Burke Craighead

Baylor '22
Harvard Law '25

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

And because different judges think different cases are important (and the Supreme Court won’t take them all), there is an incentive to engage in the sort of lobbying that @dilanesper thinks is bad (and very well might be bad!).

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

This is a frequently undervalued defect of the Judiciary Acts of 1891 and 1925. Lower court judges weren’t lobbying the Supreme Court to take up cases because they didn’t have to—the Court was obligated to take up the vast majority of appeals.

[Dilan Esper @dilanesper]

But I am now going to tell you some history. This thing of lower court judges lobbying the Supreme Court to take up cases and overturn its earlier rulings?

It's new. There's no history of it. For the first at least 150 years of this country, it didn't happen.

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

But when Congress switched to a primarily certiorari-based docket for the Court, lower court judges no longer had any certainty the Court would take up a given case. This creates an incentive to try to flag cases that those judges think are important.

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

https://t.co/zA2eMb1uQY

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

As a final note from this submission cycle, I’m happy to share that “Piercing Sovereign Immunity Through Qui Tam Actions” will appear in the Yale Law and Policy Review.

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

https://t.co/VIbq9sBr4F

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

Also forthcoming (in the Stetson Law Review) is “The Incompatibility of 28 U.S.C. § 1738 and England Reservation.”

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

And special thanks to @StephenESachs for all of the feedback he provided while I was writing this paper in his Originalism Writing Group

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

Excited to share that my article “On a Collision Course: The Twenty-First Amendment, the Dormant Commerce Clause, and Physical Presence Laws” is forthcoming in the St. Mary’s Law Journal. Link below!

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

https://t.co/gy0y6AcYKJ

[Iowa Law Review @IowaLawReview]

New from Iowa Law Review Online is Shadow Docket Singularity by M. Burke Craighead. Read this Essay here: https://t.co/9vx9s2Klz5

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

My latest is on SSRN and forthcoming in the University of Dayton Law Review. It should be a timely read on the President’s power to refuse to enforce the law and what that means for executive power more generally.

https://t.co/T9PVoL3p3X

[William Baude @WilliamBaude]

https://t.co/UBovlR7xQy

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

Many thanks to Prof. Solum for recommending my student note!

[Lawrence Solum @lsolum]

Craighead on Precedent About Precedent, https://t.co/YdhTNPqAHE - M. Burke Craighead (Harvard University - Harvard Law School) has posted Note, The Paradox of Precedent About Precedent (Harvard Law Review, Volume 138, No. 3, p. 797, 2025) on SSRN.

[Burke Craighead @BurkeCraighead]

My latest on SSRN (and recommended on Legal Theory Blog): https://t.co/gy0y6AdwAh

[Lawrence Solum @lsolum]

Craighead on the Dormant Commerce Clause and the 21st Amendment, https://t.co/zISQt6xBsL - Burke Craighead (Harvard University - Harvard Law School) has posted On a Collision Course: The Twenty-First Amendment, the Dormant Commerce Clause, and Physical Presence Laws on SSRN.