Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Civil Procedure
Third-Party Standing And Abortion Providers: The Hidden Dangers Of June Medical Services, Elika Nassirinia
Third-Party Standing And Abortion Providers: The Hidden Dangers Of June Medical Services, Elika Nassirinia
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
Standing is a long held, judicially-created doctrine intended to establish the proper role of courts by identifying who may bring a case in federal court. While standing usually requires that a party asserts his or her own rights, the Supreme Court has created certain exceptions that allow litigants to bring suit on behalf of third parties when they suffer a concrete injury, they have a “close relation” to the third party, and there are obstacles to the third party's ability to protect his or her own interests. June Medical Services, heard by the Supreme Court on June 29, 2020, …
Antitrust Changeup: How A Single Antitrust Reform Could Be A Home Run For Minor League Baseball Players, Jeremy Ulm
Antitrust Changeup: How A Single Antitrust Reform Could Be A Home Run For Minor League Baseball Players, Jeremy Ulm
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
In 1890, Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act to protect competition in the marketplace. Federal antitrust law has developed to prevent businesses from exerting unfair power on their employees and customers. Specifically, the Sherman Act prevents competitors from reaching unreasonable agreements amongst themselves and from monopolizing markets. However, not all industries have these protections.
Historically, federal antitrust law has not governed the “Business of Baseball.” The Supreme Court had the opportunity to apply antitrust law to baseball in Federal Baseball Club, Incorporated v. National League of Professional Baseball Clubs; however, the Court held that the Business of Baseball was not …
A False Sense Of Security: How Congress And The Sec Are Dropping The Ball On Cryptocurrency, Tessa E. Shurr
A False Sense Of Security: How Congress And The Sec Are Dropping The Ball On Cryptocurrency, Tessa E. Shurr
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
Today, companies use blockchain technology and digital assets for a variety of purposes. This Comment analyzes the digital token. If the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) views a digital token as a security, then the issuer of the digital token must comply with the registration and extensive disclosure requirements of federal securities laws.
To determine whether a digital asset is a security, the SEC relies on the test that the Supreme Court established in SEC v. W.J. Howey Co. Rather than enforcing a statute or agency rule, the SEC enforces securities laws by applying the Howey test on a fact-intensive …
Due Process Supreme Court Rockland County
Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division
Double Jeopardy Supreme Court Appellate Division Second Department
Double Jeopardy Supreme Court Appellate Division Second Department
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Voting Rights Act And The "New And Improved" Intent Test: Old Wine In New Bottles, Randolph M. Scott-Mclaughlin
The Voting Rights Act And The "New And Improved" Intent Test: Old Wine In New Bottles, Randolph M. Scott-Mclaughlin
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Qualified Immunity When Facts Are In Dispute, Leon Friedman
Qualified Immunity When Facts Are In Dispute, Leon Friedman
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Eleventh Amendment Federalism And State Sovereign Immunity Cases: Direct Effect On Section 1983?, Stephen H. Steinglass
Eleventh Amendment Federalism And State Sovereign Immunity Cases: Direct Effect On Section 1983?, Stephen H. Steinglass
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Proposed Citizens Right To Standing Act-Finding The Keys To Unlock The Courthouse Doors, Harold W. Wood, Jr.
Proposed Citizens Right To Standing Act-Finding The Keys To Unlock The Courthouse Doors, Harold W. Wood, Jr.
Seattle University Law Review
Recent Supreme Court decisions severely restrict the right of citizens to litigate in federal courts. The Court's standing requirements not only limit the ability of citizens to successfully invoke federal court jurisdiction, but also confuse lower courts and litigants attempting to apply the requirements. Standing requirements have met with increasing criticism. And Congress is now considering legislative modification of standing doctrine. Unfortunately, the Court's employment of constitutional foundations in establishing current standing requirements imposes substantial roadblocks Congress must avoid to enact remedial standing legislation. This comment examines the constitutional and pragmatic difficulties of statutory modification of standing requirements and recommends …