Digital Commons Network^™

Certiorari Transparency, Alexandra L. Klein, Michael L. Smith

Scholarly Articles

Amid increasing controversy over the Supreme Court’s amassing of power, rejection of precedent, reliance on the shadow docket, and Justices’ undisclosed acceptance of lavish gifts, legal scholars, commentators, and politicians have called for bold and far-reaching reforms to the Court, including term limits for Justices, stripping the Court of jurisdiction in certain cases, and adding Justices to the Court. This Article proposes a more subtle reform to the Court’s proceedings: the Court should make its certiorari de-terminations, in which it decides which cases to take up and review, public. Currently, the Court exercises near-complete discretion over the cases it decides …

Ghostwriting The Government, Bridget C.E. Dooling

Marquette Law Review

Ghostwriting is when a writer prepares materials to be issued under someone else’s name. The word describes a politician’s use of a speechwriter, a student’s purchase of a term paper, or a tongue-twisted admirer asking a poet to craft a love letter on his behalf. It also happens inside organizations every day: staff draft documents for others “up the chain” to sign. But when legislators rely on staff and lobbyists to draft bills, when an agency head relies on staff or contractors to write a rule, and when a judge relies on her clerk for a draft opinion, the benefits …

The Ambiguity That Isn’T: Why Same-Sex Marriage Is Legal In American Samoa, Dante Cade Harootunian, Sammi Lawrence

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that prohibitions on same-sex marriage violate the equal protection guarantees of the U.S. Constitution, several government officials in American Samoa issued statements claiming that the decision had no effect in American Samoa, and, to date, no same-sex couples have

applied for a marriage license in the territory. This Article analyzes the Obergefell decision in light of other federal and territorial court decisions that determined the applicability of constitutional rights to U.S. territories and concludes that, despite the statements of local officials, the Obergefell decision applies in American Samoa, and the …

Clemency For Justice Reform: A Restorative Pardon Proposal Using Conditional Pardons, Stephanie A. Clark

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

President Donald Trump’s pardons to people convicted for the January 6, 2021 attacks on the Capitol intensified the nation’s divisiveness. They also illustrate why proper clemency must be restored and used for its intended purpose to ameliorate injustice under the law. Clemency is not meant to be a “get out of jail free card” solely for family, friends, and political supporters. It is a constitutional mechanism designed to relieve consequences out of step with a criminal offense or to salve broad public hurt. When clemency is misused, it undermines public confidence and the principle that equal opportunity should exist for …

An Originalist Interpretation Of Article Iii Permits And Favors Bivens Actions As A Recognition Of The Intrinsic Connection Between Rights And Remedies, Shrivathsan Margam S

Mitchell Hamline Law Journal of Public Policy and Practice

The Bivens Doctrine, which stands for the principle that judges may infer private causes of action for money damages against federal officers from a constitutional text that does not expressly create such remedies, has faced attack from Originalists on the Supreme Court of the United States. Every case seeking to extend the Bivens principle to a new context meets rejection from the Court with concurrences calling for overturning it altogether. This Article will argue that an Originalist approach to interpreting the Constitution, specifically the Original Methods subset of the ascendant lens of Original Public Meaning, permits and counsels in favor …

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis And The Gatekeeping Role Of Canadian Courts, Sara Gordon

All Faculty Publications

Despite its long history of admission throughout North America, there appears to be no published Canadian case subjecting bloodstain pattern analysis to the special scrutiny Canadian law demands for novel or contested scientific evidence. Instead, courts have admitted the evidence based largely on the training and experience of forensic examiners, taking it for granted that the field is sufficiently reliable. However, the application of the White Burgess framework reveals that there are serious and severe concerns about the underlying scientific validity of the technique which should render it generally inadmissible. At Stage One of White Burgess, bloodstain pattern analysis fails …

Let Them Hear It: Peaceful Protests Near The Homes Of Supreme Court Justices, Srikanth Reddy

Lewis & Clark Law Review

All of us—not just attorneys and politicians—need to be more critical and skeptical of the Supreme Court. Criticism by ordinary people is good and appropriate, even if it hurts the Justices’ feelings. That includes public protests. When a case matters enough to them, members of the public can and should criticize the Court and its Justices, including by peacefully gathering and protesting near a Justice’s home, or when a Justice appears out in the world.

Taking Off The “Blindfold”: Exploring Montana’S Public Trust Doctrine And The Right To A Clean And Healthful Environment After Held V. Montana, Lizzy Gazeley

Lewis & Clark Law Review

As global average temperatures continue to rise, the threat of climate change looms closer. To evade climate catastrophe, greenhouse gas emissions will need to be substantially reduced. Despite climate change’s imminent risks, in the United States, both the federal government and states remain resistant to transitioning away from fossil fuel energy sources. To combat this government inaction, some litigants have turned to an ancient doctrine. The public trust doctrine provides that sovereigns must protect natural resources from substantial impairment to ensure the public’s right to use those resources.

In Held v. Montana, youth plaintiffs alleged that the State of Montana …

The Fiduciary Game, Lauren R. Roth

Indiana Law Journal

Fiduciary duties are supposed to bridge the gap between public and private law. Private actors who engage in “public or quasi-public” functions (e.g., corporate directors and pension administrators) are often subject to fiduciary constraints to protect vulnerable parties who lack power in relationships with these actors. Recently, scholars have argued that both courts and legislatures have inappropriately expanded the use of fiduciary duties to purely private relationships. But what if the problem is not the expansion of fiduciary duties to private relationships, but the increasing delegation of public powers to private actors whose behavior cannot be adequately constrained by fiduciary …

Mexico’S Judicial Elections And The Politics Of Reform, Amanda Driscoll, Michael J. Nelson, Julio Ríos-Figueroa

Judicature International

No abstract provided.

Toys As Evidence, Randall K. Johnson

Faculty Works

This Essay asks and answers a single question, which was posed during a recent symposium at the National Museum of Toys & Miniatures. Could the study of revealed preferences, which is the idea that observed behaviors are the best indicator of one’s beliefs, improve our collective understanding about what constitutes unlawful discrimination in certain U.S. markets? A possible answer, which is informed by the Brown v. Board of Education decision, is the study of revealed preferences may improve our collective understanding for three reasons.

One reason is the study of revealed preferences provides a window into how some producers and …

Reimagining Self-Regulation In Sexual Misconduct Complaints: Trust Through Transfer, Allyson M. Mcbride

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

To increase trust in the judiciary’s ability to self-regulate, any formal complaints about a judge should not be handled by a colleague down the hall, but a judge from a different circuit. In this Comment, I propose automatic transfer out of circuit to improve the handling of sexual misconduct complaints specifically. I first describe the different ways judicial conduct is regulated in the federal system. I then discuss the problem of sexual misconduct in the judiciary. Finally, I outline why it is problematic for judges to adjudicate complaints about their intra-circuit colleagues and recommend that all complaints be automatically transferred …

Rewriting The Sentence: Second Look Sentencing In Rhode Island, Carter Hazzard

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Re N.O., 336 A.3d 29 (R.I. 2025)., Salvamarie Alifonso

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Interrogating The Facts Of The Case, Anna Roberts

Indiana Law Journal

Buried within many criminal judicial opinions is the origin of their “facts”—the interrogation room. Criminal law pedagogy should expose this origin. If we treat the alleged product of interrogation as “what happened,” as criminal cases (and professors) sometimes do, we obscure the ways in which interrogators are trained to incriminate and to co-create confessions. We also risk obscuring subsequent layers of reporting by police, prosecutors, or judges.

Recent scholarly literature urges criminal law professors to teach differently, warning that we distort, sanitize, and bolster the carceral state when we erase governmental agents and bypass procedure. Treating the “facts of the …

Misinformation And The Jury, Gustavo Ribeiro

Indiana Law Journal

This Article bridges critical gaps between the growing body of social science research on misinformation and the persistent challenges jurors face in evaluating potentially unreliable evidence in courtrooms. Misinformation—a pervasive issue undermining decision-making in democratic societies—mirrors the difficulties jurors encounter in distinguishing truth from falsehood amid compelling but unreliable evidence. The consequences of such challenges are dire: wrongful convictions, racial disparities, and the erosion of public trust in the legal system.

This Article is the first piece of legal scholarship to provide a comprehensive discussion of current research on the psychological mechanisms underlying susceptibility to misinformation—such as the illusory truth …

Rights Without Remedies: How Trump V. Casa Undermines Universal Injunctions And Uniform Constitutional Enforcement, Savannah Cobbs

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

Trump v. CASA, Inc. significantly reduced the remedial authority of the federal judiciary by rejecting the power of federal district courts to issue universal injunctions, a tool long used to halt widespread constitutional violations. Framed as a procedural decision about equitable remedies, the ruling severely narrows the scope of relief available in challenges to executive action. This Comment examines how the Court’s decision limits lower courts’ capacity to provide meaningful remedies and reshapes the balance of power among the branches of government. The analysis argues that the majority misapplies case law like Grupo Mexicano by imposing an unduly rigid historical …

Clean Hands, Dirty Money, And The Codification Of Sec Disgorgement, Stephanie Palma

Fordham Law Review

Disgorgement is the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) most powerful enforcement tool and among its most controversial. For decades, federal courts treated disgorgement in securities enforcement actions as an equitable remedy, a view that the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed in Liu v. SEC. Months after Liu, Congress passed the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, which codified disgorgement in SEC enforcement actions. The codification of disgorgement sparked a circuit split between the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fifth and Second Circuits over whether Congress created a new statutory form of …

Who Gets To Sue? Legal Standing After Fda V. Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine, Rachael Houston, Robert Stephen Earnest

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

This article examines how courts are invoking FDA v. Alliance to define the limits of legal standing in litigation—specifically, in a reproductive health context. Reproductive health, as used here, encompasses a broad range of medical, legal, and policy issues related to abortion access, gender-affirming care, pregnancy, and professional regulation of services connected to reproductive decision-making. It includes the provision of and restrictions on reproductive healthcare services, the regulation of speech related to those services (e.g., advertising and advocacy), and the institutional responses to contested laws and agency rules affecting bodily autonomy, medical practice, and expressive conduct. Drawing on an original …

Citators In The Ai Age: Preserving The Human Component Through Court-Created Citators, Cody B. James

Faculty Law Review Articles

Citators have long worked behind the scenes, shaping case law and influencing how judges and lawyers view precedent. Yet their creation has been the sole realm of private publishers. As artificial intelligence (AI) is further integrated into citators’ creation, the human role is at risk of being automated. This article examines citators’ influence over substantive law, the human-in-the-loop justifications for preserving human involvement in citators’ creation, and the argument for courts to produce their own citators. By reclaiming this function, the courts can help enhance their legitimacy and preserve the human role in creating structures of legal information in the …

How To Apply Hertz Corp. V. Friend In The Age Of Remote Work, John Andrikos

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

The widespread adoption of remote work in the United States has strained the workability of the nerve center test of Hertz Corp. v. Friend. This comment analyzes how federal courts have applied the nerve center test to fact patterns involving partially or fully remote corporations. Further, it proposes a novel solution to this jurisdictional problem: the Key Person Test.

Who Makes The Jury? Demographics And Decision-Making In The Jury Process., Ana B. Pons

Honors Undergraduate Theses

Within the American judicial system, juries have played a central role in promoting representation and fairness in the courtroom. However, limited information exists on whether prosecutorial decisions during jury selection, jury composition, or jury behavior differ based on the sex, race/ethnicity, type of case, political ideology, or geographic location of potential jurors. Following PRISMA guidelines, this scoping review synthesizes 48 peer-reviewed articles published between the 1940s and 2026 to examine whether prosecutorial decision-making and jury outcomes vary based on the sex, race/ethnicity, type of case, political ideology, or geographic location of potential jurors. Findings indicated that men are disproportionately selected …

Koziol Firearms, Inc. V. Marchand, 334 A.3d 439 (R.I. 2025)., Grace D. Guachione

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Judicial Voice On The Courts Of Appeals, Allison Orr Larsen, Neal Devins

Faculty Publications

The judicial voice on an appellate court typically speaks in the collective, so when a judge chooses to go solo—either in a dissent or a concurrence—that act deserves a close look. Separate opinions on the U.S. Supreme Court are common because the Justices have strong incentives to articulate a distinctive personal jurisprudence. But lower court judges have always been more reluctant to write separately, and for good reason. The institutional design and longstanding practices of the U.S. courts of appeals are very different from the Supreme Court: Lower appellate court judges are bound by precedent in a different way, rarely …

Under Pressure: Delaware, Corporate America, And Certified Questions, Derek S. Hubbard

Law Student Publications

With an advanced corporate code and a highly respected Court of Chancery, Delaware has long been America’s home for big business. But its status may be in jeopardy. Within the past year, the Court of Chancery has shattered two market practices and reminded stakeholders of the uncertain nature of fiduciary duties. Corporations have responded. Termed “DExit,” corporations are leaving Delaware for competing jurisdictions, namely Texas and Nevada. As corporations leave Delaware, so do their tax dollars. Delaware’s fiscal stability is directly tied to the continued presence of corporate charters in Delaware. Delaware residents enjoy a low tax burden, with the …

Anti-Slapp Confusion: Should Federal Courts Permit Interlocutory Appeal For Anti-Slapp Motions?, Mitchell L. Grantham

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Private Rights Of Action For Election Litigation In The Federal Courts, Derek T. Muller

Journal Articles

Election litigation is surging. But just as litigants pursue more election claims in federal courts than ever before, federal courts are growing more skeptical about their authority to hear them. This Essay, a contribution to the 2025 Arnold Lecture at the University of Arkansas Little Rock, William H. Bowen School of Law, examines the narrowing landscape of private rights of action in election law with a particular focus on claims brought ahead of the 2024 election. It traces the Supreme Court's shift toward formalism, the heavy emphasis on remedies found in federal statutes, and the diminishing avenues for private enforcement …

Pricing Lies: Government Contracts And The False Claims Act, Fernando Mendoza López

Marquette Law Review

Courts have recognized the federal government’s use of government contracts not only as a commercial transaction but also as an instrument of policy. Governments routinely seek to promote small business interests, domestic industry, women-owned, minority-owned, and veteran-owned businesses. However, in cases of fraud involving these policy provisions, courts have consistently failed to recognize this dual nature of government contracts.

The intangible benefits that governments gain from these preferential policies complicate damage calculations for courts when dealing with fraud. Such complications have led to inconsistencies and the emergence of three main approaches. First, some courts have assessed that the government …

What Can Court-Appointed Neutrals Learn From Dispute Resolution Ethics?, Kristen M. Blankley

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Eroding Protections: The Decline Of Miranda Rights And Its Impact On Due Process In Contemporary America, Autumn G. Pelfrey

Honors Undergraduate Theses

This thesis examines whether the protections established in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), remain robust within contemporary criminal justice practice or have been weakened through doctrinal and practical developments. Miranda warnings were originally designed to mitigate the risk that coercive custodial interrogation would produce compelled or unreliable self-incrimination. Since 1966, however, both judicial interpretation and evolving law-enforcement practices have created a growing gap between Miranda’s formal legal promise and its practical operation in real-world interrogations.

The study evaluates the erosion of Miranda’s protective force through three primary mechanisms. First, doctrinal developments have narrowed Miranda’s scope by redefining …