About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


14 Elon L. Rev. 1 (2022)

handle is hein.journals/elonlr14 and id is 1 raw text is: ARTICLES FACTORIES OF GENERIC CONSTITUTIONALISM RICHARD DIETZ* I.OVERVIEW OF FEDERAL ECONOMIC SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS........ 4 II.EXCLUSIVE EMOLUMENT CLAUSE ................................................... 7 III.M ONOPOLIES CLAUSE.................................................................... 13 IV.FRUITS OF THEIR LABOR CLAUSE ................................................. 19 V.JUST AND EQUITABLE TAX CLAUSE ............................................... 24 VI.THE CHALLENGES OF INNOVATIVE STATE CONSTITUTIONALISM..... 29 VII.THE HARMS OF LOCKSTEPPING IDIOSYNCRATIC STATE PROV ISION S.............................................................................. 31 Every state has its own constitution. Their language-varied, dense, often quite lengthy-contrasts with the more familiar, streamlined language of the United States Constitution. Still, there is quite a bit of shared language among the fifty state constitutions and the federal one. The framers of the Bill of Rights, for example, were inspired by language from the early states' constitutions.' The Bill of Rights, in turn, inspired the framers in many future states.2 Judge, North Carolina Court of Appeals. This article is adapted from a thesis submission for the Master of Judicial Studies program at Duke University School of Law. The author thanks Professor Joseph Blocher of Duke University School of Law and Professor John V. Orth of the University of North Carolina School of Law for their review and comments. JEFFREY S. SUTTON, 51 IMPERFECT SOLUTIONS: STATES AND THE MAKING OF AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 7-9 (2018). 2 Joseph Blocher, Reverse Incorporation of State Constitutional Law, 84 S. CAL. L. REV. 323, 332 (2011). (1)