max-width) flex-1 group\/turn-messages focus-visible:outline-hidden relative flex w-full min-w-0 flex-col agent-turn\"> <div class=\"flex max-w-full flex-col grow\"> <div class=\"min-h-8 text-message relative flex w-full flex-col items-end gap-2 text-start break-words whitespace-normal [.text-message+&amp;]:mt-1\"> <div class=\"flex w-full flex-col gap-1 empty:hidden first:pt-[1px]\"> <div class=\"markdown prose dark:prose-invert w-full break-words light markdown-new-styling\"> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:17px;\"><strong>Google and the Limits of Antitrust<\/strong><\/span><\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:14px;\">Geoffrey A. Manne &amp; Joshua D. Wright<\/span><\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\">\u00a0<\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:13px;\"><a class=\"ms-custom-button\" href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2013\/10\/ManneFinal.pdf\">READ HERE<\/a><\/span><\/div> <\/div> <\/div> <\/div> <\/div> <\/div> <\/div>  <\/div><\/div><\/div><\/li>\n                <li style=\"display: none; width: 100%;\" class=\"slide-3759 ms-image \" aria-roledescription=\"slide\" data-date=\"2026-01-10 15:24:31\" data-filename=\"pexels-trev-takes-photos-6451438-scaled-300x400.jpg\" data-slide-type=\"image\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/pexels-trev-takes-photos-6451438-scaled-300x400.jpg\" height=\"400\" width=\"300\" alt=\"\" class=\"slider-3746 slide-3759 msDefaultImage\" title=\"pexels-trev-takes-photos-6451438\" \/><div class=\"caption-wrap\"><div class=\"caption\"><div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:17px;\"><strong>Who Decides Majorness?<\/strong><\/span><\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:14px;\">Chad Squitieri<\/span><\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\">\u00a0<\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\">\u00a0<\/div> <div style=\"text-align:center;\"><span style=\"font-size:13px;\"><a class=\"ms-custom-button\" href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2021\/04\/Squitieri-Who-Determines-Majorness.pdf\">READ HERE<\/a><\/span><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/li>\n            <\/ul>\n        <\/div>\n        \n    <\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:48px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h5 class=\"wp-block-heading alignwide has-text-align-center has-white-color has-text-color\" style=\"padding-left:32px;font-size:48x;font-style:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:26px;line-height:1;text-transform:uppercase\"><strong>Harv. J.L. &amp; Pub. Pol&#8217;y<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:45px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns alignwide is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-28f84493 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\" style=\"flex-basis:66.66%\">\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading has-text-align-center\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/current-issue\/\" data-type=\"link\" data-id=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/current-issue\/\">Read the Current Print Edition Issue<\/a><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<h5 class=\"wp-block-heading has-text-align-center\"><strong>Articles<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-text-color has-ast-global-color-6-color has-alpha-channel-opacity has-ast-global-color-6-background-color has-background is-style-wide\" \/>\n\n\n\n<h5 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/02\/49.Menashi.pdf\" data-type=\"link\" data-id=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/49.McFadden_Kapoor.pdf\">The Birthright Citizenship Debate<\/a><\/h5>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>Hon. Steven J. Menashi<\/em><\/strong><br>The Supreme Court may resolve the legality of Executive Order 14,160 before these questions receive the full attention of scholars. The Court, no doubt, will have the benefit of the views of able attorneys and many amici curiae. But the detailed consideration of the contributors to this Issue provides a solid foundation on which the debate can proceed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h5 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/02\/49.Wurman.pdf\" data-type=\"link\" data-id=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/02\/49.Wurman.pdf\">Jurisdiction and Citizenship<\/a><\/h5>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>Ilan Wurman<\/em><\/strong><br>This Article makes three historical claims about the common law rule and its development. First, the Article centers the importance of parental status. Second, it reveals through an examination of safe-conducts and English statutes from the twelfth through fourteenth centuries that the sovereign\u2019s consent to an alien\u2019s presence was necessary to extend the king\u2019s protection. Third, it uncovers new evidence, including from treatises and military authorities, that suggest that by the American Civil War the applicability of the common law rule to children born of temporary sojourners was contested.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h5 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/02\/49.Whittington.pdf\" data-type=\"link\" data-id=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/49.McFadden_Kapoor.pdf\">By Birth Alone: The Original Meaning of Birthright Citizenship and Subject to the Jurisdiction of the United States<\/a><\/h5>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>Keith E. Whittington<\/em><\/strong><br>The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment entrenched birthright citizenship into the Constitution. Some have asserted that the scope of birthright citizenship should be understood to exclude children born on American soil to parents who are either unauthorized to be in the country or authorized to be in the country for only a limited purpose and period. This asserted limitation of birthright citizenship is at odds with the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment and the antecedent common-law rule of nativity that the language of the Fourteenth Amendment embodied and declared.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h5 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/02\/49.Magliocca.pdf\" data-type=\"link\" data-id=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/49.McFadden_Kapoor.pdf\">Without Domicile or Allegiance: Gypsies and Birthright Citizenship<\/a><\/h5>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>Gerard N. Magliocca<\/em><\/strong><br>Though Professors Wurman and Whittington disagree on the original public meaning of the Citizenship Clause, and hence birthright citizenship, they must agree that children born in the United States to Roma (or gypsy) parents are citizens. Why did the Roma feature so prominently in the citizenship conversation, and what does that mean for the interpretation of birthright citizenship today?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Explore the full issue <a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/current-issue\/\" data-type=\"link\" data-id=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/current-issue\/\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-left\">Explore Issue 1 of Volume 49, with articles on the Take Care Clause, parental rights, natural law, qualified immunity, and more <a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/volume-49-2\/\" data-type=\"link\" data-id=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/volume-49-2\/\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<details class=\"wp-block-details is-layout-flow wp-block-details-is-layout-flow\" style=\"font-size:18px\"><summary>Volume 48 Excerpt: <em>Everson<\/em> Must Fall<\/summary>\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">You can access the full article of the below abstract by Timon Cline, Josh Hammer &amp; Yoram Hazony\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/03\/Hammer-FINAL.pdf\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">In June 2022, in&nbsp;<em>Dobbs v. Jackson Women\u2019s Health Organization,<\/em>&nbsp;the Supreme Court overturned&nbsp;<em>Roe v. Wade<\/em>, the infamous 1973 decision that purported to discover a right to an abortion in the text of the Constitution. It was a remarkable achievement. For decades, conservative lawyers, scholars, clergymen, and activists had devoted overwhelming attention to ending the Supreme Court-mandated abortion regime established under&nbsp;<em>Roe<\/em>. This almost obsessive focus on overturning&nbsp;<em>Roe<\/em>&nbsp;was largely a reflection of the uniquely odious character of the American \u201cabortion on demand\u201d regime, which had turned abortion into a pillar of America\u2019s culture of sexual license and a kind of sacrament of post-War liberalism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">But the&nbsp;<em>Dobbs<\/em>&nbsp;decision is likely to be regarded as a watershed in American constitutional history for reasons that go well beyond the abortion issue itself. For in recognizing that the Constitution includes no right to an abortion, the Court seemed to be bringing to a close a period of seventy-five years in which it had consistently discovered previously unknown \u201crights\u201d in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and imposed these new rights on the states through an authority it claimed to have found in the Fourteenth Amendment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">This mechanism had permitted the Court to progressively strip the states of their constitutional authority to determine their own&nbsp; laws, not only with respect to the issues of racially motivated violence and abuse that had motivated the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment after the Civil War, but also on a vast array of other areas pertaining to health, religion, and morals\u2014the very police powers entrusted to the States by the Constitution in 1787. It is no exaggeration to say that by the method described above, the federal structure of the American republic was systematically dismantled by liberal courts anxious to place issues relating to race, religion, and morals beyond the reach of state legislatures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">In the wake of the&nbsp;<em>Dobbs<\/em>&nbsp;decision, America\u2019s sleepy state legislatures have once again emerged as the dominant venue for the most demanding and important political debates, exercising responsibility for republican self-government to an extent they have not known for decades. While opinions vary as to whether the ultimate resolution of the abortion issue, specifically, should be at the state or federal level, it is undeniable that American federalism has been given a new lease on life due to&nbsp;<em>Dobbs<\/em>. As President Donald Trump put it following&nbsp;<em>Dobbs<\/em>, whatever the states determine will be \u201cthe law of the land.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">This move to reinstate the federal structure of American government appears to be part of a broader project of constitutional restoration undertaken by the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts. From the strengthening of the Second Amendment right of citizens to carry arms in&nbsp;<em>New York State Rifle &amp; Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen<\/em>, to the \u201cmajor questions doctrine\u201d case of&nbsp;<em>West Virginia v. EPA<\/em>, to the demise of so-called \u201caffirmative action\u201d programs in&nbsp;<em>Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard<\/em>, to the limitations of the&nbsp; powers of the&nbsp; administrative state in&nbsp;<em>Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo<\/em>, the Supreme Court has shown a consistent interest in rehabilitating important and long-moribund provisions of the Framers\u2019 Constitution. In this context, the Roberts Court\u2019s willingness to recalibrate the relationship between the national government and the states, building upon the work begun by the Rehnquist Court that preceded it, is best understood as an indication that we have entered a period in which the terms of the original Constitution are being revisited and revived.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">Let us suppose that we\u2019ve read this watershed moment correctly, and that the Supreme Court is prepared to go beyond overturning&nbsp;<em>Roe<\/em>, and to engage in a more general restoration of the ailing American constitutional order as a distinctly federalist one. What, then, should be the next great aim of this Court and of American conservatives seeking such a constitutional restoration?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">The American constitutional order was designed, in no small part, to allow the respective states\u2014the laboratories of policy\u2014ample room to experiment with different settlements on questions of public religion and morals. It was designed, in other words, to defuse the rationalists\u2019 yearning to devise a single answer to every vexing question of religion and morals, and to impose this one answer on a vast continent in which diverse communities had established themselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">Today, more than ever, we can see the wisdom in this design and understand how much good, and even national healing, could come from returning to it now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\">With this larger purpose in mind, we propose that the next longterm goal for the conservative legal movement must be to seek a reversal of&nbsp;<em>Everson v. Board of Education,<\/em>&nbsp;the Court\u2019s 1947 ruling that originally imposed the misguided and ahistorical doctrine of \u201cseparation of church and state\u201d on the states. More than any other decision, it was this ruling that paved the way for the destruction of America\u2019s federalist system, especially as it pertains to laws concerning the establishment of religion and public morals, and for the Supreme Court\u2019s subsequent campaign to suppress traditional religious and moral norms that had animated public life in America for centuries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-medium-font-size\"><em>Everson<\/em>&nbsp;must fall.<\/p>\n<\/details>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-vertically-aligned-stretch is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\" style=\"flex-basis:33.33%\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-query is-layout-flow wp-block-query-is-layout-flow\">\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading has-text-align-center\">New from <em>Per Curiam<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-post-template is-layout-flow wp-block-post-template-is-layout-flow\"><li class=\"wp-block-post post-4872 post type-post status-publish format-standard hentry category-per-curiam tag-grand-jury tag-originalism tag-state-constitutional-law\">\n<h5 class=\"wp-block-post-title\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/the-original-meaning-and-understanding-of-the-investigative-power-of-the-grand-jury-in-the-constitution-of-alaska-savannah-shoffner-richard-garnett\/\" target=\"_self\" >The Original Meaning and Understanding of the Investigative Power of the Grand Jury in the Constitution of Alaska \u2013 Savannah Shoffner &amp; Richard Garnett<\/a><\/h5>\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-post-date\"><time datetime=\"2026-04-02T01:25:44-04:00\">April 2, 2026<\/time><\/div>\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-post-excerpt\"><p class=\"wp-block-post-excerpt__excerpt\">The investigatory, or reporting, power of grand juries refers to the body\u2019s ability to issue statements on wide-ranging matters of public policy, generally aimed at exposing \u201cinefficiency, neglect, or criminal or quasi-criminal conduct\u201d by government officials. <\/p><\/div>\n<\/li><li class=\"wp-block-post post-3857 post type-post status-publish format-standard hentry category-per-curiam tag-birthright-citizenship tag-constitutional-law tag-fourteenth-amendment\">\n<h5 class=\"wp-block-post-title\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/indians-and-citizenship-territorial-birth-parental-status-in-contemporaneous-caselaw-elias-neibart\/\" target=\"_self\" >Indians and Citizenship: Territorial Birth &amp; Parental Status in\u00a0Contemporaneous Caselaw \u2013 Elias Neibart<\/a><\/h5>\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-post-date\"><time datetime=\"2026-02-24T13:11:35-04:00\">February 24, 2026<\/time><\/div>\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-post-excerpt\"><p class=\"wp-block-post-excerpt__excerpt\">Shortly after the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, courts were asked to determine the citizenship status of litigants and parties before them: Were they Indians or United States citizens? What the following demonstrates is that courts did not adopt a territory-centric view of citizenship. <\/p><\/div>\n<\/li><li class=\"wp-block-post post-3800 post type-post status-publish format-standard hentry category-per-curiam\">\n<h5 class=\"wp-block-post-title\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/does-braidwood-treat-independent-agencies-like-a-major-question-austin-piatt\/\" target=\"_self\" >Does\u00a0Braidwood\u00a0Treat Independent Agencies Like a Major Question? \u2013 Austin Piatt<\/a><\/h5>\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-post-date\"><time datetime=\"2026-01-21T10:48:35-04:00\">January 21, 2026<\/time><\/div>\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-post-excerpt\"><p class=\"wp-block-post-excerpt__excerpt\">Consider the following two quotes from recent Supreme Court cases. One: \u201cCongress must speak clearly if it wishes to insulate officers from at-will removal.\u201d\u00a0Two: \u201cWe expect Congress to speak clearly when authorizing an agency to exercise powers of vast economic and political significance.\u201d\u00a0 <\/p><\/div>\n<\/li><\/ul><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns alignwide has-ast-global-color-4-background-color has-background is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-28f84493 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\" style=\"border-right-style:none;border-right-width:0px\">\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading has-text-align-center\">Submit<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-text-color has-alpha-channel-opacity has-background\" style=\"background-color:#a51c30;color:#a51c30\" \/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center\">&nbsp;&nbsp;The most competitive submissions will be high quality legal scholarship of a particular interest to a conservative and libertarian audience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-content-justification-center is-layout-flex wp-container-core-buttons-is-layout-a89b3969 wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link wp-element-button\" href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/submission\/\">Submit to JLPP<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\" style=\"border-right-style:none;border-right-width:0px\">\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading has-text-align-center\">Archive<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-text-color has-alpha-channel-opacity has-background\" style=\"background-color:#a51c30;color:#a51c30\" \/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center\">The <em>Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy<\/em> has a wide-ranging catalog of legal scholarship stretching back decades for interested readers to engage with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-content-justification-center is-layout-flex wp-container-core-buttons-is-layout-a89b3969 wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link wp-element-button\" href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/archive\/\">JLPP Archive<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading has-text-align-center\">Join<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-text-color has-alpha-channel-opacity has-background\" style=\"background-color:#a51c30;color:#a51c30\" \/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center\">The&nbsp;<em>Harvard Journal of Law &amp; Public Policy<\/em>&nbsp;is open to all interested Harvard Law School students, including 1Ls, transfer students, and LLM candidates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-content-justification-center is-layout-flex wp-container-core-buttons-is-layout-a89b3969 wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link wp-element-button\" href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/join\/\">Join JLPP<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"inherit-container-width wp-block-group alignfull has-ast-global-color-5-background-color has-background is-layout-constrained wp-container-core-group-is-layout-2db05125 wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\" style=\"padding-top:40px;padding-right:40px;padding-bottom:40px;padding-left:40px\">\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center has-small-font-size\"><strong>From the Archives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h1 class=\"wp-block-heading has-text-align-center has-ast-global-color-2-color has-text-color\">Federalism and Commerce<\/h1>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center has-ast-global-color-3-color has-text-color\">Hon. Frank Easterbrook<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-horizontal is-content-justification-center is-layout-flex wp-container-core-buttons-is-layout-ecd33c62 wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link wp-element-button\" href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2013\/05\/36_3_935_Easterbrook.pdf\">Read Here<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-text-color has-alpha-channel-opacity has-background is-style-wide\" style=\"background-color:#eeeeee;color:#eeeeee\" \/>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-query is-layout-constrained wp-block-query-is-layout-constrained\">\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">About JLPP<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The <em>Harvard Journal of Law &amp; Public Policy<\/em> is published three times annually and is one of the nation\u2019s largest and most widely circulated law reviews and the leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship. The Journal is student-run and edited, with assistance from faculty advisors, and is distributed with assistance from the Federalist Society for Law &amp; Public Policy Studies..<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>Per Curiam<\/em> is the <em>Harvard Journal of Law &amp; Public Policy<\/em>\u2019s online companion and offers professors, practitioners, judges, and the border legal community the opportunity to publish substantive but shorter-form legal scholarship on current developments in the law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The <em>Journal<\/em> was founded forty years ago by the late Stephen Eberhard and former Senator and Secretary of Energy E. Spencer Abraham. Since its inception, many alums have risen to prominent legal positions in government, academia, and at the nation\u2019s most prominent law firms.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-media-text alignwide has-media-on-the-right is-stacked-on-mobile is-vertically-aligned-center has-text-color has-background has-link-color wp-elements-1e2773f91628ece55ecfd225d507d617\" style=\"color:#000000;background-color:#ffffff;grid-template-columns:auto 47%\"><div class=\"wp-block-media-text__content\">\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Contact Us<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p style=\"font-size:1.1em\">Harvard Law School<br>Wasserstein Hall, Suite 3039 1585 Massachusetts Avenue<br>Cambridge, MA 02138<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p style=\"font-size:1.1em\">Email: harvardjlpp@gmail.com<br>Editor-in-Chief: spigeon@jd26.law.harvard.edu<\/p>\n\n\n<div style=\"margin-bottom:6px;\" class=\"alignleft wp-block-site-logo\"><a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/\" class=\"custom-logo-link\" rel=\"home\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"349\" height=\"77\" src=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2021\/04\/cropped-Screen-Shot-2021-04-12-at-2.58.12-PM-1-400x89.png\" class=\"custom-logo\" alt=\"Harvard Journal of Law &amp; Public Policy\" srcset=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2021\/04\/cropped-Screen-Shot-2021-04-12-at-2.58.12-PM-1.png 1283w, https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2021\/04\/cropped-Screen-Shot-2021-04-12-at-2.58.12-PM-1-300x67.png 300w, https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2021\/04\/cropped-Screen-Shot-2021-04-12-at-2.58.12-PM-1-1024x227.png 1024w, https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2021\/04\/cropped-Screen-Shot-2021-04-12-at-2.58.12-PM-1-768x171.png 768w, https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2021\/04\/cropped-Screen-Shot-2021-04-12-at-2.58.12-PM-1-400x89.png 400w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 349px) 100vw, 349px\" \/><\/a><\/div>\n\n\n<div style=\"height:29px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n<\/div><figure class=\"wp-block-media-text__media\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"795\" height=\"526\" src=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/WidenerLibrary_HarvardUniversity_Springtime-e1768170229288.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-3742 size-full\" srcset=\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/WidenerLibrary_HarvardUniversity_Springtime-e1768170229288.jpg 795w, https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/WidenerLibrary_HarvardUniversity_Springtime-e1768170229288-300x198.jpg 300w, https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2026\/01\/WidenerLibrary_HarvardUniversity_Springtime-e1768170229288-768x508.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 795px) 100vw, 795px\" \/><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Read the Current Print Edition Issue Articles The Birthright Citizenship Debate Hon. Steven J. MenashiThe Supreme Court may resolve the legality of Executive Order 14,160 before these questions receive the full attention of scholars. The Court, no doubt, will have the benefit of the views of able attorneys and many amici curiae. But the detailed consideration of the contributors to this Issue provides a solid foundation on which the debate can proceed. Jurisdiction and Citizenship [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":209,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"normal-width-container","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-3756","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/PeZSiL-YA","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3756","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/209"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3756"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3756\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3756"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}