Columbia Law Review

In recent years, a growing number of litigants and scholars have argued that—despite the usual rule in federal court that only final orders are appealable—interlocutory orders denying church-autonomy defenses under the First Amendment can be appealed immediately. Proponents ground their claims in the belief that church autonomy provides religious institutions with an immunity from suit, rather than with a mere defense to liability. As a result,[...]

Since the Supreme Court’s District of Columbia v. Heller decision in 2008, lower federal courts have wrestled with Second Amendment claims raised by categories of people excluded from gun possession. Among those cases, several have been brought by noncitizens challenging their prosecutions under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), the federal criminal ban on possession by unlawfully present noncitizens. In the post-Heller § 922(g)(5) cases,[...]

For decades, antitrust enforcers ignored employer power in labor markets, adopting neoclassical assumptions that labor markets are competitive. Despite fanfare regarding recent labor antitrust enforcement, enforcers still deploy neoclassical assumptions and methods, targeting only proven deviations from a presumed competitive baseline, or infracompetitive wages and working conditions. The New Labor Antitrust deduces harms only from reduced competition[...]

The Supreme Court has recently adopted a new rule of religious equality: Laws unconstitutionally discriminate against religion when they deny religious exemptions but provide secular exemptions that undermine the law’s interests to the same degree as would a religious exemption. All the Justices and a cadre of scholars have agreed in principle with this approach to religious equality. This Essay argues that this new rule of religious equality[...]