Catholics for Choice and Trademark law

On the evening of January 21, 2022, the night before the annual March for Life in Washington, D.C., pro-life activists gathered in the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception to celebrate Mass for the unborn and for the success of the March. Unbeknownst to the Mass-goers, another group of protesters gathered with a projector across the street from the Basilica. As Mass was being celebrated inside the church, these protestors projected onto the outside of the church statements in support of legal abortion access. This group was led by Catholics for Choice, an organization dedicated to protecting legal abortion.

The same group released a statement that evening by its president Jamie L. Manson stating, “I support abortion access because my Catholic faith teaches that healthcare is a human right, and that includes abortion. … Catholics for Choice will never stop shining our light on behalf of the pro-choice, faithful majority for the fundamental constitutional and human right to abortion – as a matter of justice, a matter of freedom, and a matter of faith.” The following day Wilton Cardinal Gregory made plain his view of the dissident group and their stunt, stating, “The true voice of the Church was only found within the Basilica,” and that “those whose antics projected words on the outside of the church building demonstrated by those pranks that they really are external to the Church and they did so at night.” He then cited John 13:30: “And Judas having received the bread, went out immediately. And it was night.”

Continue reading “Catholics for Choice and Trademark law”

Customary Law and Popular Sovereignty

Following are lightly edited remarks delivered at a panel on “Unwritten Law,” held at the annual meeting of the Association of American Law Schools on January 6, 2022. These informal remarks are of course not intended to be rigorous or comprehensive, merely suggestive. Many thanks to organizer Robert Leider and fellow panelists Jeremy Waldron, Steve Sachs and Ashraf Ahmed for their thoughts and contributions.


It’s difficult to know how to discuss the topic of unwritten law in twelve minutes. The topic is an incredibly heterogeneous one, full of analytic complications that require endless preliminary distinctions, such as the extremely pellucid and not at all confusing distinction, beloved of legal historians, between legal custom and customary law. So naturally I propose simply to heroically ignore all those conceptual preliminaries and tell you how I changed my mind on a fundamental substantive issue: the relationship between popular sovereignty and custom. 

Continue reading “Customary Law and Popular Sovereignty”