Digital Commons Network^™

Exploit Machina, Andrea Matwyshyn

Faculty Scholarship

Over half a century ago, Hannah Arendt cautioned us to “think what we are doing” when we build new technologies. Engaging with her counsel and a set of historical case studies, this Article frames what it calls exploit machina problems. Exploit machina refers to situations where broken technologies and broken governance combine to irreparably harm the public. In other words, exploit machina involves organizational choices to knowingly leverage technology as part of legally problematic conduct, including various forms of fraud. In the language of data science, exploit machina situations implicate strategic decisions in building and managing artificial intelligence (AI); they …

Neuro-Advocacy: Harmonizing Persuasion With The Operation Of The Brain, Gary Gildin

Faculty Scholarship

The most significant contemporary advances in effective courtroom advocacy will emerge from what on the surface is an unlikely source: neuroscience. Revolutionary advances in technology for the first time allow us to see how the human brain makes decisions. The findings are wholly inconsistent with how the trial process presupposes the finder of fact will perceive and use information delivered by lawyers and witnesses. Consequently, lawyers seeking to persuade jurors (and judges) must reframe their advocacy to align with what we have learned about how the minds of these decision-makers will receive testimony and argument and use these inputs to …

Hardwiring Hercules?, Courtney M. Cox

Faculty Scholarship

It is time to reorient the debate over the right to a human decision. Within that debate, the strongest arguments in favor of human decisionmakers are Arguments from Explanation: AI technology is increasingly and necessarily opaque, and so machines should not replace human decisionmakers because machines cannot give the required explanations. Or so the humanist argument goes. Meanwhile, machinists argue that most humanist principles have been deflated by the Better Decision Argument, which reframes such principles as grounding not a right to a human decision, but merely to a “better” decision— whether by human or machine.

This Article turns that …

Should Statutory Interpretation And Contract Interpretation Be Harmonized?, Ethan J. Leib

Faculty Scholarship

This paper develops four case studies about how states have harmonized or separated their statutory interpretation regimes and their contract interpretation regimes.  After exploring the choices of Texas, Alaska, New York, and Alabama—all of which take different approaches to their lumping or splitting—the paper seeks to make state courts more aware of what their options are; to help states think about whether their commitments to formalism or contextualism make sense to apply in both domains; and to help them evaluate their meta-choices about whether to bring their interpretive regimes closer together or further apart.

Trump V. Cook And The American Rule Of For-Cause Removal, Jane Manners, Lev Menand

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Risky Business, Atinuke O. Adediran

Faculty Scholarship

Corporate law scholarship and doctrine have largely operated on the assumption that corporate shareholders are interested in financial goals, while corporate stakeholders—such as employees, consumers, and local communities—are interested in social and environmental goals, like diversity and inclusion and climate change. Because of this assumption, the law largely requires a corporation to disclose information it considers to be “financially material” to shareholders—that is significant enough to impact the company’s financial position—including factors it considers to be financially risky.

Financial materiality is so embedded in corporate law doctrine that even if an issue is about social and environmental concerns, financial materiality …

Outside Counsel Guidelines: Power, Ideology, And The Evolution Of The Corporate Bar, Bruce A. Green, Eli Wald

Faculty Scholarship

Outside Counsel Guidelines (“OCGs”), terms of the lawyer–client relationship imposed by corporations, are a significant development in the practice of law by large corporate law firms (“BigLaw”). Among the most controversial OCGs are those that expand on law firms’ fiduciary obligations, thereby restricting their future clientele. The organized bar maintains that rules of professional conduct should restrict lawyers’ acquiescence to these OCGs because they limit clients’ access to legal services and undermine lawyers’ independence without advancing corporate clients’ legitimate interests.

This Article shows why the bar’s effort has (very recently) deservedly failed: corporate clients have a legitimate interest in demanding …

The Regulation Of Technological Innovation In Financial Services: A Comparative Approach With Respect To Digital Assets And Artificial Intelligence, Howell E. Jackson, Katja Langenbucher

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Memory And Authority Of Failed Constitutional Amendments, Julie C. Suk

Faculty Scholarship

When the original public meaning of any constitutional provision is enforced, guarantees of rights that were adopted before women were included in legal rights may appear illegitimate and inadequate for a 21st-century democracy. Originalists have long pointed to Article V amendment as the legitimate path to changing the Constitution. Jack Balkin’s Memory and Authority points to the importance of expanding American constitutional memory if women and minorities are to be included in the transhistorical “We the People.” This Essay illustrates how the memory and authority of failed constitutional amendments can challenge originalists’ reliance on amendment as the path to democratically …

Pragmatic Conceptualism, Public Nuisance, And The American Opioid Litigation, Benjamin C. Zipursky

Faculty Scholarship

Public nuisance as a part of American tort law has been as high profile in the first decades of this century as products liability law was in the last several decades of the 20th century.  The American opioid litigation over the past decades is a spectacular example, filling headlines and generating billions of dollars of settlements.  There is a plausible argument, however, that the doctrinal core of the opioid litigation is meritless because there simply is no “interference with public right” as required by public nuisance law.  The first aim of the article is to articulate and assess that argument. …

Does Textualism Constrain Supreme Court Justices?, James J. Brudney, Lawrence Baum

Faculty Scholarship

A principal justification for textualism is the constraint hypothesis. Conservative Justices and leading textualist scholars contend that—in stark contrast to reliance on legislative history—focus on the ordinary meaning of enacted text leaves little room for the Justices to be policy-oriented or ideological in their interpretations. This Article represents the first systematic study probing the validity of the constraint hypothesis, one that employs both quantitative and qualitative analysis.

The Article examines the Justices’ reliance on interpretive resources in over 660 statutory decisions in the field of labor and employment, decided by the Burger Court, the Rehnquist Court, and the Roberts Court—during …

Brokering Safety, Chinmayi Sharma, Thomas E. Kadri, Sam Adler

Faculty Scholarship

For victims of abuse, safety means hiding. Not just hiding themselves, but also their contact details, their address, their workplace, their roommates, and any other information that could enable their abuser to target them. Yet today, no number of name changes and relocations can prevent data brokers from sharing a victim’s personal information online. Thanks to brokers, abusers can find what they need with a single search, a few clicks, and a few dollars. For many victims, then, the best hope for safety lies in obscurity—that is, making themselves and their information harder to find.

This Article exposes privacy law’s …

An Empirical Study Of Malingering In Insanity Cases Across Twelve Decades, Deborah W. Denno

Faculty Scholarship

The last 120 years have seen a surge in the use of neuroscientific evidence in American criminal law cases, fueled by discoveries in brain science that have challenged the legal system’s assumptions about human thinking and culpability. One key assumption is that many defendants “malinger,” that is, feign or fake insanity or mental illness, to garner an acquittal or mitigated punishment. Likewise, when potential evidence that a defendant is malingering is introduced in court, it can have a pronounced and powerful negative effect on the defendant’s insanity claim, especially when juries and criminal justice actors are already skeptical of insanity …

The Black Hole Of Capital Gains: Etf Swap Funds, Jeffrey M. Colon

Faculty Scholarship

ETFs have begun to challenge mutual funds as the dominant U.S. public pooled asset vehicle.  Their constant liquidity, exposure to an ever widening range of investment strategies, and highly touted tax efficiency have driven the explosive growth in the assets under management of ETFs over the last 15 years.  The tax efficiency is due to section 852(b)(6), which permits ETFs to distribute appreciated property tax free and eliminate all fund-level taxable gains even while making portfolio adjustments, which mutual funds cannot do.

Fund sponsors have developed various strategies to exploit the benefits of section 852(b)(6), with the newest being the …

Transparency As A Regulatory Duty, Olivier Sylvain

Faculty Scholarship

This symposium piece offers a simple survey of transparency measures addressed to deepfakes and other related consumer harms, as well as the constitutional problems they present.

Slaughter, The Symmetry Rule, And What The Decision Of 1789 Actually Decided, Jane Manners, Lev Menand

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Applying History As Law: The Role Of Historical Facts In Implementing Constitutional Doctrine, Joseph Blocher, Brandon L. Garrett

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court has long relied on historical evidence in constitutional cases, but recent years have seen a major change in how it does so: not only to interpret the meaning of constitutional text, but to establish doctrinal tests that call for historical evidence to be used in the application of those tests going forward. Broadly speaking, originalism has moved from the realm of legal interpretation to that of law declaration and then to law application. This transformation in the legal significance of history raises important questions for originalism as a practice of constitutional adjudication, not simply a theory …

Religious Riders And The Sherman Act, Bailey Sanders

Faculty Scholarship

Can corporations engage in anticompetitive behavior on the basis of religious belief? While the answer may seem like an obvious no, in fact this question has largely been overlooked. It has hovered at the margins of the debate over religious exemptions: Proponents of religious exemptions have essentially argued that there is no harm in providing such exemptions to businesses because a competitive market will ensure consumers who might be denied services or goods by a religious firm can still obtain those goods and services elsewhere. But what if religiously minded businesses act in ways that are specifically designed to limit …

Ai And Courts: An International Human Rights Perspective, Veronika Fikfak, Laurence R. Helfer

Faculty Scholarship

International human rights courts and treaty bodies are increasingly turning to automated decision-making (ADM) technologies to expedite and improve their review of individual complaints. These tribunals have yet to consider many of the legal, normative, and practical issues raised by the use of different types of automation technologies for these purposes. This chapter offers an initial assessment of the benefits and challenges of introducing ADM into international human rights adjudication. We weigh up the benefits of introducing these tools to improve international human rights adjudication – which include greater speed and efficiency in processing and sorting cases, identifying patterns in …

Uncertain Enforcement And Standing To Sue, Ernest A. Young

Faculty Scholarship

Plaintiffs with strong claims that a law is unconstitutional may yet fail to establish standing when the law is rarely enforced. Other statutes, like Texas’s unusual abortion law, may render challenges difficult by delegating enforcement to private parties who are difficult to identify in advance. Both problems arise from the assumption that the law shapes behavior only through sanctions imposed in enforcement proceedings. This view is mistaken, both jurisprudentially and empirically. Worse, it requires courts to ask two unanswerable questions: How likely is enforcement? And how likely does Article III require it to be? It also asks standing doctrine to …

Crypto Litigation And Market Efficiency, Robert E. Bishop, Bradford Levy, Frank Partnoy, Daniel Taylor, Andrew Yeh

Faculty Scholarship

This paper investigates, for the first time in the literature, the factors that should matter to courts in determining whether a crypto  market is “efficient,” meaning that prices are sufficiently responsive to information. Based on new empirical evidence and a series of event studies, we recommend a new judicial framework for assessing market  efficiency in crypto litigation.

Market efficiency tests based on event studies have played an important role in other areas of litigation, particularly securities litigation, where courts frequently rely on what have become known as the “Cammer factors.” Academics have not yet assessed the extent to which market …

The Foreign Commerce Power, Kathleen Claussen, Timothy Meyer

Faculty Scholarship

This Article is the first to scrutinize presidential trade authority under the Constitution. The Constitution grants the President no independent power to regulate foreign commerce. That conclusion, while apparent from a straightforward reading of Articles I and II, stands in stark contrast to executive conduct of U.S. trade policy in recent years. This Article traces the roots of this constitutional distortion to a confluence of doctrinal drift and academic oversight. Courts and commentators have increasingly relied on an expansive conception of executive power grounded in a perceived general foreign affairs authority. In doing so, they have blurred the line between …

Should Judicial Opinions Be Read Like Statutes?, Margaret H. Lemos

Faculty Scholarship

Should judicial opinions be interpreted with an eye to their purpose, context, or the intent of their authors, or should interpreters focus on the ordinary meaning of the text? Opinions present the same sorts of interpretive puzzles as other legal texts, and yet they have been omitted from the debates over interpretive methodology that dominate the fields of constitutional and statutory interpretation. The omission is no accident: the Supreme Court has stated repeatedly—and with increasing frequency in recent years—that judicial opinions are not to be read like statutes. Yet neither courts nor commentators have explained why the principles that ground …

The Effect Of Provider Diversity On Racial Health Disparities: Evidence From The Military, Michael Frakes, Jonathan Gruber

Faculty Scholarship

We assess the relationship between the racial diversity of medical providers and racial health disparities in the use of preventive care and in patient outcomes. We use unique data from the Military Health System, where we observe providers as patients so that we can identify their race, and where moves across bases change exposure to provider race in a plausibly exogenous fashion. We consider patients with four chronic, deadly, but manageable illnesses, where the relationship with the provider may have the most direct impact on health. We find striking evidence that provider racial diversity leads to reduced disparities in maintenance …

The Eighth Amendment And Prison Staff-To-Sentenced Prisoner Sexual Violence, Matthew Lyskawa

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, I provide the first comprehensive account of lower federal courts’ Eighth Amendment prison conditions jurisprudence regarding prison staff-to-sentenced prisoner sexual violence. I show that lower federal courts are systematically misunderstanding and misapplying Supreme Court case law in this context. The result is that sexually victimized prisoners must meet extremely burdensome doctrinal standards unique to sexual violence claims. Lower federal courts would faithfully follow Supreme Court precedent if they applied the excessive force standard to sexual assault claims and the conditions of confinement standard to sexual harassment claims. However, a faithful application of Supreme Court case law does …

Confession Contamination And Dna Exonerations, 1989-2025, Brandon L. Garrett

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Llm-Assisted Legal Propositions Identification From Party Arguments In The U.S. Supreme Court Briefs, Heng Zheng, Alex Zhang

Faculty Scholarship

Merits briefs are central to U.S. litigation, serving as the primary means for parties to present arguments and persuade judges. Legal propositions in these merits briefs are the atomic units of arguments, whose relationships evolve throughout litigation and inform court decisions and precedent. Large language models (LLMs) have been applied to legal document review, but there is limited evidence on their ability to identify legal propositions in merits briefs. Given the labor-intensive nature of the task, we evaluate a human-AI collaborative approach to identifying legal propositions in the U.S. Supreme Court merits briefs, in which legal annotators review and revise …

Cumulative Burdens On Second Amendment Rights, Joseph Blocher, Hayley Lawrence

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Why Are Executions Becoming Crueler?, Deborah W. Denno

Faculty Scholarship

Since the modern death penalty era, this country’s six execution methods have become crueler over time. This article details the execution procedures adopted across death penalty states up to the end of 2025, analyzing their societal and cultural underpinnings and explaining how they were implemented, including their shared flaws, unscientific origins and protocols, and reliance on untrained, unqualified, or unknown executioners. While legislatures and courts claim that states move from one technique to the next to enhance greater humaneness, history shows that such switches are primarily propelled by constitutional challenges to a state’s particular technique. In theory, rendering a state’s …

The Surveillance Of System-Adjacent Individuals, Mariam A. Hinds

Faculty Scholarship

Although the Fourth Amendment protects against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” this right is not enjoyed by all people equally. Supreme Court jurisprudence has curtailed the Fourth Amendment privacy rights of individuals under probation or parole supervision. In this line of cases, the Court concluded that the government’s interest in monitoring supervisees, reducing recidivism, and promoting public safety outweighed their reasonable expectation of privacy.

However, surveillance mechanisms like probation and parole extend the criminal legal system’s carceral gaze beyond the supervisees and peer into the bedrooms and digital lives of their families, roommates, and communities, or who this Article calls system-adjacent …