When I was a law student, we spent most of our time in law school on precedents of the U.S. Supreme Court.
When I left law school, I started to wonder how people even survive in litigation, financially and emotionally, to have their cases reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
I also realized that cases reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court represent a minute fraction of cases which could have been no less important, but the U.S. Supreme Court did not or could not take them for review. After all, the U.S. Supreme Court is a panel of 9 judges who hear cases out of 52 states and 12 federal appellate circuit, not to mention those cases, albeit rare, which come to the U.S. Supreme Court directly.
There is simply no time to review all of the appeals of the top state courts and from all appellate circuits on constitutional issues.
When writs of certiorari are denied by the U.S. Supreme Court, the case dies and issues remain unreviewed, even though there may have been some unconstitutional laws or unconstitutional conduct of government officials involved.
Moreover, to raise a certain constitutional argument, you need to have an actual injury or a standing, and even then, the myriad of court-created doctrines of comities, deferences, abstentions, immunities, avoidances, etc. may prevent your constitutional issue from ever reaching a court.
Additionally, courts have started lately to sanction parties and counsel for raising "frivolous" constitutional arguments, so much of constitutional arguments may be stifled this way from the very beginning, where attorneys are simply too scared to bring a certain constitutional argument before the court.
I suggest public discussion of whatever constitutional issues were ever decided by any court anywhere in the United States. Was it right? Was it wrong? Was it constitutional?
Was certain behavior of a certain public official unconstitutional?
Is a certain law unconstitutional under the U.S. Constitution?
Such issues are pertinent matter for public debate.
They may never be decided through courts given the expense, the brick wall of judge-created doctrine blocking judicial review of such issues, and unavailability of review by the U.S. Supreme Court as of right.
I request to send me issues of constitutionality, simply questions, which I will post for discussion in this blog, with or without attribution to the person who asked the question, according to the wishes of the author of the question.
I will post my own questions and will express my opinion as to that law.
Maybe, just maybe, if there is a vigorous debate of constitutional issues, our constitutional law will develop more lively and more issues will get to be heard by the courts, improving everybody's chances to get a remedy if their constitutional rights are violated.
Please, send me your questions to be posted and discussed.
