Faculty Available for Comment on 2022 Supreme Court Term

U.S. Supreme Court

Photo by iStock

June 29, 2022

University of Virginia School of Law faculty listed here are available to speak to the media about the 2022 Supreme Court term. The list will be updated as more cases are announced.

303 Creative LLC v. Elenis

Issue(s): Whether applying a public-accommodation law to compel an artist to speak or stay silent violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment.

Konnoth writes in health and civil rights, as well as on health data regulation. He is also active in LGBT rights litigation, and has filed briefs in the U.S. Supreme Court and the Tenth Circuit on LGBT rights issues.

Schauer is a world-renowned expert in the areas of constitutional law, evidence, legal reasoning, freedom of speech, and jurisprudence and the philosophy of law. His expertise has been demonstrated in hundreds of books, book chapters, articles, essays, classes and personal appearances.

A scholar who focuses on law and religion, jurisprudence, political philosophy and constitutional law, Schwartzman is co-director of the Karsh Center for Law and Democracy.


Health and Hos​pital Corporation of Marion County, Indiana v. Talevski

Issue(s): (1) Whether, in light of compelling historical evidence to the contrary, the Supreme Court should reexamine its holding that spending clause legislation gives rise to privately enforceable rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; and (2) whether, assuming spending clause statutes ever give rise to private rights enforceable via Section 1983, the Federal Nursing Home Amendments Act of 1987’s transfer and medication rules do so.

Bayefsky’s work addresses both the practical workings of legal institutions and underlying philosophical ideas such as dignity and equality. Bayefsky clerked for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.


Jones v. Hendrix

Issue(s): Whether federal inmates who did not — because established circuit precedent stood firmly against them — challenge their convictions on the ground that the statute of conviction did not criminalize their activity may apply for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C § 2241 after the Supreme Court later makes clear in a retroactively applicable decision that the circuit precedent was wrong and that they are legally innocent of the crime of conviction.

Ortiz teaches constitutional law, administrative law, electoral law, civil procedure and legal theory, and is director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, which is representing Jones. He clerked for Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. and then-Judge Stephen G. Breyer.

In the News


Mallory v. Norfolk ​Southern Railway Co.

Issue: Whether the due process clause of the 14th Amendment prohibits a state from requiring a corporation to consent to personal jurisdiction to do business in the state.

Frost writes and teaches in the fields of immigration and citizenship law, federal courts and jurisdiction, and judicial ethics.

Solum teaches civil procedure and works on problems of law and technology, including internet governance, copyright policy and patent law.


Merrill v. ​Milligan

Issue: Whether the state of Alabama’s 2021 redistricting plan for its seven seats in the United States House of Representatives violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

Ross teaches and writes in the areas of constitutional law, constitutional theory, election law, administrative law and statutory interpretation. He has served on the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court.


Moore v. Harper

Issue(s): Whether a state’s judicial branch may nullify the regulations governing the “Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives ... prescribed ... by the Legislature thereof,” and replace them with regulations of the state courts’ own devising, based on vague state constitutional provisions purportedly vesting the state judiciary with power to prescribe whatever rules it deems appropriate to ensure a “fair” or “free” election.

Gilbert teaches courses on election law, legislation, and law and economics, and his current research focuses on campaign finance law, corruption and the adjudication of “culture war” disputes.

Ross teaches and writes in the areas of constitutional law, constitutional theory, election law, administrative law and statutory interpretation. He has served on the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court.

In the News


National Pork Producers Council v. Ross

Issues(s): (1) Whether allegations that a state law has dramatic economic effects largely outside of the state and requires pervasive changes to an integrated nationwide industry state a violation of the dormant commerce clause, or whether the extraterritoriality principle described in the Supreme Court’s decisions is now a dead letter; and (2) whether such allegations, concerning a law that is based solely on preferences regarding out-of-state housing of farm animals, state a claim under Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc.

Mason’s research focuses on the dormant Commerce Clause. She co-authored an amicus brief in Ross.

Solum teaches civil procedure and works on problems of law and technology, including internet governance, copyright policy and patent law.

In the News


Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency

Issues(s): Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit set forth the proper test for determining whether wetlands are "waters of the United States" under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1362(7).

Jaffe is director of the Environmental Law and Community Engagement Clinic and serves on the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission. Jaffe co-authored an amicus brief in Sackett.

Solum is an expert in statutory interpretation, and public policy and regulation.


Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College

Issue(s): (1) Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Grutter v. Bollinger and hold that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions; and (2) whether Harvard College is violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by penalizing Asian American applicants, engaging in racial balancing, overemphasizing race and rejecting workable race-neutral alternatives.

Ballenger is director of the Appellate Litigation Clinic and worked as a lawyer for the University of Michigan in Grutter and for the University of Texas in both Fisher cases. He clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia.

Forde-Mazrui teaches Constitutional Law, Employment Discrimination, Criminal Law, and Race and Law. His scholarship focuses on equal protection, especially involving race and sexual orientation. He is director of the Center for the Study of Race and Law.

Hellman is the author of “When Is Discrimination Wrong?” and co-editor of “The Philosophical Foundations of Discrimination Law,” and several articles related to equal protection.

Robinson is one of the nation’s leading education law experts and speaks throughout the United States about K-20 educational equity, school funding, education and democracy, equal opportunity, civil rights, Title IX and federalism.


Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina

Issue(s): (1) Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Grutter v. Bollinger and hold that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions; and (2) whether a university can reject a race-neutral alternative because it would change the composition of the student body, without proving that the alternative would cause a dramatic sacrifice in academic quality or the educational benefits of overall student-body diversity.

Ballenger is director of the Appellate Litigation Clinic and worked as a lawyer for the University of Michigan in Grutter and for the University of Texas in both Fisher cases. He clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia.

Forde-Mazrui teaches Constitutional Law, Employment Discrimination, Criminal Law, and Race and Law. His scholarship focuses on equal protection, especially involving race and sexual orientation. He is director of the Center for the Study of Race and Law.

Hellman is the author of “When Is Discrimination Wrong?” and co-editor of “The Philosophical Foundations of Discrimination Law,” and several articles related to equal protection.

Robinson is one of the nation’s leading education law experts and speaks throughout the United States about K-20 educational equity, school funding, education and democracy, equal opportunity, civil rights, Title IX and federalism.


U.S. v. Texas

Issue(s): (1) Whether state plaintiffs have Article III standing to challenge the Department of Homeland Security’s Guidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Law; (2) whether the Guidelines are contrary to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) or 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a), or otherwise violate the Administrative Procedure Act; and (3) whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(f)(1) prevents the entry of an order to “hold unlawful and set aside” the guidelines under 5 U.S.C. § 706(2).

Frost writes and teaches in the fields of immigration and citizenship law, federal courts and jurisdiction, and judicial ethics.


Wilkin​s v. U.S.

Issue(s): Whether the Quiet Title Act’s statute of limitations is a jurisdictional requirement or a claim-processing rule.

Bayefsky writes about constitutional law, federal courts, civil procedure and legal theory. She clerked for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Founded in 1819, the University of Virginia School of Law is the second-oldest continuously operating law school in the nation. Consistently ranked among the top law schools, Virginia is a world-renowned training ground for distinguished lawyers and public servants, instilling in them a commitment to leadership, integrity and community service.

Media Contact

Mike Fox
Director of Media Relations
mfox@law.virginia.edu / (434) 982-6832

News Highlights