Digital Commons Network^™

Brief Of First Amendment Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Tabatha Abu El-Haj, Timothy Zick, Hyland Hunt

Briefs

No abstract provided.

Ace In The Hole: The Epa's Proposed Affordable Clean Energy Rule; Have Your Coal And Burn It Too, Cy M. Hudson

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

Out Of Sight, But Not Out Of Mind: Reevaluating The Role Of Federalism In Adequately Regulating Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, Madhavi Kulkarni

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

The Deficiencies Of The European Union's Regulatory System Governing The Classification Of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals, Elissa Sanford

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

Diving To New Depths: How Green Energy Markets Can Push Mining Companies Into The Deep Sea, And Why Nations Must Balance Mineral Exploitation With Marine Conservation, Catherine Danley

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

Two Popular Democracies' "Energy Independence" Initiatives Through The Lenses Of Constitutionalism, Environmentalism, And Judicial Activism Oeuvres--A Comparative Study Of The Trump And Modi Administrations, Vidhya V. Iyer

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

The energy independence approaches by two popular democracies, the United States and India, have recently been the center of attention. This Article examines whether two Democratic leaders, the President of the United States, Donald Trump, and Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, have maintained constitutionalism in light of executive orders and ordinances that focus on energy independence by way of promoting coal-fired power plants rather than focusing on the environment and human health. Based on constitutional underpinnings, this Article concludes that although both leaders and their administrations may not have violated their respective constitutions, they have certainly violated notions of …

Table Of Contents And Masthead (V. 44, No. 1)

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

Law School Moves Up Eight Spots In Latest U.S. News & World Report Rankings, Jaime Welch-Donahue

Law School News Archive

No abstract provided.

Second Guessing Double Jeopardy: The Stare Decisis Factors As Proxy Tools For Original Correctness, Justin W. Aimonetti

William & Mary Law Review Online

In Gamble v. United States, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the 170-year-old dual-sovereignty doctrine. That doctrine permits both the federal and state governments—as “separate sovereigns”—to each prosecute a defendant for the same offense. Justice Thomas concurred with the majority opinion in Gamble, but wrote separately to reject the traditional stare decisis formulation. In particular, the factors the majority used to evaluate stare decisis, in his view, amount to nothing more than marbles placed subjectively on either side of the stare decisis balancing scale. He would have preferred, instead, an inquiry into whether the precedent was demonstrably erroneous as an original matter, …

Abortion Case May Not Overturn Roe, But Could Effectively Nullify It, A. Benjamin Spencer

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Protecting The Role Of The Press During Times Of Crisis, Mary-Rose Papandrea

William & Mary Law Review

President Trump’s daily tweets attacking the media have led many observers to express concern about the state of the press in our nation. Trump has called the press “the ... enemy of the [American] people,” encouraged a climate of hatred toward journalists at his rallies, refused to condemn Saudi Arabia for the brutal killing of reporter Jamal Khashoggi, and accused the media of writing “fake news.” The public’s trust in the institutional press has simultaneously diminished. Combined with the continuing economic challenges journalists face, the press is certainly facing some difficult times.

Nevertheless, things are not as dire as they …

Crisis? Whose Crisis?, Jack M. Beermann

William & Mary Law Review

Every moment in human history can be characterized by someone as “socially and politically charged.” For a large portion of the population of the United States, nearly the entire history of the country has been socially and politically charged, first because they were enslaved and then because they were subjected to discriminatory laws and unequal treatment under what became known as “Jim Crow.” The history of the United States has also been a period of social and political upheaval for American Indians, the people who occupied the territory that became the United States before European settlement. Although both African-Americans and …

Packing And Unpacking State Courts, Marin K. Levy

William & Mary Law Review

When it comes to court packing, questions of “should” and “can” are inextricably intertwined. The conventional wisdom has long been that federal court packing is something the President and Congress simply cannot do. Even though the Constitution’s text does not directly prohibit expanding or contracting the size of courts for political gain, many have argued that there is a longstanding norm against doing so, stemming from a commitment to judicial independence and separation of powers. And so (the argument goes), even though the political branches might otherwise be tempted to add or subtract seats to change the Court’s ideological makeup, …

The Judicial Reforms Of 1937, Barry Cushman

William & Mary Law Review

The literature on reform of the federal courts in 1937 understandably focuses on the history and consequences of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s ill-fated proposal to increase the membership of the Supreme Court. A series of decisions declaring various components of the New Deal unconstitutional had persuaded Roosevelt and some of his advisors that the best way out of the impasse was to enlarge the number of justiceships and to appoint to the new positions jurists who would be “dependable” supporters of the administration’s program. Yet Roosevelt and congressional Democrats also were deeply troubled by what they perceived as judicial obstruction …

The Court Should Not Let Politically Divided Times Affects Its Choices And Decisions, Erwin Chemerinsky

William & Mary Law Review

The Court should not let politically divided times affect its choices or decisions. Altering the Court’s role in politically divided times would require a definition of what qualifies as such an era and a theory of how to act in such times. Almost every era in American history could be deemed a politically divided time. Changing the Court’s role in politically divided times is inconsistent with its preeminent role: interpreting and enforcing the Constitution. This role does not change, and should not change, in politically charged moments. Indeed, history shows that the Court cannot know what is likely to lessen …

Judging "Under Fire" And The Retreat To Facts, Allison Orr Larsen

William & Mary Law Review

Americans tend to worry about how our current polarized political climate will affect the legitimacy of our courts. Often overlooked in this important conversation is a discussion about what a toxic political dialogue can do—and in fact is doing—to the construction of the law itself. This Article will begin to make the case that judicial decisions themselves change as a result of high-intensity politics. Specifically, I will argue that when judges are “under fire” (to borrow a phrase from Planned Parenthood v. Casey), they tend to cloak their decisions in factual observations about the world that seem neutral and objective, …

Candidate Privacy, Rebecca Green

Faculty Publications

In the United States, we have long accepted that candidates for public office who have voluntarily stepped into the public eye sacrifice claims to privacy. This refrain is rooted deep within the American enterprise, emanating from the Framers' concept of the informed citizen as a bedrock of democracy. Voters must have full information about candidates to make their choices at the ballot box. Even as privacy rights for ordinary citizens have expanded, privacy theorists and courts continue to exempt candidates from privacy protections. This Article suggests that two disruptions warrant revisiting the privacy interests of candidates. The first is a …

Justices Make The Tough-- But Right-- Call In Cross-Border Shooting Case, A. Benjamin Spencer

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Non-Transparent Pbm Cash Flows: Balancing Market Forces Under A Reluctant Legislative Regime, John Mcguinness

William & Mary Business Law Review

No abstract provided.

Duties, Disclosure, And Discord: Necessity To Resolve Circuit Split And Certainty Leidos Could Have Clarified For Litigation Strategy And Risk Allocation, Damian P. Gallagher

William & Mary Business Law Review

Securities litigation is a complex, specialized, and detailed practice of the law that depends on the expertise of courts and the Securities and Exchange Commission. From its inception, the securities laws, namely the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, provided a baseline expectation and prescription for the Securities and Exchange Commission to promulgate rules to fulfill the organic statute’s demands. Through time, technology, and the law generally, the securities laws have expanded significantly, not only asking, but also requiring, the courts to answer questions never contemplated by the original drafters of the laws to guide …

"Liberty Requires Accountability": The Appointments Clause, Lucia V. Sec, And The Next Constitutional Controversy, Michael A. Sabino

William & Mary Business Law Review

“Liberty requires accountability” is the essential precept which animates the Appointments Clause of Article II. This constitutional safeguard assures that those who exercise the sovereign power of the United States remain accountable both to the Chief Executive who appointed them and to the People who elected that President. The proviso was most recently tested in Lucia v. SEC, and, most assuredly, shall be in controversy again. After first expositing the high Court’s extensive Appointments Clause jurisprudence presaging Lucia, this Article thoroughly explores this newest Article II landmark, before concluding with commentary upon future Appointments Clause challenges expected to soon …

Time To Prune The Flora--Procedural Due Process, The Full Payment Rule And Assessable Penalties: Larson V. United States, Frank G. Colella

William & Mary Business Law Review

In Larson v. United States, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the opportunity to limit the scope of the Flora “full payment” rule when its strict application in the instant case foreclosed judicial review of the underlying tax controversy. As a result, the decision rubberstamped the IRS’s imposition of assessable penalties without any meaningful judicial review of those actions. The Article argues that the court’s decision to blindly apply the full payment rule, without considering any form of a hardship exception, effectively denied John Larson his right to due process of law as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment …

Legal Literature Review Of Social Entrepreneurship And Impact Investing (2007-2017): Doing Good By Doing Business, Deborah Burand, Anne Tucker

William & Mary Business Law Review

Although the ambition to do good by doing business is not new, the burgeoning realization of this ambition is. As the fields of social entrepreneurship and impact investing advance in size, scope and complexity, questions about the roles of corporations and capital markets in society intensify.

What is legal scholarship contributing to this discussion? This Article reviews the scholarly contributions of 260 articles written by over 150 authors about the fields of social enterprise, social finance, and impact investing. The Article maps the contributions of legal scholarship over the last decade—from 2007 (when the term “impact investing” was first coined) …

Table Of Contents V.11, No.1

William & Mary Business Law Review

No abstract provided.

Black Flags Behind Bars: Doe V. Mattis And Why The 2001 Aumf Does Not Justify The Detention Of U.S.-Citizen Islamic State Fighters, John A. Gurtunca

William & Mary Law Review Online

This Note proposes that the current legal authority the United States relies on to detain U.S. citizens captured as enemy combatants—the 2001 AUMF—does not provide an adequate justification for the detention of Islamic State fighters who are U.S. citizens. This Note argues that despite a marriage of convenience, the Islamic State’s organizational and operational differences from al-Qaeda make it a factually distinct organization. Because the Islamic State and al-Qaeda are two different entities, the Islamic State falls outside the scope of the 2001 AUMF. Thus, the 2001 AUMF should not apply to the detention of U.S.-citizen Islamic State fighters because …

First, We'll Neuter All The Judges, A. Benjamin Spencer

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Nonexcludable Surgical Method Patents, Jonas Anderson

William & Mary Law Review

A patent consists of only one right: the right to exclude others from practicing the patented invention. However, one class of patents statutorily lacks the right to exclude direct infringers: surgical method patents are not enforceable against medical practitioners or health care facilities, which are the only realistic potential direct infringers of such patents. Despite this, inventors regularly file for (and receive) surgical method patents. Why would anyone incur the expense (more than $20,000 on average) of acquiring a patent on a surgical method if that patent cannot be used to keep people from using the patent?

The traditional answer …

Summary Dispositions As Precedent, Richard C. Chen

William & Mary Law Review

The Supreme Court’s practice of summarily reversing decisions based on certiorari filings, without the benefit of merits briefing or oral argument, has recently come under increasing scrutiny. The practice is difficult to square with the Court’s stated criteria for granting certiorari and its norms against reviewing fact-bound cases to engage in mere error correction. Nonetheless, there is growing acceptance that the practice is likely to continue in some form, and the conversation has shifted to asking when the use of summary dispositions should be considered proper. Commentators have had no trouble identifying the Court’s tendencies: summary dispositions are most commonly …

No-Fault Digital Platform Monopolization, Marina Lao

William & Mary Law Review

The power of today’s tech giants has prompted calls for changes in antitrust law and policy which, for decades, has been exceedingly permissive in merger enforcement and in constraining dominant firm conduct. Economically, the fear is that the largest digital platforms are so dominant and its data advantage so substantial that competition is foreclosed, resulting in long-term harm to consumers and to the economy. But the concerns extend beyond economics. Critics worry, too, that the large platforms’ tremendous economic power poses risks of social and political harm and threatens our democracy. These concerns have prompted discussions of ways to reinvigorate …

Extrajudicial Statements And Prejudice In The Digital Age: Creating Factors To Preserve The Balance Between Attorney And State Interests In Trial Litigation, Emily R. O'Hara

William & Mary Law Review

As social media’s prevalence and usage grows within the United States, people and organizations capitalize on new media to send news to users. In 2017, 67 percent of people consumed their news from social media websites, and the rate continues to grow. Local and national news sources bring newsworthy stories to active users on social media sites such as Twitter, where users can communicate and interact with one another to promote ideas and spread information. These online accounts cover not only mundane, day-to-day news, but also salacious stories relating to civil and criminal lawsuits.

In April 2018, attorney Neal Katyal …