2026 National Conference of Constitutional Law Scholars Tackles Issues of Executive Power and Judicial Precedent
Constitutional scholars discussed executive power, originalism, judicial precedent and other themes in a series of wide-ranging discussions during the eighth annual National Conference of Constitutional Law Scholars on March 6 and 7, 2026, at the Westin La Palma Resort & Spa in Tucson.
The event coincides with the 20th anniversary of the William H. Rehnquist Center on the Constitutional Structures of Government at the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law, which sponsors the conference.
According to Rehnquist Center Director Andrew Coan, the topics covered during the event are particularly relevant today. “Executive power and judicial precedent have both been central issues in recent decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court, which has become more self-consciously and explicitly originalist in recent years,” said Coan.
Keynote Questions “Remedy Skepticism”
The conference featured Stanford Law Professor Mila Sohini as the keynote speaker, discussing “The Strange Career of Judicial Restraint.”
Sohini addressed what she called “remedy skepticism,” or the reluctance of courts to provide remedies for violations of constitutional rights. She traced the current strain of remedy skepticism to the conservatism of the Reagan era, though she argued that it is not inherently a conservative or liberal ideal.
Sohini warned against narrowing the availability of remedies for constitutional violations in light of broadening executive power. “What happens after a court holds or has very good reason to think that what a government officer is doing is against the law?” she asked. “What kinds of remedies can a court give?”
“Any system of constitutional remedies that is worth defending must be adequate to the constitutional threats it confronts at a moment in which the executive branch is severely testing the limits of constitutional constraint, at a moment that our constitutional order feels like it is melting away,” Sohini concluded. “It is time—it is past time—to rethink remedies.”
“Sohini drew attention to interesting recent shifts on the Supreme Court on standing and remedies questions,” noted Coan. “These questions have been central to many of the most important recent decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court.”
A Meeting of the Minds
Around 70 scholars converged for the conference, which included a series of moderated panels on topics such as equality and individual rights and executive power. The conference drew moderators from law schools including the University of Michigan, Harvard University, and New York University.
The conference also included three lightning sessions in which participants delivered short, no-paper presentations on early-stage projects followed by group discussion. The lightning sessions are designed to provide early feedback on works in progress, and included the work of nearly 20 scholars, Arizona Law Visiting Professor Ned Foley among them.
The conference has come to serve as what Coan calls “a kind of annual meeting for the field of constitutional law” that extends beyond the formal agenda to the informal conversations among leading national experts. “It is a special point of pride that the conference continues to foster civil and constructive dialogue among persons of fundamentally different points of view,” said Coan. “The Rehnquist Center has made all of this possible and put Arizona Law on the map as a hub for cutting-edge constitutional law debate and scholarship.”
The conference was founded in 2018 by Coan, David Schwartz (University of Wisconsin Law School) and Brad Snyder (Georgetown University Law Center). Co-organizers of the 2026 edition were Coan, Shalev Roisman and Oren Tamir of Arizona Law, and Rebecca Aviel of the University of Denver Sturm College of Law.