"One-Person, One-Initiative: Equal Protection Limits on Missouri's Proposed District-Based Initiative Approval Rule"

Monteleone_One-Person, One-Initiative (Forthcoming)Download

Washington University Law Review is pleased to share an early release of "One-Person, One-Initiative: Equal Protection Limits on Missouri's Proposed District-Based Initiative Approval Rule" by Domenic Monteleone, forthcoming in Volume 104.

This Note examines Missouri's Amendment 4, which will appear on the August 4, 2026, primary ballot. The proposed amendment would require citizen initiated constitutional amendments to receive a statewide majority and a majority of votes in each of Missouri's eight congressional districts. Monteleone argues that this district based requirement, which does not apply to legislatively referred amendments such as Amendment 4 itself, raises significant Equal Protection concerns.

Online Edition

SHADOW TARIFFS AND THE EXECUTIVE VOLATILITY REGIME
by Doron Narotzki
This Article identifies and theorizes a neglected element of tariffs: “shadow tariffs,” the tariff-like burdens created by executive volatility rather than by durable border collection. When an administration repeatedly announces, delays, conditions, escalates, and reverses tariffs, it changes the expected distribution of future trade costs.Corporations respond ex ante by repricing risk, rewriting contracts, pulling forward inventory, reconfiguring supply chains, investing
Race as Evidence: The Historical Racial Nexus and Equal Protection
by Lisa Owens
This Essay accepts strict scrutiny as the constitutional terrain within which race-conscious policy must operate and builds a refined framework for equal protection analysis: the Historical Racial Nexus (“HRN”). HRN offers a narrow tailoring theory designed to survive contemporary judicial scrutiny by charting a third path between colorblind formalism and categorical race-based remedialism. Rather than treating race as a present-day
Property Rights v. Taxpayer Rights: The Battle Over Tax Foreclosures
by Stewart E. Sterk
Local governments rely on property taxes to fund many essential public services. Owners who do not pay the taxes impose an increased burden on their taxpaying neighbors. To what extent can local governments interfere with the property rights of delinquent owners in order to safeguard the interests of ordinary taxpayers? In particular, can the government use the foreclosure process in
An Overlooked Footnote in Trump v. CASA Ensures That the Debate Over Universal Injunctions Isn’t Over
by Harvey Reiter
Several months ago, I wrote in Law360 that, given the tenor of the questioning in Trump v. CASA—the birthright citizenship case—I did not expect the court to address the issue of universal injunctions.[1] That prediction plainly turned out to be wrong. But I was not wrong that Republican and Democratic administrations alike would continue to be troubled by
Land-Grant Universities
by Michael Banerjee
In their groundbreaking High Country News article on “land-grab universities,” Robert Lee and Tristian Ahtone argue that Congress’s 1862 Morrill Act,[3] which famously granted lands held by the United States to states for the purpose of endowing fifty-two universities, “worked by turning land expropriated from tribal nations into seed money for higher education.[4] “In all,” they write, “the act redistributed

Category: Statement

Scholarship, Teaching, and Protest

Statement by Michael McConnell to Stanford Law School Community

Statement by the Undersigned Editors of Volume 97