Samuel Simon, a doctoral student in politics at Princeton University, will speak on "Congressional Issue Spotting."

As scholars, policymakers, and the public become increasingly skeptical of the Supreme Court, it is important to better understand Congress's ability to serve as an alternative constitutional interpreter and protector of constitutional values and rights. However, extant scholarship on congressional constitutionalism focuses exclusively on dissecting those constitutional debates Congress has rather than asking when and under what circumstances Congress chooses to debate constitutional questions in the first place. As a result, we lack a full understanding of the degree to which constitutional considerations animate Congress's work. This paper asks not just how Congress answers constitutional questions but which questions it asks in the first place. Relying on a novel dataset of congressional constitutional debates, I seek to determine when Congress does and does not "spot constitutional issues" in the legislation on its agenda. The analysis provides insights for reformers interested in improving congressional deliberation and judges, scholars, and members of the public attempting to craft doctrine that takes advantage of what Congress does well and compensates for what it does poorly, or not at all, as a constitutional interpreter.

To request a copy of the paper or attend virtually, contact Kim Murray.

UCHV sponsorship of an event does not constitute institutional endorsement of the program, speakers, or views presented.