Digital Commons Network^™

How Did We Get Here?, Michael J. Klarman

Fordham Law Review

President Donald J. Trump’s second administration has transgressed basic rules and norms of democracy and the rule of law in myriad ways. Below, I have laid out my own top ten list of transgressions, though others could surely have made out a good case for their own “favorites.” It would not be difficult to come up with a longer list, yet the purpose of my Levine Lecture is less to describe where we are than to explain how we got here. Following an enumeration of Trump administration transgressions, my lecture turns to two questions. First, why have traditional checks on …

Fabricating The Crime Of Undocumented Presence, Eric S. Fish, Doug Keller

Fordham Law Review

In 2025, the Trump administration’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) declared that it is a federal crime simply to be an undocumented immigrant. Congress has enacted no such crime. Congress has made it a crime for an immigrant to enter the United States in a manner that “eludes examination or inspection.” For nearly 100 years, this “elude” offense has been understood to occur only at the moment an immigrant enters the country. But the Trump administration’s OLC has reinterpreted this crime as a continuing offense. Under this new reading, an immigrant who entered unlawfully eludes examination until the moment of …

The Alien Enemies Act Of 1798, Andrew Kent

Fordham Law Review

For the first time since World War II—and for the first time ever outside a formally declared war—an American president has invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to detain and deport noncitizens. Enacted during the Quasi-War with France, the Act’s operative language remains largely unchanged today. In March 2025, President Donald J. Trump proclaimed that members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua present in the United States are “alien enemies,” asserting that their activities, allegedly coordinated with President Nicolás Maduro’s government, constitute an “invasion” or “predatory incursion” within the meaning of the statute. Litigation challenging the invocation of …

The Role Of Reliance In Stare Decisis Doctrine, Rochelle Hestnas

Fordham Law Review

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent treatment of reliance interests in stare decisis doctrine is in flux. The Court has overruled long-standing precedent such as Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey with scant analysis as to how reliance interests factor into stare decisis doctrine, despite continuing to name reliance as a factor that should be considered. Arguments for whether and how reliance interests deserve protection are inherently challenging because it cannot be the case that every precedent should stand. Using Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization as a case study, this Note analyzes the Court’s claim …

News That Will Not Break: How The First And Fourth Amendments Can Jointly Protect The Press From Secret Government Intrusions Into Newsgathering, Julianna Margolin

Fordham Law Review

The modern constitutional and statutory framework permits the U.S. government to obtain journalists’ confidential source information and work product by secretly serving third-party service providers with subpoenas. While the First Amendment protects journalists and the Fourth Amendment guards against unreasonable government searches, new technology and the involvement of third parties complicate the balance between independent newsgathering and government access.

This Note examines reporters’ privilege jurisprudence stemming from the seminal U.S. Supreme Court decision Branzburg v. Hayes, which declined to recognize a categorical privilege. This Note also explores the subpoena power in the digital age as it converges with privacy …

Public Libraries, Limited Forums: Critiquing The Fifth Circuit’S Decision In Little V. Llano County, Spencer Emelia Petrick-Knoll

Fordham Law Review

Conflicts over the collections of public libraries have become increasingly frequent in the twenty-first century. In 2025, the Fifth Circuit held that library collections are government speech, thereby preventing patrons from challenging book removals. This Note critiques that decision and analyzes which First Amendment doctrine should govern the curation decisions of a public library. It examines the historical evolution of the public library and First Amendment doctrine to argue for classification of the public library’s collection as a limited public forum. This classification allows libraries to make reasonable, viewpoint-neutral decisions about retaining books in their collections while ensuring that viewpoint …

What Can States Teach? The Right To Education After Mahmoud, Will Simon

Fordham Law Review

In the summer of 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court set new limits on what public schools could require students to learn. Mahmoud v. Taylor pitted a school district interested in promoting pluralism against religious parents who wished to withdraw their children from classroom instruction that promoted celebration and acceptance of LGBTQ+ people. The Court found a violation of those parents’ constitutional right to freely exercise their religion, which both expanded the control parents can exert over their child’s public school education and increased the likelihood of similar claims going forward. As federal courts hear this newly expanded set of First …

Splitting The Baby: Determining The Causation Standard In Family And Medical Leave Act Retaliation Claims, Eliana C. Singer

Fordham Law Review

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) guarantees employees unpaid leave following certain qualifying events. The FMLA not only provides substantive rights but also prohibits retaliation against employees who exercise those rights. When employees face unlawful retaliation, they can bring retaliation claims against their employers. However, there is disagreement among courts as to how to evaluate these claims. More precisely, courts are split concerning whether employees must prove their use of leave was a but-for cause of retaliation, or merely that it was one of an employer’s mixed motives for retaliating. The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Second and …

The Mirage Of Meta Pixel Code: Redefining Pii In The Era Of Generative Ai, Sophie Venter

Fordham Law Review

Data privacy laws are intended to put consumers in control of whether their identifying data can be sold and used for targeted advertising. However, these laws do not provide adequate protections in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI). This Note examines one way that existing privacy law permits companies to profit from selling data for targeted advertising without obtaining user consent: transferring video watching data in a pixel code. Some U.S. Courts of Appeals have determined that these data transfers do not sufficiently identify users and the videos they watched to constitute violations of user privacy. This has led …

The Unitary Executive And The Federal Reserve, Lev Menand

Fordham Law Review

The U.S. Supreme Court may soon embrace an interpretation of the U.S. Constitution that would significantly expand the power of the president over federal administrators and invalidate key provisions in dozens of federal statutes. A critical question is whether this interpretation—known as the unitary executive theory (UET)—would also render unconstitutional central bank independence (CBI), an arrangement where a country’s monetary policy is formulated by a semiautonomous body of experts insulated from partisan political pressure. Several justices have suggested that it would not, and a growing scholarly literature has proposed ways for the Court to distinguish the country’s central banking apparatus …

The Quiet Revival Of The Effective Vindication Of Rights Doctrine, Myriam Gilles

Fordham Law Review

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in American Express v. Italian Colors Restaurantwas widely seen as the death knell for the “effective vindication of rights” doctrine—a judicially created rule that arbitration agreements are enforceable only “so long as the prospective litigant effectively may vindicate its statutory cause of action in the arbitral forum.” By upholding a class action–banning arbitration provision that rendered arbitration economically irrational, Italian Colors appeared to extinguish any meaningful limits on the enforcement of arbitration agreements.

But reports of the doctrine’s demise were premature. This Article uncovers how, in the decade since Italian Colors, lower …

Foreign Judgments In U.S. Courts, Yanbai Andrea Wang

Fordham Law Review

American law on foreign judgments is at an inflection point. For over a century, the doctrine has been shaped by concerns about outgoing U.S. judgments seeking asset collection in the civil law countries of continental Europe. But shifting trade flows and changing litigation tactics have carved a new landscape, demanding a return to foreign judgments law’s conceptual and doctrinal underpinnings. This Article first maps the new landscape, in which China is rapidly rising as a foremost foreign judgments interlocutor. Meanwhile, litigants are increasingly pursuing parallel litigation in multiple countries. The impact of incoming judgments and the interactions between related litigations …

Reorganizing The Administrative State: Executive Ambition And Legislative Constraint, Jordan Graber

Fordham Law Review

Beginning in the 1930s, Congress enacted a series of statutes granting presidents the authority to initiate reorganizations of the administrative state. Under these reorganization statutes, the president determined any necessary changes in agency organization and submitted a reorganization proposal to Congress, which could approve or reject the plan. Over the next fifty years, the president and Congress worked cooperatively to promote the effective and efficient functioning of the administrative state.

Despite the successful reorganization initiatives undertaken pursuant to these statutes, Congress has not conferred reorganization authority on any president in the last four decades. As a result, the organization of …

The Glomar Of It All: The Role Of External Disclosures In Agency Refusals To Confirm Or Deny Under Foia, Claire Paulanne Kurzweil

Fordham Law Review

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requires federal agencies to disclose records upon request from the public, subject to statutory exemptions. Increasingly, agencies have relied on a nonstatutory mechanism, known as the Glomar response, to avoid disclosure. This mechanism, which allows agencies to refuse to confirm or deny the very existence of records, prevents courts and FOIA requesters from receiving even the basic information necessary for judicial review. As courts attempt to adapt FOIA’s review framework to the increased evidentiary constraints of Glomar responses, they are divided over whether to consider disclosures from outside the agency responding to the FOIA …

Lawless Antitrust, John M. Newman

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Utility Law As Anti-Oligarchy Regulation, Ganesh Sitaraman

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ai, Antitrust, And The Marketplace Of Ideas, Maurice E. Stucke

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Why Capitalism Needs Democracy And Democracy Needs Capitalism, Luigi Zingales

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is Tax “Law”?, Luís C. Calderón Gómez

Fordham Law Review

Although taxation remains a hotly contested issue in debates by both politicians and political theorists—over the optimal size of government, distributive (and sometimes corrective) justice, or even the legitimacy of current private property arrangements—taxation has been largely ignored by legal theorists, to the detriment of both tax law and legal theory. This Article argues that tax law, driven by its battle against tax evasion, is in deep conflict with widely accepted conceptions of “legality”—that is, the qualities that make a rule distinctively and normatively “law.” This matters because legality is a key buttress in jurisprudential and political theory accounts that …

Minimal Success: The Consequences Of Mandatory Minimums In Youth Sentencing, Maya Chrobot

Fordham Law Review

In New York State, children as young as thirteen can be processed as adults and sentenced to mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory minimum sentences require judges to sentence the defendant to a statutorily set minimum term of imprisonment. Practitioners, judges, and researchers question the efficacy of mandatory minimum sentences, finding that they are ineffective at deterring crime, decreasing bias in sentencing, and increasing community safety. Additionally, there is clear evidence about the damaging effects of incarceration on young adults. Instead of functioning as rehabilitative punishment, incarceration leads young adults to experience poor mental and physical health outcomes upon release, and they …

Interrogation Of Regents And Administrative Reliance Interests In The Context Of Vacillating Immigration Policy, Sarah Engelberg-Nolan

Fordham Law Review

Arbitrary and capricious review under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) operates as an important agency-accountability tool when invoked as intended. But the recent U.S. Supreme Court case Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California and subsequent lower federal court cases have opened the floodgates to a more searching and potentially activist review. In Regents, the Court held that the administration of President Donald J. Trump could not rescind the discretionary immigration program Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) in the manner the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) attempted, in part because DHS failed to …

The Nondiscrimination Principle, Zephyr Teachout

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Revival Of Section 5: A Return To The Ftc’S Roots In A Time Of Democratic Crisis, Shaoul Sussman

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Antitrust And Economic Liberty, Doha Mekki

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

False Conflict: Colorblindness And Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act, W. Kerrel Murray

Fordham Law Review

If friends and foes of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 agree on one thing, it is the irrepressible conflict between section 2’s attention to race and constitutional colorblindness. They’re wrong. Rightly understood, section 2’s design is remarkably compatible with colorblind constitutionalism’s letter and spirit.

To show how, this Article first returns to section 2’s origins and the preexisting approach its text codifies. That approach had an underappreciated ethos: When intentional discrimination’s effects sufficiently distort a political system, an electoral rule’s results might impugn its unconstitutionality, even if the rule had been adopted without discriminatory purpose. Drawing …

Winging It: Convergence, Convivencia, And Belonging Of Latina Lawyers, Verónica C. Gonzales

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Building A Professionally Socialized Immigration Bar: A Comparative Case Study, Jayanth K. Krishnan, Kunle Ajagbe

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

“No Further Discussion Necessary”: Compliance As Professionalism In Legal Education, Sarah J. Schendel

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

"In Better Times": The Basis Of Representation And The Forgotten History Of The Fourteenth Amendment, Jessica I. Gorovitz

Fordham Law Review

Over the past several years, the U.S. Supreme Court has incorporated history into the analysis of unenumerated individual rights, like abortion, and enumerated ones, like the right to keep and bear arms. But it has not incorporated history into its approach to individual rights claims of racial discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause, a methodological gap the Court has left unexplained. Rather, it has held that the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment is to prevent racial classifications, largely citing its own precedent, eschewing the Amendment’s history. This approach conflicts with section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires states …

Against The Drafter: An Empirical And Theoretical Analysis Of The Doctrine Of Contra Proferentem, Farshad Ghodoosi, Tal Kastner

Fordham Law Review

Contra proferentem, the enduring maxim that directs courts to interpret an ambiguity in a contract against its drafter, appears simple on its face. Although it might be best known as a fundamental principle of insurance law, contra proferentem figures in courts’ interpretation of a range of contract types. As an interpretive rule of thumb that parties can easily override with a simple contract provision, the doctrine and its boilerplate antidote seem to offer a straightforward means to facilitate private ordering—a central goal of contract law.

However, neither courts’ application of the doctrine in case law nor contract drafters’ treatment …