Akhil Reed Amar

Akhil Amar
Amar in 2014
Born (1958-09-06) September 6, 1958
Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.
EducationYale University (BA, JD)
TitleSterling Professor of Law and Political Science
RelativesVikram Amar (brother)
AwardsPaul M. Bator Award (1993)
American Academy of Arts and Sciences (2007)
Barry Prize (2024)
Academic work
DisciplineConstitutional law
InstitutionsYale University
Notable students

Akhil Reed Amar (born September 6, 1958) is an American legal scholar at Yale University, known for his expertise on a wide range of U.S. constitutional law issues—especially on the topics of originalism, the U.S. Bill of Rights, federalism, executive power, judicial power, constitutional history, and criminal procedure.[1] Amar joined the Yale Law School faculty in 1985 at the age of 26[2]—the youngest junior professor in the last sixty years. As a Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science, he currently holds one of Yale's highest chairs, and has done so since 2008.[3] He is Yale's only living professor to have received the University's unofficial triple crown: the title of Sterling Professor for scholarship, the DeVane Medal for teaching, and the Lamar Award for alumni service.[4][5]

His work has been cited in more than fifty U.S. Supreme Court cases by justices nominated by presidents of both parties—tops among scholars still under age 70.[5] No one else under age 70 has more than forty comparable Supreme Court case citations. According to Fred R. Shapiro's 2021 study of lifetime citations in American law reviews—a separate and distinct citation category—Amar is also the single most-cited constitutional law scholar still under age 70.[6]

Early life and education

Amar was born on September 6, 1958, in Ann Arbor, Michigan.[7] He has two brothers, one of whom is Vikram Amar, who is also a legal scholar and is a Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law.[8] His parents were young physicians from India who met at the University of Michigan.[7] His father became a professor at the University of California, San Francisco.[7] His middle name comes from his father's mentor, Reed M. Nesbit.[7]

Amar grew up in Walnut Creek, California, and graduated from Las Lomas High School in 1976.[9] He then attended Yale University, where he double majored in history and economics.[3] He was a member of the Yale Debate Association, winning its Thacher Memorial Prize, and was chair of the Liberal Party of the Yale Political Union.[10] At Yale, Amar was affiliated with Ezra Stiles Residential College.[11] His undergraduate mentors included the distinguished American historians Edmund Morgan and John Morton Blum.[7] He graduated from Yale in 1980 with a perfect 4.0 grade point average, receiving a Bachelor of Arts, summa cum laude, and winning election to Phi Beta Kappa along with Yale’s Louis Laun graduation prize for overall excellence by an economics major.[3]

In 1981, Amar entered Yale Law School, where he became an editor of The Yale Law Journal[12] and had Robert Bork as a teacher.[7] His most notable mentors were Guido Calabresi, Owen Fiss, and Bruce Ackerman.[13]He graduated in 1984 with a Juris Doctor degree and received a faculty award for having written the best student essay in the Yale Law Journal.[10] After law school, Amar was a law clerk for then-judge Stephen Breyer of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit from 1984 to 1985.[10]

Academic career

Amar speaks with Justice Clarence Thomas (left) at the National Archives in 2012

Amar joined the faculty of Yale Law School in 1985 as an assistant professor, then became an associate professor in 1988 and a full professor in 1990. From 1993 to 2008, he held the Southmayd Professorship of Law—the second youngest person at Yale Law School ever to receive an endowed chair, and the youngest since the early 1930s.[14] In 2008, he was appointed Sterling Professor of Law, the law school’s highest academic rank.[3] Amar's former students include U.S. senators—Cory Booker, Michael Bennet, Chris Coons, and Josh Hawley—and other notable past and present government officials, including Jake Sullivan, Neal Katyal, Alex Azar, Michael Barr, Brian Deese, Steven Engel, Maggie Goodlander, Jill Pryor, Stephen A. Higginson, Stephanos Bibas, William J. Nardini, Candace Jackson-Akiwumi, Gabriel P. Sanchez, Ronnie Abrams, Lewis J. Liman, Dabney Friedrich, Roy Altman, Josh Divine, Cyrus Habib, Goodwin Liu, and Rob Bonta.[15] Justice Brett Kavanaugh was also briefly a student of Amar.[16]

He is the author of more than a hundred law review articles[17] and many books, including The Words That Made Us: America's Constitutional Conversation, 1760-1840 and its sequel Born Equal: Remaking America's Constitution, 1840-1920. He has described these volumes as part of a planned trilogy, with the final volume tentatively titled Earth's Best Hope: America's Constitution, 1920-Present.[18]

Amar has described himself as a liberal. Some of his positions have drawn criticism from progressive commentators and academics.[19][20][21] He supported Brett Kavanaugh's appointment to the Supreme Court[22] and has argued that overturning Roe v. Wade would not undermine other privacy-related rights, such as the right to use contraceptives and the right to interracial marriage, which the Supreme Court upheld in Griswold v. Connecticut and Loving v. Virginia, respectively.[23]

Honors and awards

Amar’s books have received a number of awards and recognitions. In 1998-99, Amar won an ABA Certificate of Merit for his book, The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction.[24] His 2005 book, America’s Constitution: A Biography, received the ABA annual Silver Gavel award.[25] His 2012 book, America’s Unwritten Constitution, was named one of the 50 best nonfiction books of the year by the Washington Post.[26] His 2015 book, The Constitution Today, was named one of Time Magazine’s top ten nonfiction books of the year.[27] His 2025 book Born Equal: Remaking America’s Constitution, 1840-1920, won the Abraham Lincoln’s Institute’s annual book award. [28]

His books have collectively earned two starred reviews from Publishers Weekly[29] and three starred reviews from Kirkus Reviews.[30]—tops, it is believed, among legal scholars under age 70.

In 1993, he received the annual Paul M. Bator award from the Federalist Society.[31] In 2007, he was elected a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.[32] In 2008, U.S. presidential candidate Mike Gravel said if elected president he would name Amar to the Supreme Court.[33] In 2015, President Obama nominated Amar to the National Council on the Humanities.[34] The Senate never scheduled a confirmation vote. That same year, Amar received the William Clyde DeVane Medal for Undergraduate Teaching Excellence, Yale’s highest teaching award. [35] In 2017, he received the annual Outstanding Scholar Award from the American Bar Foundation[36] and also the Association of Yale Alumni’s Howard R. Lamar Award for Outstanding Faculty Service to Yale Alumni.[37] In 2024, he was awarded the Barry Prize for Distinguished Intellectual Achievement by the American Academy of Sciences and Letters.[38]

Professional activities and public engagement

Amar has testified before the United States Congress as a constitutional law expert a dozen times at the invitation of members of both major political parties.[10] He has also delivered endowed lectures at more than 75 universities, colleges, and schools.[10]

From 1999 to 2004, he was a contributing editor to The New Republic. [39] In the early 2000s, he was among a group of scholars, including Professor Gordon S. Wood, involved in the establishment of the National Constitution Center.[10] He serves as a trustee of both the American Exchange Project and the New York Historical.

Media, podcasting, and commentary

Amar has participated in a range of media and public-facing educational projects. In the early 2000s, he served as an informal consultant to the television series The West Wing.[40] He was referenced by name in a 2004 episode as a Yale Law School classmate of the fictional character, Josh Lyman. Several later episodes of the series tightly meshed with Amar’s public critique of modern rules of presidential succession and his closely related ideas about the Twenty-Fifth Amendment.[41][42]

His work has been discussed or featured on broadcasts and television programs across the political spectrum, including The Colbert Report,[43] Morning Joe, AC360, Velshi, Fox News @ Night with Shannon Bream, Fareed Zakaria GPS,[44] Erin Burnett Outfront, and Constitution USA with Peter Sagal [45].

Since early 2021 he has co-hosted a weekly podcast, Amarica’s Constitution with a fellow Yale alumnus, Andy Lipka. Guests have included Stephen Breyer,[46] Bob Woodward,[47] Kate A. Shaw,[48] Linda Greenhouse,[49] Steven Calabresi,[50] Sarah Isgur, [51] and Gary Hart.[52]

In 2025, he and his brother Vik Amar began co-authoring a regular column on SCOTUSblog punningly titled “Brothers in Law."[53]

Amar’s scholarship spans constitutional interpretation, federal courts, criminal procedure, and democratic design, and has been widely cited by courts and legal scholars.

Early scholarship (pre-tenure, through 1990)

Amar’s early scholarship focused on democratic theory, federal courts, and constitutional structure.

In a 1984 student note, Amar developed and elaborated a method of selecting representatives that he termed “lottery voting”— a system in which voters cast ballots and a representative is then selected at random from the ballots cast.[54] He argued that this blend of voting (typically used to select legislators) and lotteries (often used in selecting jurors) could potentially broaden representation. This note received the faculty-awarded Peres Prize for the best student note published in the Yale Law Journal that academic year.[10] Although student-authored work is rarely cited by the U.S. Supreme Court, this student note was cited in Justice John Paul Stevens’s dissent in Holland v. Illinois (1990).[55]

In a 1985 law review article,[56] later elaborated in articles in 1989[57] and 1990,[58] and in books published in 2005[59] and 2021[60], Amar argued that Article III jurisdiction consists of two distinct tiers of lawsuits.[56] In the first tier, he argued, federal jurisdiction is mandatory: in “all cases” arising under federal law and in “all cases” affecting public ambassadors, public ministers, and consuls, at least one Article III court must be available to hear the case at trial or on final appeal.[56] In the second tier of “controversies” defined by party alignment (such as diversity suits between citizens of different states), Congress may give the first and last word to state courts.[56] The 1985 article, written while Amar was a law student and published while he was a law clerk, has been cited in more than 500 other law review articles.[61] His sequel articles have also been cited in hundreds of law review articles.[61]

Around this time, Amar also began exploring broader questions of constitutional structure and governmental accountability. In the Constitution’s bicentennial year, 1987, Amar published an article in the Yale Law Journal addressing issues of American popular sovereignty and federalism.[62] He proposed that states adopt what he termed “converse-1983” laws to provide remedies for individuals whose federal constitutional rights had been violated by federal officials.[62] He also argued against certain governmental and government-officer immunity doctrines that, in his view, unduly limited remedies for victims of constitutional violations.[62] The article has been cited in more than 1,000 law review articles,[61] ranking it among the top forty most cited law review pieces published in the last forty years.[63] It has also been cited in seven Supreme Court cases.[64] In 2025 and 2026, several states have enacted or are considering enacting converse-1983 laws.[65][66][67]

Early Tenure period (1990–1993)

During his early tenure period, Amar began to widen his constitutional focus.

In 1991, Amar published an article in the University of Chicago Law Review arguing that geographically defensible borders were central to the American constitutional project.[68] He contended that early American liberty developed (for white Americans at least) in part because the nation, protected by its "wide oceanic moats” and other features of its geography, avoided maintaining a large peacetime standing army until the middle of the twentieth century.[59][68]

In related work that year, Amar published an article in the Yale Law Journal addressing the Bill of Rights.[69] He argued that the original Bill of Rights blended states’ rights and community rights (such as jury-related rights and militia-related rights) with individual rights, raising questions about how the Bill of Rights could be incorporated against states through the later Fourteenth Amendment.[69] In a 1992 article in the Yale Law Journal and a 1998 book on the Bill of Rights, Amar defended incorporation—applying the provisions of the Bill of Rights against states—but argued that it should be implemented in a “refined” form that distinguished individual rights from structural and collective rights.[70][71] His arguments for what he dubbed “refined incorporation” have been widely discussed by scholars and judges. [61]

Amar also addressed the relationship between constitutional structure and individual rights in specific doctrinal contexts. For example, he argued that the Second Amendment originally reflected a more communitarian and localist conception of gun rights, whereas the Fourteenth Amendment supported a more individual-rights-oriented understanding.[69] Some scholars have described Amar as among the first modern constitutional scholars to give sustained attention to the possibility of an individual constitutional right to private gun possession. Amar himself is not a gun owner,[72][73] and he has also written that a range of reasonable gun regulations would pass constitutional muster.[74] His 1991 article has been cited in more than 900 law review articles, ranking it among the hundred most cited articles published in the last forty years.[61] It has also been cited in five Supreme Court cases.[75] The 1998 book elaborating the idea of “refined incorporation” has been cited in eight Supreme Court cases.[76]

Southmayd Professorship (1993–2008)

As the Southmayd Professor of Law, Amar further widened his focus, tackling myriad issues of constitutional criminal procedure, and writing about the Constitution as a whole.

In 1994, Amar published an article in the Harvard Law Review reconceptualizing the Fourth Amendment.[77] He argued that the Amendment contains neither a global warrant requirement nor a global probable-cause requirement. According to Amar, the Amendment was designed to prohibit general warrants but not to prevent all or even most warrantless intrusions. He further argued that the Amendment presupposed damage remedies for unlawful searches, rather than the exclusion of reliable evidence. He argued that the exclusionary rule wrongly rewards the guilty and has no proper constitutional foundation. In Amar’s view, courts should adopt a broad understanding of searches and seizures, and should focus on reasonableness as the central Fourth Amendment standard. This article has been cited in more than 1,000 law review articles[78]—ranking it among the top 50 in the last forty years[63]—and by Supreme Court justices in six cases.[79]

He elaborated these ideas in subsequent work addressing other provisions of the criminal procedure amendments. In 1995, Amar published an article on the self-incrimination doctrine of the Fifth Amendment,[80] and in 1996, he completed the trilogy with an article on Sixth Amendment first principles.[81] In these years, he also returned to the topic of juries in an article outlining ten suggestions for jury reform.[82] These works emphasized truth-seeking and protection of the innocent as central constitutional concerns and criticized rules excluding reliable evidence from criminal trials. The four articles formed the core of Amar’s 1997 book on constitutional criminal procedure.[83] These articles and the resulting book have been cited in hundreds of law review articles[78] and in nine Supreme Court cases.[84][85][86] Amar’s writings on the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment helped spark a shift in Supreme Court doctrine sometimes called “the Crawford revolution.”[87]

Amar also contributed to debates over constitutional interpretation and methodology. In 1999, he introduced the term “intratextualism” in a Harvard Law Review article, describing an interpretive approach that examines how certain distinctive words and phrases appear repeatedly in the Constitution.[88] The article has been cited by more than 600 law review articles,[78] and in two Supreme Court decisions.[89]

In subsequent work, Amar continued to develop these interpretive themes. In November 2000, he wrote the Foreword to the Harvard Law Review, arguing that constitutional interpretation should place greater emphasis on the Constitution’s text, history, and structure, and less on judicial doctrine.[90] This article has been cited by more than 400 law review articles,[78] and is often mentioned as anchoring a modern school of constitutional interpretation known as “liberal originalism.”[91] Amar has argued this approach draws on the writings of figures such as Abraham Lincoln and Hugo Black.[92]

In 2000, Amar also wrote about electoral design. In a New York Times op-ed, he became the first general constitutional scholar in the modern era to argue that the Electoral College was initially shaped and soon revised to placate slaveholders, who disfavored direct-national-election proposals.[93] According to Amar, slaveholders understood that slaves would not have counted in a direct-election system, but the Founders’ electoral-college system cleverly enabled slave states to get credit for their slave populations via the Constitution’s Three Fifths Clause.[93]

In 2001, on the first anniversary of Bush v. Gore, Amar co-authored with his brother, legal scholar Vik Amar, a series of online posts proposing an early version of what later became the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), a set of state laws aiming to award the presidency to the national popular vote winner without a constitutional amendment.[94] The Amar Plan, as it came to be known in some circles, differed in certain key ways from a similar blueprint published several months earlier by Northwestern University Professor Robert W. Bennett. Bennett and the Amar brothers “are generally credited as the intellectual godparents” of NPVIC.[95] The current NPVIC proposal aims to take full effect once adopted by states totalling 270 electoral votes. As of April 2026, states totaling 222 electoral votes have adopted the compact.[96] Over the years, Amar has identified some legal and practical problems associated with the current NPVIC proposal.[97]

During this period, Amar also advanced proposals concerning the structure of the federal judiciary. In August 2002, Amar and co-author Steven G. Calabresi were the first to argue that Congress could establish eighteen-year term limits for Supreme Court justices by statute.[98] Amar later testified in support of this proposal before the Biden administration’s Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States in 2021.[99] In 2023, the proposal was endorsed by a project of the of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.[100]

He also addressed questions of campaign finance and political speech. In October 2002, Amar criticized central parts of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, arguing that it unconstitutionally restricted political speech and improperly shielded incumbent lawmakers from criticism.[101] In 2010, the Supreme Court adopted similar reasoning to strike down a major piece of this law.[102] Amar’s 2002 article endorsed alternative campaign finance reforms including publicly-funded vouchers, free air time for challengers, and subsidized debates, among other things.

In 2005, Amar published a book analyzing the complete text of the Constitution, article by article and amendment by amendment.[103] The book characterized the enactment of the Constitution as the big bang of the modern political world, thanks to a ratification process in which more people were allowed to vote on the basic ground rules of government than on anything in prior human history.[104] Amar argued that the Constitution was more democratic, more attentive to geography and national security, and more accommodating of slavery at the Founding than previously understood by most scholars. He also continued arguing, as he had since 1987, that the Constitution was widely understood to prohibit unilateral secession. Amar’s 2005 book won the annual 2006 ABA Silver Gavel award[25] and has been cited by justices in nine cases.[105] As of April 2026, the book is in its 18th paperback printing.[106]

Sterling Professorship (2008–present)

In his later career, Amar has continued to publish on constitutional structure, public law, and contemporary legal debates.

In 2011 and early 2012, Amar wrote a series of newspaper and online essays arguing that the Affordable Care Act was constitutional. He emphasized Congress’s taxing power as a basis for the law’s validity.[107] In line with this approach, the Supreme Court ultimately relied on a tax theory to uphold the key provisions of the law in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012).

Amar has also written about congressional procedure. In 2011 and 2013, he published a pair of essays in Slate (the first co-authored with former Senator Gary Hart) explaining how the Senate could, by a series of simple-majority votes, end or abridge supermajority filibuster rules.[108] In 2013, the Senate used this simple-majority procedure to change its rules and confirm certain federal judicial nominees;[109] In 2017, it did so again for a Supreme Court nomination.[110] According to Amar, “the nuclear-option genie is now out of the bottle,” and such procedures could be used more broadly in the future.[111]

In 2021, Amar and his brother Vik published a law review article arguing that when regulating federal elections, state legislatures are bound by their state constitutions.[112] In Moore v. Harper (2023), the Supreme Court adopted reasoning similar to the Amars’ article and strongly rejected the competing “independent state legislature” theory.

Amar has also written on the historical development of the Constitution. In 2021 and 2025, he published the first two volumes of a planned trilogy spanning the entire history of the American constitutional project.[113] These first two volumes argued that the original Constitution was shaped most significantly by George Washington and later transformed by Abraham Lincoln. In March 2026, the latter volume received the Abraham Lincoln Institute’s annual book award.[114] In this work, Amar emphasized the concept of birth equality—the idea that American citizens born on American soil and under the American flag are all born equal, black or white, male or female, regardless of their parents’ religion or national origin or marital status or immigration status.[115]

These themes have also informed his more recent public-facing scholarship and litigation-related writing. In 2026, Amar and his brother Vik authored a series of posts on SCOTUSblog in connection with an amicus brief in the birthright citizenship case, Trump v. Barbara.[116][117] These writings drew on themes from Amar’s 2025 book, Born Equal, and elaborated the concept of equal citizenship “under the flag.” In oral argument on April 1, 2026, several justices made statements that appeared to mesh with the arguments and analysis advanced in the Amars’ amicus brief and SCOTUSblog posts.[118]

Selected works

Books

  • The Constitution and Criminal Procedure: First Principles (1997) ISBN 0-300-06678-3
  • For the People (with Alan Hirsch) (1997) ISBN 0-684-87102-5
  • The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction (1998) ISBN 0-300-07379-8
  • Processes of Constitutional Decisionmaking (ed. with Paul Brest, Sanford Levinson, and Jack M. Balkin) (2000) ISBN 0-7355-5062-X
  • America's Constitution: A Biography (2005) ISBN 1-4000-6262-4
  • America's Unwritten Constitution: The Precedents and Principles We Live By (2012) ISBN 978-0-465-02957-0
  • The Bill of Rights Primer: A Citizen's Guidebook to the American Bill of Rights (with Les Adams) (2013) ISBN 978-1-62087-572-8
  • The Law of the Land: A Grand Tour of Our Constitutional Republic (2015) ISBN 978-0-465-06590-5
  • The Constitution Today: Timeless Lessons for the Issues of Our Era (2016) ISBN 978-0-465-09633-6
  • The Words that Made Us: America's Constitutional Conversation, 1760-1840 (2021) ISBN 978-0-465-09635-0
  • Born Equal: Remaking America's Constitution, 1840-1920 (2025) ISBN 978-1-541-60519-0

Articles

Personal life

Amar and his wife, Vinita Parkash, married in 1989 and have three children.[119]

See also

References

  1. ^ "Akhil Reed Amar Google Scholar". Google Scholar. Retrieved April 16, 2026.
  2. ^ https://law.yale.edu/akhil-reed-amar
  3. ^ a b c d Tam, Derek (November 7, 2008). "Amar Earns Sterling Rank". The Yale Daily News. Retrieved March 4, 2015.
  4. ^ "Akhil Reed Amar". American Academy of Arts & Sciences. Retrieved December 9, 2025.
  5. ^ a b "Akhil Reed Amar". Yale Law School. Retrieved August 24, 2025.
  6. ^ Shapiro, Fred R. (2021). "The Most-Cited Legal Scholars Revisited". University of Chicago Law Review. 88 (1): 1595–1618.
  7. ^ a b c d e f Nordlinger, Jay (May 22, 2022). "A Professor and the American Heritage". National Review.
  8. ^ "Vikram D. Amar". U. C. Davis School of Law. The Regents of the University of California. September 2, 2021.
  9. ^ "Obama Names Yale Professor to Key Administration Post". India-West. May 20, 2015. Archived from the original on August 4, 2019. Retrieved June 29, 2017.
  10. ^ a b c d e f g Amar, Akhil (July 2021). "CV – Akhil Reed Amar" (PDF). Yale Law School. Retrieved April 28, 2026.
  11. ^ "Notable Alumni | Ezra Stiles College". Ezra Stiles College. Yale University. 2010. Retrieved April 18, 2024.
  12. ^ "YLJ Volume 93 Masthead". Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  13. ^ "Amar Albany Law School" (PDF). Retrieved April 18, 2026.
  14. ^ Cite error: The named reference Amar CV was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  15. ^ "Akhil Amar: Looking at How America Governs Itself". Zip06. May 25, 2022. Retrieved April 18, 2024.
  16. ^ "Filling the Court: From Midnight Judges to Court Packing to Garland, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh". Roosevelt House Public Policy Institute. Hunter College. September 2018. Retrieved April 18, 2024.
  17. ^ Yale Law School
  18. ^ Amar, Akhil, Reed. Born Equal, pp. 612, 624.
  19. ^ Lemieux, Scott (June 24, 2022). "Getting Real About the Post-'Roe' World". The American Prospect. The American Prospect, Inc. Retrieved March 19, 2023.
  20. ^ Weissmann, Jordan (July 10, 2018). "The Liberal Case for Kavanaugh Is Complete Crap". Slate. The Slate Group. Retrieved March 19, 2023.
  21. ^ Koppelman, Andrew (May 22, 2022). "Akhil Amar and the Dobbs draft". The Hill. Nextstar Media, Inc. Retrieved March 19, 2023.
  22. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed (July 10, 2018). "Opinion | A Liberal's Case for Brett Kavanaugh". The New York Times.
  23. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed (May 13, 2022). "The End of Roe v. Wade". The Wall Street Journal.
  24. ^ https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300127089/the-bill-of-rights/
  25. ^ a b "Goodreads American Bar Association Silver Gavel Award". Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  26. ^ "Best of 2012: 50 notable works of nonfiction". Washington Post. Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  27. ^ "Top 10 Everything of 2016". Time Magazine. Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  28. ^ "Lincoln Institute 2026 Symposium". Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  29. ^ "Books by Akhil Reed Amar and Complete Book Reviews". Publishers Weekly. Retrieved August 24, 2025.
  30. ^ "Books by Akhil Reed Amar". Kirkus. Retrieved August 24, 2025.
  31. ^ "Paul M. Bator Award Recipients". Federalist Society. Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  32. ^ "Book of Members, 1780-2010: Chapter A" (PDF). American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Archived (PDF) from the original on May 10, 2011. Retrieved April 17, 2011.
  33. ^ Kaplan, Thomas (February 7, 2008). "Gravel's justice of choice: Amar". Yale Daily News. Archived from the original on October 24, 2008. Retrieved June 29, 2017.
  34. ^ "Obama announces more key administration posts". Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  35. ^ "Amar and Crothers cited for teaching and scholarship". Yale Bulletin and Calendar. Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  36. ^ "ABF Outstanding Scholar Award". Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  37. ^ "Amar, Hill, and Holloway honored for service to alumni \access-date=April 19,2026".
  38. ^ "Awards". American Academy of Sciences & Letters. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
  39. ^ "Akhil Amar Author Page". The New Republic. Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  40. ^ "After the Veep, Redraw the Line". Washington Post. Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  41. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed & Amar, Vikram David, "Is the Presidential Succession LawConstitutional?," 48 Stan. L. Rev. 113 (1995-1996)
  42. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, "Applications and Implications of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment" (2009)
  43. ^ "The Colbert Report, Akhil Reed Amar". Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  44. ^ "Fareed Zakaria GPS Transcript Amar". Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  45. ^ "Why has the Constitution lasted so long". Twin Cities PBS. Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  46. ^ "Justice on the Spot - Special Guest Justice Stephen Breyer". Apple Podcasts. Retrieved August 22, 2025.
  47. ^ "The Purpose of the Truth". Apple Podcasts. Retrieved August 3, 2023.
  48. ^ "Strictly Scrutinizing Moore - Special Guest Kate Shaw". Apple Podcasts. Retrieved August 22, 2025.
  49. ^ "Roberts Court, or Trump Court? A Conversation with Linda Greenhouse". Apple Podcasts. Retrieved August 22, 2025.
  50. ^ "Sinking the Unitary Executive - Special Guest Steven G. Calabresi". Apple Podcasts. Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  51. ^ "Last Branch Stands, The Barbara Court sits - Special Guest Sarah Isgur". Apple Podcasts. Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  52. ^ "Filibuster Finis". Apple Podcasts. Retrieved August 3, 2023.
  53. ^ "Brothers in Law". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved April 19, 2026.
  54. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed. “Choosing Representatives by Lottery Voting.” The Yale Law Journal 93, no. 7 (1984): 1283–308. https://doi.org/10.2307/796258.
  55. ^ "Holland v. Illinois". Retrieved April 25, 2026.
  56. ^ a b c d Amar, Akhil Reed, “A Neo-Federalist View of Article III: Separating the Two Tiers of Federal Jurisdiction,” 65 B.U. L. Rev. 205 (1985)
  57. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, “Marbury, Section 13, and the Original Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court,” 56 U. Chi. L. Rev. 443 (1985)
  58. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, “The Two-Tiered Structure of the Judiciary Act of 1789,” 138 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1499 (1990)
  59. ^ a b Amar, Akhil Reed, America's Constitution: A Biography (Random House 2005)
  60. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, The Words That Made Us: America’s Constitutional Conversation, 1760-1840 (Basic Books 2021).
  61. ^ a b c d e "Hein Online Amar Author Profile". HeinOnline. HeinOnline. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  62. ^ a b c Amar, Akhil Reed, “Of Sovereignty and Federalism,” 96 Yale L.J. 1425 (1987)
  63. ^ a b "SCHOLARLY IMPACT RANKINGS: Comprehensive Rankings Most-Cited Articles". HeinOnline. HeinOnline. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  64. ^ See, e.g., Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co., 491 U.S. 1 (1989) (Stevens, J., concurring); California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565 (1991) (Scalia, J. concurring); New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992); Hess v. Port Auth.,513 U.S. 30 (1944) (Stevens, J., concurring); U.S. Term Limits Inc v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995) (Thomas, J., dissenting); Seminole Tribe v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44 (1996) (Souter, J. dissenting); Boumediene v Bush, 553 U.S. 723 (2008)
  65. ^ Liptak, Adam. "A Legal Tool for Holding ICE Agents to Account, Hiding in Plain Sight". New York Times. New York Times.
  66. ^ Dindial, Emily Reina. "States Have the Power to Hold Federal Agents Accountable by Allowing People to Sue Them for Rights Violations". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  67. ^ Stark, Harrison. "Resuscitating State Damages Remedies Against Federal Officials". Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  68. ^ a b Amar, Akhil Reed, “Some New World Lessons for the Old World,” 58 U. Chi. L. Rev. 483. (1991)
  69. ^ a b c Amar, Akhil Reed, “The Bill of Rights as a Constitution,” 100 Yale L.J. 1131 (1987)
  70. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, “The Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment,” 101 Yale L. J. 1193 (1992)
  71. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, The Bill of Rights: Creation and Constitution (Yale Univ. Press 1998)
  72. ^ Tran, Ethan. "Akhil Reed Amar lectures students on how to understand American history". The Davidson. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  73. ^ Cantor, Charlotte. "Amar Returns to Hackley". The Dial. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  74. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, The Constitution Today: Timeless Lessons for the Issues of our Era (Basic Books 2016)
  75. ^ See, e.g., California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565 (1991) (Scalia, J. concurring); Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992) (Souter, J. concurring); Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417,(1998) (Kennedy, J., concurring); Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639(2002) (Thomas, J., concurring); McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) (Breyer, J., dissenting)
  76. ^ See e.g., Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1 (2004) (Thomas, J., concurring); Miller-El v. Dretke, 545 U.S. 231 (2005) (Breyer, J., concurring); Van Orden v. Perry, 545 U.S. 677 (2005) (Stevens, J., dissenting); McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010); Town of Greece v Galloway, 572 U.S. 565 (2014) (Thomas, J., concurring); Timbs v. Indiana, 586 U.S. 146 (2019) (Gorsuch, J., concurring); New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022); Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2023)
  77. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, “Fourth Amendment First Principles,” 107 Harv. L. Rev. 757 (1994)
  78. ^ a b c d Cite error: The named reference Amar HeinOnline Author Page was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  79. ^ West Covina v. Perkins, 525 U.S. 234 (1999) (Thomas, J., concurring); Atwater v. Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318 (2001); Virginia v. Moore,553 U.S. 164 (2008); Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014) (Alito, J., concurring); Collins v. Virginia, 584 U.S.586 (2018) (Thomas, J., concurring); Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296 (2018) (Thomas, J., dissenting)
  80. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed and Lettow, Renee “Self-Incrimination and the Constitution: A Brief Rejoinder to Professor Kamisar,” 93 Mich. L. Rev. 1011 (1995)
  81. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, “Foreword: Sixth Amendment First Principles,” 84 Geo. L.J. 641 (1996)
  82. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, “Reinventing Juries: Ten Suggested Reforms,” 28 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1169. (1994-1995)
  83. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, The Constitution and Criminal Procedures: First Principles (Yale Univ. Press 1997)
  84. ^ The article on Sixth Amendment Principles was cited in six cases.See e.g., Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723 (2008) (Scalia, J., dissenting); Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 564 U.S. 647 (2011) (Kennedy, J., dissenting); Luis v. United States, 578 US 5 (2016); Gamble v. United States, 587 U.S. 678 (2019); Cid C. Franklin v. New York, 604 U.S. __ (2025) (statement of Alito, J.).
  85. ^ The Fifth Amendment article was cited in McKune v Lile, 536 U.S. 24 (2002) (Stevens, J., dissenting)
  86. ^ The book has been cited in three cases. See e.g., Lilly v. Virginia, 527 U.S. 116 (1999), 594 U.S. 295 (1999) (Breyer, J., concurring); Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004); Lange v. California, 594 U.S. 295 (2021) (Thomas, J., dissenting)
  87. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, “Confrontation Clause First Principles: A Reply to Professor Friedman,” 86 Geo. L.J. 1045 (1998). See also Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004).
  88. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, “Intratextualism,” 112 Harv. L. Rev. 747 (1999)
  89. ^ Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 576 U.S. 787 (2015) (Roberts, CJ., dissenting); United States v. Vaello Madero, 596 U.S. 159(2022)(Thomas, J., concurring)
  90. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, “The Supreme Court, 1999 Term–Foreword: The Document and the Doctrine,” 114 Harv. L. Rev. 26 (2000)
  91. ^ Shesol, Jeff. "What Abraham Lincoln Understood About the Founders". New York Times. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  92. ^ Prevost, Lisa. "Understanding the 'constitutional dialogue' behind American equality". YaleNews. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  93. ^ a b Amar, Akhil Reed. "The Electoral College, Unfair From Day One". New York Times. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  94. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed; Amar, Vikram David (December 28, 2001). "How to Achieve Direct National Election of the President Without Amending the Constitution: Part Three Of A Three-part Series On The 2000 Election And The Electoral College". Findlaw. Archived from the original on December 3, 2020. Retrieved November 25, 2020.
  95. ^ Neale, Thomas H.; Nolan, Andrew (October 28, 2019). The National Popular Vote (NPV) Initiative: Direct Election of the President by Interstate Compact (Report). Congressional Research Service. Retrieved November 10, 2019.
  96. ^ "Progress of the National Popular Vote Bill in Each State". National Popular Vote. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  97. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, The Constitution Today: Timeless Lessons for the Issues of Our Era (Basic Books 2016)
  98. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed; Calabresi, Steven G. "Term Limits for the High Court". The Washington Post. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  99. ^ Akhil Reed, Amar. "Amar Written Testimony to the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States" (PDF). Biden White House. Biden White House Archives.
  100. ^ "Supreme Court Term Limits: An Initiative of the Our Common Purpose project". American Academy of the Arts and Sciences. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  101. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, "The Sham Called Campaign Finance Reform,” American Lawyer (Oct. 2000)
  102. ^ Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010)
  103. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, America's Constitution: A Biography (Random House 2005)
  104. ^ Amar, America's Constitution: A Biography, p.5
  105. ^ Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529 (2013) (Ginsburg, J., dissenting); Evenwel v. Abbott, 578 U.S. 54 (2017) (Alito, J. concurring) (Thomas, J., concurring); Gamble v. United States, 587 U.S. 678 (2019) (Thomas, J., concurring) (Gorsuch, J., dissenting); United States v. Haymond, 588 U.S. ___ (2019)(2019) (Alito, J., dissenting); Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico v. Aurelius Investment, LLC, 590 U.S. ___ (2020) (Sotomayor, J., concurring); Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022) (Kavanaugh, J., concurring); Haaland v. Brackeen, 599 U.S. 255(2023) (Gorsuch, J., concurring); Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181 (2023) (Thomas, J., concurring); United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024) (Kavanaugh, J., concurring)
  106. ^ Amar, America's Constitution: A Biography
  107. ^ See, e.g., Amar, Akhil Reed, "How to Defend Obamacare,” Slate (Mar. 29, 2012); Amar, Akhil Reed and Brewster, Todd, “Rejecting Affordable Care Act is Rejecting Constitution,” Philadelphia Inquirer (Mar. 18, 2012)
  108. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed and Hart, Gary, "How to End the Filibuster Forever,” Slate (Jan. 6, 2011)
  109. ^ "Senate votes change in filibuster rules". American Bar Association. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  110. ^ Schor, Elana. "Senate confirms Gorsuch to Supreme Court". Politico. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  111. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed. "The Nuclear-Option Genie is Out of the Bottle". Slate. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  112. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed & Amar, Vikram David, "Eradicating Bush-League Arguments Root and Branch: The Article II Independent-State-Legislature Notion and Related Rubbish", 2021 Supreme Court Review 1 (2022)
  113. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, The Words That Made Us: America's Constitutional Conversation, 1760-1840 (Basic Books 2021); Amar, Akhil Reed, Born Equal: Remaking America's Constitution, 1840–1920 (Basic Books 2025)
  114. ^ "Professor Akhil Reed Amar's "Born Equal" Receives Annual Lincoln Institute Book Prize". Yale Law School News. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  115. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, Born Equal: Remaking America's Constitution, 1840–1920 (Basic Books 2025)
  116. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed, Amicus Brief in support of Respondents, Trump v. Barbara (2026).
  117. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed; Amar, Vikram David. "SCOTUSBlog: Brothers in Law". Column: Brothers in Law. SCOTUSblog. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  118. ^ Amar, Akhil Reed; Amar, Vikram David. "Birthright citizenship: oral argument highlights". Brothers in Law. SCOTUSblog. Retrieved April 26, 2026.
  119. ^ Akhil Reed Amar résumé
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.