New in SCOTUSBlog: What Has Changed In 14th Amendment Cases Over The Past Two Decades?
By Josh Blackman · Oct 7, 2026, 12:15 PM CDT
Randy Barnett and I continue to discuss shifts in our constitutional law casebook over the past two decades. This installment focuses on changes to the 14th Amendment. It is titled, A textbook 14th Amendment revolution . (I love the headline, for which all credit goes to editor Zach Shemtob.) Here is an excerpt: With the ascent of the Roberts court, the fifth edition reports a sea change in equal
Excerpt shown under fair-use limits. Full text remains with the original publisher.
People in this coverage
Explore their history and attributable record. Being mentioned does not imply endorsement.
Layer 1 · Claims & fact checks
AI analysisLayer 3 · Reporting analysis
AI analysisEmotive LanguageThe phrase frames the Roberts Court’s jurisprudence as dramatically different, signaling a strong evaluative stance.
MetaphorThe metaphor dramatizes the perceived obsolescence of earlier substantive due‑process cases.
Appeal to AuthorityMentioning a well‑known legal scholar serves to bolster the author’s credibility.
SpeculationPredictive language is used without supporting evidence, indicating conjecture.
Context
AI analysisMissing context
The article does not provide broader scholarly or empirical context about how courts, scholars, or practitioners have evaluated the impact of these cases, nor does it cite any data on how the cited decisions have been applied in lower courts since their issuance.
Important context
The piece is a self‑published commentary on a legal blog, reflecting the author’s perspective on casebook revisions rather than an independent news report. It references Supreme Court decisions as primary legal sources but does not quote the opinions themselves.
Opinion vs. reporting
AI analysisThe article blends factual references to Supreme Court cases with the author’s interpretive commentary and evaluative language, making it primarily opinion‑driven rather than straight reporting.