Digital Commons Network^™

Privately Negotiated Withdrawals: How Shareholders Can Shape A Company's Carbon Emissions Reduction, Gabriella M. Chioffi

Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum

Governed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's Rule 14a-8, shareholder proposals are a fundamental and longstanding mechanism that investors use to express their opinions and preferences on how a corporation is operating. Over the last decade, there has been a marked shift in the subject matter of the proposals that shareholders are submitting, as concerns relating to the environment have become an increasingly key issue. However, shareholder support for these climate-related proposals reached its highest point in 2021 and has declined slightly in subsequent years. The conditions that made shareholder proposals a successful tool in 2021 have since changed, …

Climate Deregulation Under Trump 2: Will It Have Any Durable Impact?, John D. Graham

Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum

Following through on his 2024 campaign pledges, President Donald Trump is dismantling President Biden's aggressive climate policies, including federal regulatory controls on the major sectors of the economy that account for most greenhouse gas emissions in the US. Although it is too early to make a definitive assessment of what Trump will accomplish, I present evidence that Trump is taking a more creative, radical, and legally sophisticated approach to climate deregulation in his second administration than was attempted in his first administration. I evaluate how durable climate deregulation may be. A major weakness in Trump's agenda is the lack of …

The Alaska Wolf War: Action On The Prince Of Wales Island Complex, Edward A. Fitzgerald

Alaska Law Review

This Article examines Alaska's management of the Alexander Archipelago wolf on the Prince of Wales Island Complex, pursuant to constitutional and statutory requirements. It begins by reviewing the history of unsuccessful efforts to declare the wolf a threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act. It then analyzes Bennett v. State, which focused on the changed management regime and devastating wolf harvest of the 2019–20 season. The Article argues that the district and Alaska Supreme Court's decisions in the case were flawed because they failed to properly implement the "hard look" doctrine.

Note From The Editor

Alaska Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Trainwreck In The Making: The Alaska Railroad Right-Of-Way, John W. Pletcher, Mia E. Manney

Alaska Law Review

This Article argues that the Ninth Circuit erred in Alaska Railroad Corp. v. Flying Crown Subdivision Additions Nos. 1 & 2 Property Owners Ass'n by recognizing an exclusive use easement that permits the Alaska Railroad Corporation to unilaterally exclude private property owners from non-interfering uses of the right-of-way. Drawing on common law easement principles reaffirmed in Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States, the Article demonstrates that exclusivity must be conferred through specific language in a creating instrument and cannot be implied from federal railroad legislation. The Article calls for legislative reform and remedial judicial interpretation to curtail …

Protecting Bearded Seals In Alaska: The Esa, Critical Habitat Designations, And Climate Change, Caitlyn Leary

Alaska Law Review

Rapid climate change in the Arctic has accelerated the loss of sea ice, threatening the survival of one of Alaska's most vital species: the bearded seal. In 2012, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) listed the bearded seal as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Ten years later, the agency designated approximately 174 million acres of occupied critical habitat for the seals on the northern coast of Alaska, along the Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas. NMFS reasoned that a large designation was necessary to account for the dynamic and seasonal nature of sea ice. In 2024, however, the U.S. …

Carbon Cash Back: A Green Ubi For A Decarbonized Future, Lily Skopp

Alaska Law Review

This Note supports a framework for climate governance that transforms carbon tax revenues into equal per‑capita cash distributions for all United States residents: a green universal basic income (UBI). It examines how the institutional structure of the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) can guide the design of a federal resource‑based dividend. By combining economic analyses of efficiency and distribution with legal scholarship on political salience and administrative design, the Note uses Alaska's PFD as an empirical case study to connect two often separate literatures. The Note introduces the PFD's key features—universality, independent fund management, and a narrative of collective resource …

Volume 109, Number 3 (2026)

Judicature

No abstract provided.

Rules Of Origin And U.S. Tariffs On Imported Electric Vehicles: What Makes A Car Chinese?, Carlos F. Aguirre Cardenas

Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law

This article analyzes the legal and regulatory foundations of the U.S. Government's decision to impose unilateral tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, including the 100 percent tariff enacted under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, the 25 percent tariff established under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. It focuses on how rules of origin influence the effectiveness of these measures and examines how Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers might design supply chain strategies to circumvent tariffs by classifying vehicles as non-Chinese.

Governing With Digital Platforms: A Chinese Lesson For The U.S.?, Shitong Qiao

Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law

Can digital platforms make law and governance more efficient? Both China and the United States host some of the world's largest digital platforms, which lead in internet technologies, provide critical digital infrastructure, and mediate private communication and public discourse. While the American experiment has stalled, the Chinese government has made remarkable progress in leveraging digital platforms to enhance efficiency in law and governance.

The study highlights China's successes in streamlining court operations, curbing online piracy, and reshaping interactions between the Chinese government and its citizens. In practice, digital platforms have become co-governors, exerting substantial influence over public institutions rather than …

From Smallpox To Synthetic Biology: The Evolving Threat Of Biological Weapons And The Jus Ad Bellum, Sabrina I. Slagowitz

Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law

Biological weapons are not new, but recent developments in genetic technology have fundamentally transformed their threat potential. Advances in genome sequencing, editing technologies, and CRISPR have made pathogen modification faster, cheaper, and more accessible than ever before, reinvigorating fears of large-scale biological warfare and giving rise to a new class of synthetic bioweapons. This note examines the implications of genetically modified biological weapons for the jus ad bellum, the international law governing the use of force. Drawing an analogy to cyberweapons, it argues that bioweapons share key characteristics with cyberweapons—stealth, latency, asymmetry, non-kinetic lethality, and anonymity—that will generate similar legal …

Security Threats And Diminishing Market Access: Implications For Chinese Investors, Audrey Faulks

Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law

Western countries have responded to geopolitical threats associated with China's rise as a world power by restricting the presence of leading Chinese telecommunications companies and equipment in their network infrastructure. The past several years have seen a targeted and expanding effort by countries to remove Huawei, one of the largest actors in the telecommunications sector, from their national markets. Huawei has responded to these regulatory measures by threatening to bring arbitration claims under China's bilateral investment treaties with several European states. Additionally, Huawei has filed a Request for Arbitration against Sweden for its exclusion from the 5G market. This note …

The Early American Tradition Of Arms Regulation: Common Law, Common Weapons, And Common Use, Saul Cornell

Duke Law Journal Online

No abstract provided.

When The Second Amendment Meets The Third Dimension: Bruen In The Age Of 3d-Printed Firearms, Andrew Touma

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

3D-printed firearms pose a serious threat to the public by allowing individuals to circumvent traditional regulatory safeguards. Although the first shot from a 3D-printed firearm was over a decade ago, these weapons continue to exploit gaps in the federal regulatory scheme. In the meantime, state governments have adopted a variety of approaches to regulating 3D-printed firearms. As 3D printing pushes firearms technology into the future, the Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen directs Second Amendment doctrine to look to history, leaving questions over whether a decidedly historical methodology could effectively adapt to technological …

Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Possess: Mapping A Potential Second Amendment Challenge To 18 U.S. Code § 922(G)(6), Emil Zakarian

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

For decades, the United States military discharged LGBTQ+ service members based on their sexual orientation, often assigning discharge characterizations that carry enduring legal consequences. One overlooked consequence arises under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(6), which prohibits individuals discharged "under dishonorable conditions" from possessing firearms. Although this provision has received limited judicial scrutiny, the Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen calls its constitutionality into question by requiring that modern firearm regulations be consistent with the Nation's historical tradition of regulation.

This Note argues that § 922(g)(6) is constitutionally vulnerable as applied to veterans discharged solely …

It's In The Money: The Independent Federal Reserve, Kathrynne E. Curtis

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The case at the heart of the current controversy involves the President's firing of a Federal Reserve Governor against a backdrop of crumbling precedent. The backbone of administrative agency independence, Humphrey's Executor, awaits the Supreme Court's judgment. Therefore, distinguishing the Federal Reserve—responsible for controlling monetary policy and setting interest rates—has never been more pressing. This Note argues that the Federal Reserve can be meaningfully distinguished on a historical basis, as the Court suggests in Trump v. Wilcox, by reference to its family tree: the First and Second National Banks. Precedent and the fallout from lapses in the early …

Studying Supreme Court Advocacy: A Response To The Scotus Tournament, Margaret H. Lemos

Duke Law Journal Online

No abstract provided.

Reflections On Judging At The Intersection Of Constitutional Claims And Public Policy, Kimberly J. Mueller

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Dei Under Scrutiny: Doctrinal Shifts, Litigation Risk, And Emerging Threats To Civil Rights Law After Sffa, Richard J. Grad

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy

For decades, private employers, nonprofits, and philanthropic institutions have implemented voluntary diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs to promote opportunity, mitigate bias, enhance organizational performance, and advance social justice. These initiatives were long understood to comply with civil rights law. But following Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA), that understanding is steadily under attack.

Although SFFA's holding is confined to college admissions, the case's rhetoric has increasingly been appropriated in a broader campaign to dismantle DEI across sectors. Executive-branch actions, advocacy groups, state attorneys general, and private litigants have invoked SFFA's vision of colorblindness to …

The Griffin Principle: Defining And Deterring Election Contest Gamesmanship, Samuel Davis

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy

Through the lens of a protracted battle over a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court in 2024, this Article considers the problem of election contest gamesmanship: the manipulation of the procedures states use to resolve post-election disputes in an effort to subvert the democratic results of an election. This Article illustrates how election contest gamesmanship problematizes basic assumptions of federal voting rights doctrines, exploiting the traditional deference afforded to the operation of state election administration procedures to evade federal judicial scrutiny and advance strictly partisan ends. The result is a unique and pernicious threat to the fair administration of …

Constitutional Litigation After Trump V. Casa, Howard M. Wasserman

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy

Trump v. CASA resolved a decade-old scholarly debate about whether federal courts can grant "universal" injunctions in constitutional cases—injunctions prohibiting the executive from enforcing the challenged law against all persons subject to the law, beyond the plaintiffs to the action. A 6-3 Court said federal courts could issue remedies necessary to accord "complete relief to the plaintiffs," without the power to protect non-parties.

The various opinions in CASA offer competing visions of litigation, adjudication, and judicial decisionmaking. The case plays and will continue to play an essential role in ongoing challenges to Trump Administration policies and regulations and all constitutional …

Journal Staff

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

The Ninth Amendment And Natural Rights/Social Compact Theory: A Defense Of Fundamental Unenumerated Constitutional Rights In The Wake Of Dobbs, Joseph R. Guerra

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy

In ruling that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not protect a right to an abortion, the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization relied on reasoning that casts serious doubt on the continued validity of other unenumerated constitutional rights. According to Dobbs, unenumerated rights cannot be recognized unless they are deeply rooted in this Nation's history and traditions, and have long enjoyed legal protection. In ruling that a right to abortion failed this test, the Court asserted that its decision did not undermine other previously recognized unenumerated rights, such as rights to …

Originalism's Unbalanced Ledger, David Zaring

Duke Law Journal

This Essay examines the fundamental tension between originalism and cost-benefit analysis—the two dominant methodologies shaping modern, public law decision-making. Originalism, currently triumphant, prioritizes historical meaning and textual fidelity. It operates in stark contrast to cost-benefit analysis, the byword of the administrative state since 1982, which focuses on the future and efficiency. Descriptively, the two methodologies are irreconcilable. Nor is it possible to pair them by claiming they serve different purposes; originalism and cost-benefit analysis conflict when assessing agency design, constitutional rights, and judicial review of administrative action. As regulatory policymaking continues to rely on empirical and economic assessments, originalism's influence …

Legalistic Noncompliance, Daniel T. Deacon, Leah M. Litman

Duke Law Journal

Will the executive branch comply with court orders? That question has garnered a considerable amount of attention over the first few months of the second Trump administration. But what does it mean to comply? And what if a form of noncompliance is already occurring?

This Article documents an emerging practice that has dominated the second Trump administration's approach to unfavorable court rulings, a practice this Article calls legalistic noncompliance. Legalistic noncompliance occurs when the administration uses the language of the law as cover to claim that it is complying with court orders when in fact it is not. Drawing …

Judging Requires Judgment, Justin Driver

Duke Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Restoring Chevron Deference By Statute, Scott Dodson

Duke Law Journal

This Essay details a solution for legislatively restoring Chevron deference: amend the APA to direct lower federal courts to give deference to reasonable agency decisions but retain nondeferential judicial review by the U.S. Supreme Court. This solution restores most of the practical benefits of Chevron by giving agencies flexibility to implement congressional policy directives with the expertise they have acquired, by maintaining stability in administrative regulation, and by relieving lower federal courts of the burdens of nondeferential review. And retaining nondeferential judicial review in the Supreme Court will preserve the constitutional role of the judicial branch to say what the …

Presidential Administration After Arthrex, Noah A. Rosenblum, Roderick M. Hills Jr.

Duke Law Journal

The federal government employs over 2 million civilian workers, all but a few thousand of whom enjoy forms of tenure and insulation from presidential control. This bureaucracy, sometimes called "the administrative state," is organized in a many-layered structure defined by statutes and regulations. Pursuant to law and court decisions, the administrative state routinely makes findings of fact, policy determinations, and conclusions of law, sometimes independent of the president. The Supreme Court's recent decision in United States v. Arthrex risks unsettling this arrangement. It adopts a simplistic, hierarchical vision of bureaucratic organization, which is frankly incompatible with existing statutes and regulations. …

Confidentiality Of Ai Conversations: Protecting Self-Represented Litigants Who Use Chatgpt For Legal Advice, Anoo D. Vyas

Duke Law & Technology Review

When a layperson uses ChatGPT to obtain feedback on a legal matter, attorney-client privilege may not apply, as ChatGPT is not a lawyer, much less a human. Further, while lawyers are entitled to protection for their opinion work-product, it is not clear whether self-represented litigants are entitled to the same protection. Additionally, the broader duty of confidentiality binds only attorneys, not AI systems like ChatGPT. The public increasingly uses AI tools such as ChatGPT. If a layperson employs ChatGPT for legal advice, particularly in a civil matter, such communications may be discoverable and potentially admissible. This presents an access to …

Humphrey's Eulogy: A Functionalist View Of Trump V. Slaughter And The Role Of The Ftc, Alex Zhang

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Trump v. Slaughter presents the Supreme Court with a foundational question about the administrative state: whether the for-cause removal protections afforded to Federal Trade Commission Commissioners under the FTC Act are consistent with Article II's vesting of executive power in the President, and, if not, whether Humphrey's Executor v. United States should be overruled.

In March 2025, President Trump removed two FTC Commissioners without satisfying the statutory standard of inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. The dismissed Commissioners sued, and the District Court for the District of Columbia granted summary judgment in their favor, holding that Humphrey's Executor …