Tulane Home Tulane Home
Keith Werhan
  • Ashton Phelps Chair of Constitutional Law Emeritus
  • kwerhan@tulane.edu
  • Weinmann Hall, Room 359-F
  • 504.862.8796
Keith Werhan

Selected Publications

“America’s Aristotelian Constitution,” In Progress.

“Regulatory Federalism, Shaken Not Stirred,” 29 Journal of Law & Politics 151-87 (2013)

(published by the University of Virginia School of Law).

“Popular Constitutionalism, Ancient and Modern,” 46 UC Davis Law Review 65-131 (2012).

“The Classical Athenian Ancestry of American Freedom of Speech,” 2008 Supreme Court Review 293-347.

“Rethinking Freedom of the Press After 9/11,” 82 Tulane Law Review 1561-1605 (2008), reprinted in The First Amendment Law Handbook, 2008-2009, pp. 67-109 (Rodney A. Smolla, ed., Thomson Reuters West, 2008).

“Navigating the New Neutrality: School Vouchers, the Pledge, and the Limits of a Purposive Establishment Clause,” 41 Brandeis L.J. 603-29 (2003) (This article was an invited submission for a First Amendment Discussion Forum, co-sponsored by Vanderbilt University, Washington and Lee University, and the University of Louisville. All papers submitted for the Forum were published collectively in the Brandeis Law Journal.)

“The Tie That Binds: Constitutional Law and Culture, Obscenity and Child Pornography,” 100 South Atlantic Quarterly 897-917 (Fall 2001). (This article was an invited submission for a special issue, “Culture and the Law.” The South Atlantic Quarterly is a literary journal published by Duke University Press.)

“Checking Congress and Balancing Federalism: A Lesson From Separation-of-Powers Jurisprudence,” 57 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 1213-84 (2000).

“Normalizing the Separation of Powers,” 70 Tul. L. Rev. 2681-717 (1996).

“Delegalizing Administrative Law,” 1996 U. Ill. L. Rev. 423-66 (1996). This article was quoted by the High Court of Australia in support of its decision to reject the Chevron doctrine in Australian administrative law. (Enfield City v. Devt Assess CMMN, 199 CLR 135, [2000] HCA 5.)

“The Liberalization of Freedom of Speech on a Conservative Court,” 80 Iowa L. Rev. 51-100 (1994).

“The Neoclassical Revival in Administrative Law,” 44 Admin. L. Rev. 567-627 (1992), reprinted in Thomas O. Sargentich, ed., Administrative Law Anthology 383-92 (Anderson Publishing Co., 1994).

“Federalism and Separation of Powers on a ‘Conservative’ Court: Currents and Cross-Currents From Justices O’Connor and Scalia,” 64 Tul. L. Rev. 1443-76 (1990) (with M. David Gelfand).

“Toward an Eclectic Approach to Separation of Powers: Morrison v. Olson Examined,” 16 Hast. Const. L. Q. 393-451 (1989).

“The O'Briening of Free Speech Methodology,” 19 Ariz. St. L. J. 635-79 (1987).

“Pullman Abstention after Pennhurst: A Comment on Judicial Federalism,” 27 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 449-506 (1986).

“The Supreme Court’s Public Forum Doctrine and the Return of Formalism,” 7 Cardozo L. Rev. 335-437 (1986).

“The Sovereignty of Indian Tribes: A Reaffirmation and Strengthening in the 1970s,” 54 Notre Dame L. Rev. 5-25 (1978).

“A Federal Cause of Action Against a Municipality for the Fourth Amendment Violations by its Agents,” 42 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 850-68 (1974) (co-author).

“Restrictions on the Rights to Resign: Can a Member's Freedom to "Escape the Union Rule" Be Overcome by Union Boilerplate?,” 42 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 397-426 (1974) (co-author).


Principles of Administrative Law, Thomson/Reuters, West Academic Publishing, 2nd edition, 2014. ?

Principles of Administrative Law, Thomson/West, 2007. ?

Freedom of Speech, Praeger Press, 2004. ?