Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Law (4215)
- Constitutional Law (141)
- Criminal Law (116)
- Law and Society (96)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (94)
-
- Administrative Law (80)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (70)
- Civil Procedure (63)
- First Amendment (61)
- Legal Profession (48)
- Litigation (48)
- Courts (47)
- Criminal Procedure (45)
- Law and Race (43)
- Family Law (41)
- Civil Law (39)
- International Law (39)
- Law and Politics (39)
- Law and Gender (36)
- Judges (35)
- Jurisprudence (35)
- Legislation (35)
- Intellectual Property Law (34)
- Supreme Court of the United States (34)
- Internet Law (32)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (32)
- Election Law (29)
- Evidence (29)
- State and Local Government Law (29)
- Torts (27)
- Keyword
-
- Ethics (183)
- Constitution (106)
- Constitutional law (87)
- Evidence (77)
- Constitutional Law (69)
-
- Law (67)
- Tax (64)
- Antitrust (62)
- Criminal law (62)
- Religion (62)
- Originalism (61)
- Bankruptcy (60)
- Professional responsibility (60)
- Jurisdiction (54)
- Citizenship (52)
- Legal ethics (49)
- Regulation (49)
- First Amendment (48)
- Race (47)
- Securities (47)
- Liability (46)
- First amendment (45)
- Justice (45)
- Due process (44)
- Politics (44)
- Jurisprudence (43)
- Marriage (43)
- New York (43)
- Interpretation (42)
- International law (41)
- File Type
Articles 151 - 180 of 4271
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Liberty On Hold: The Constitutional Test And Source For Overdetention Claims, Sarya Baladi
Liberty On Hold: The Constitutional Test And Source For Overdetention Claims, Sarya Baladi
Fordham Law Review
The persistence of overdetention—meaning continued detention after officers knew or should have known that the arrested person was entitled to release—poses major concerns about both the fundamental right against arbitrary detention and other unenumerated constitutional rights. The U.S. Supreme Court’s 1979 decision in Baker v. McCollan established a vague constitutional protection against overdetention, but it left lower courts to answer many open questions about its parameters.
Although courts agree that the Constitution prohibits law enforcement from arbitrarily detaining indefinitely an arrested person who protests their legitimate release, the application of this protection has been inconsistent across federal courts of appeals. …
Turning A Blind Eye To “Prisoner-On-Prisoner” Brawls: Why Failure-To-Protect Claims Should Proceed Under Bivens, Sophia M. Brusco
Turning A Blind Eye To “Prisoner-On-Prisoner” Brawls: Why Failure-To-Protect Claims Should Proceed Under Bivens, Sophia M. Brusco
Fordham Law Review
Correctional officers have an obligation, under the Eighth Amendment and 18 U.S.C. § 4042, to protect incarcerated persons from an attack at the hands of fellow incarcerated individuals. Despite this duty, when a federal officer fails to protect an incarcerated person from attack, the viability of the victim’s claim against the offending officer is uncertain. Even though the doctrine, created in Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, allows courts to infer a cause of action for damages directly from the Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court adopted a test in Ziglar v. Abbasi that has …
Institutional Liability For Sexual Violence In Prisons Based On Theaided-By-Agency Theory, Tori Klevan
Institutional Liability For Sexual Violence In Prisons Based On Theaided-By-Agency Theory, Tori Klevan
Fordham Law Review
Sexual assault perpetrated by correctional officers in prisons and jails is a pervasive problem in women’s correctional facilities. However, victims who choose to pursue a civil action rarely recover damages for their injuries because our legal system fails to provide adequate options for relief. This failure leaves victims uncompensated and disincentivizes correctional institutions from implementing effective preventative measures. Part of the reason for this failure is that most U.S. courts refuse to hold employers liable for sexual violence committed by their employees. They find that employers cannot be held liable for the tortious conduct of their employees unless the conduct …
Improving Lawyers & Lives: How Immigrant Justice Corps Built A Model For Quality Representation While Empowering Recent Law School And College Graduates And The Immigrant Communities Whom They Serve, Jojo Annobil, Elizabeth Gibson
Improving Lawyers & Lives: How Immigrant Justice Corps Built A Model For Quality Representation While Empowering Recent Law School And College Graduates And The Immigrant Communities Whom They Serve, Jojo Annobil, Elizabeth Gibson
Fordham Law Review
The late Judge Robert A. Katzmann of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit formed a study group in 2008 called the Study Group on Immigrant Representation to assess the scope of the problem and find a solution. The study group determined that the representation crisis was an issue “of both quality and quantity” and that the two most important variables for a successful outcome in a case were having counsel and not being detained. To address this need, the study group established two innovative programs: the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project (NYIFUP), the first public defender …
Expert Knowledge, Democratic Accountability, And The Unitary Executive, Barry Sullivan
Expert Knowledge, Democratic Accountability, And The Unitary Executive, Barry Sullivan
Fordham Law Review
Proponents of the “unitary executive” theory hold that “all federal officers exercising executive power must be subject to the direct control of the President.” But how, as a constitutional matter, should such presidential control be defined, and how should it be effectuated? Unitarians are not united. Kevin H. Rhodes and Professor Steven G. Calabresi identify at least three distinct versions of the theory, which reflect a diversity of responses to those questions. The strongest or most aggressive version (which may also find the least support in the relevant jurisprudence) holds that the President may “supplant any discretionary executive action taken …
Concerted Civic Administration, Peter M. Shane
Concerted Civic Administration, Peter M. Shane
Fordham Law Review
With the benefit of hindsight, the Roberts Court’s decision in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board marked the arrival in the U.S. Supreme Court of what has aptly been called the “separation-of-powers counterrevolution.” For the first time in history, the Court voided statutory criteria limiting the removability of a subordinate officer by a principal officer within the executive branch. Since then, the Court has crafted an increasingly complex separation-of-powers jurisprudence aimed at protecting the President’s supposed Article II authority to control subordinate administrators. Underlying this jurisprudence is the Court’s supposition that, constitutionally speaking, executive branch administrators “wield …
The President's Fourth Branch?, Bijal Shah
The President's Fourth Branch?, Bijal Shah
Fordham Law Review
Unitary executive theory has taken hold of the administrative state, motivated by the view that agencies constitute a rogue fourth branch of government. Emboldened by the U.S. Supreme Court, the President has begun to interfere with administrative accountability to important criteria including statutory procedural requirements that impact both public participation and administrative due process, the expectation that agencies engage neutral expertise to implement the law, and the obligations of judicial review. As a result, this Essay argues, rather than constituting a fourth branch that is unaccountable to the President, the administrative state has been encouraged by the President and courts …
Due Process Protections For Charter School Students In Long-Term Exclusionary Discipline Proceedings, Leah E. Soloff
Due Process Protections For Charter School Students In Long-Term Exclusionary Discipline Proceedings, Leah E. Soloff
Fordham Law Review
Charter schools—public schools that are subject to minimal state regulation—often employ high levels of exclusionary discipline. Because charter schools in many states are exempt from state laws regulating school discipline, the U.S. Constitution provides charter school students their only source of protections during such disciplinary proceedings. However, the constitutional due process protections afforded to public school students in disciplinary proceedings remain a source of significant disagreement among courts. Although the U.S. Supreme Court has established that public school students must be afforded due process protections in exclusionary discipline proceedings, the Court has yet to determine what process is actually due …
The Diffuse Executive, Anya Bernstein, Cristina Rodriguez
The Diffuse Executive, Anya Bernstein, Cristina Rodriguez
Fordham Law Review
A unitary executive is an exacting ideal. It asks that all power in an administration be gathered in the person of the President, who should have full authority to determine the actions of officials and employees. Even if the President does not directly control every executive action (how could he?), when officials fail to implement presidential preferences, the unitary theory dictates that the President must have the power to remove them. The model posits a tightly organized hierarchy—every rung implementing the substantive decisions of the rung above, with orders flowing from the top: a command-and-control structure for government action. And, …
Article Iii, The Bill Of Rights, And Administrative Adjudication, John M. Golden, Thomas H. Lee
Article Iii, The Bill Of Rights, And Administrative Adjudication, John M. Golden, Thomas H. Lee
Fordham Law Review
Modern reconsideration of legal constraints on the federal administrative state has commonly focused on agency rulemaking but seems increasingly concerned with agency adjudication. In this Essay, we provide an overview of constitutional issues implicated by administrative adjudication. We specifically explain how and why the so-called public-rights doctrine generally allows federal administrative adjudication outside private-rights actions substantially linked to traditional actions in law, equity, or admiralty. We also discuss how constitutional provisions outside Article III—including Bill of Rights protections of individuals as against the federal government—may nonetheless require a role for Article III courts even in so called public rights cases, …
The Collateral Fallout From The Quest For A Unitary Executive, Harold J. Krent
The Collateral Fallout From The Quest For A Unitary Executive, Harold J. Krent
Fordham Law Review
To bolster a strong “Unitary Executive,” the Roberts Court has held that Congress can neither shield a single head of an administrative agency nor an inferior officer in an independent agency from removal at will. With respect to appointments, the Roberts Court has held that adjudicative officers in many executive agencies must now be appointed either by the President or a superior officer under the President’s supervision. As a result, dissenting Justices and academics have accused the Roberts Court of expanding Article II beyond both the constitutional text—which seemingly grants Congress the discretion to structure administrative agencies as it deems …
Police Officers, Policy, And Personnel Files: Prosecutorial Disclosure Obligations Above And Beyond Brady, Lauren Giles
Police Officers, Policy, And Personnel Files: Prosecutorial Disclosure Obligations Above And Beyond Brady, Lauren Giles
Fordham Law Review
Police officers play a significant role in the criminal trial process and are unlike any other witness who will take the stand. They are trained to testify, and jurors find them more credible than other witnesses, even though officers may have more incentive to lie than the ordinary witness. Despite the role of police officers in criminal proceedings, state statutes say virtually nothing about evidence used to impeach police officers, often contained in the officer’s personnel file. Worse still, the standard for disclosing information in an officer’s personnel file varies among and within states, resulting in inconsistent Brady disclosures. This …
To Mint Or Not To Mint: Non-Fungible Tokens And The Right Of Publicity, Hannah Bobek
To Mint Or Not To Mint: Non-Fungible Tokens And The Right Of Publicity, Hannah Bobek
Fordham Law Review
Non-fungible tokens (NFTs) allow for authentication and ownership of digital assets, which are notable features in the virtual world given the infiniteness of internet content. The emergence of this novel technology, however, has raised challenges, especially regarding enforcement of the right of publicity. This Note addresses how litigators have approached right of publicity violations arising from NFTs and how courts might respond to future violations that this technology is capable of facilitating. Legal scholars and commentators argue that certain features of NFTs pose pronounced threats to the right of publicity, namely the technology’s novelty, democratized nature, anonymization of creators, transferability …
Between Scylla And Charybdis: Addressing Software Patent Eligibility In Early-Stage Litigation, Pooja Krishnan
Between Scylla And Charybdis: Addressing Software Patent Eligibility In Early-Stage Litigation, Pooja Krishnan
Fordham Law Review
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International established a two-step inquiry for determining the eligibility of a patent claim for protection. The test has faced criticism for its inconsistency, particularly when evaluating software-related patents. These inconsistencies are exacerbated when the test is applied during the early stages of litigation to address motions made under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 12(c), as the test often requires an in-depth technical analysis of the claims.
First, this Note examines the current approach to software patent eligibility and the various points of inconsistencies and tension. This Note …
Children Are Constitutionally Different, But Life Without Parole And De Facto Life Sentences Are Not: Extending Graham And Miller To De Facto Life Sentences, Ellen Brink
Fordham Law Review
Under the U.S. Supreme Court’s current juvenile sentencing jurisprudence, a juvenile may legally receive a prison sentence of hundreds of years without parole in instances in which a sentence of life without parole would be unconstitutional. This illogical state of affairs is the result of the Court’s silence on whether its holdings in Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama, which together limit the availability of juvenile life without parole sentences, also apply to so-called de facto life sentences. De facto life sentences are lengthy term-of-years sentences that confine offenders to prison for the majority, if not the entirety, …
Confronting Carpenter: Rethinking The Third-Party Doctrine And Location Information, Charlie Brownstein
Confronting Carpenter: Rethinking The Third-Party Doctrine And Location Information, Charlie Brownstein
Fordham Law Review
The third-party doctrine enables law enforcement officers to obtain personal information shared with third parties without a warrant. In an era of highly accessible technology, individuals’ location information is consistently being transmitted to third parties. Due to the third-party doctrine, this shared information has been available to law enforcement, without the individual knowing or having an opportunity to challenge this availability. Law enforcement has utilized this doctrine to obtain comprehensive information regarding individuals’ whereabouts over long periods of time.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently limited the reach of the third-party doctrine regarding location data held by cellphone providers. However, this …
Misunderstanding Meriwether, Brian Soucek, Ryan Chen
Misunderstanding Meriwether, Brian Soucek, Ryan Chen
Fordham Law Review
Meriwether v. Hartop is widely seen as one of the most important academic freedom and transgender rights cases of recent years. Whether praising it as a victory for free speech or condemning it as a threat to educational equality, commentators across the political spectrum have agreed on one thing: the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit did something big when it held that professors at public universities have a First Amendment right to misgender their students in class. But contrary to popular belief, Meriwether held no such thing. In fact, the Sixth Circuit could not have held what …
Taking Aim At New York's Concealed Carry Improvement Act, Leo Bernabei
Taking Aim At New York's Concealed Carry Improvement Act, Leo Bernabei
Fordham Law Review
In June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court held in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen that New York’s requirement, which mandated that applicants for concealed carry licenses show proper cause for carrying a handgun in public, violated the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. Responding to the likely increase in individuals licensed to carry handguns in the state, New York enacted the Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA). This law bans all firearms from many places of public congregation, establishes a default rule that firearms are not allowed on private property without the owner or lessee’s permission, and sets additional …
Anything But Prideful: Free Speech And Conversion Therapy Bans, State-Federal Action Plans, And Rooting Out Medical Fraud, Jordan Hutt
Fordham Law Review
At a time when conversion therapy might seem archaic to many people, this practice remains prevalent across the United States and finds legal support in the halls of federal courthouses. In 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in Otto v. City of Boca Raton, held that two ordinances banning conversion therapy in Boca Raton and Palm Beach violated First Amendment free speech rights. Specifically, Otto held that conversion therapy bans were content-based restrictions subject to strict scrutiny. Conversely, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Third and Ninth Circuits’ prior decisions upheld conversion therapy bans …
Proceedings At An Impasse: Appealing Fugitive Disentitlement Orders Of International Defendants Under The Collateral Order Doctrine, Parker Siegel
Proceedings At An Impasse: Appealing Fugitive Disentitlement Orders Of International Defendants Under The Collateral Order Doctrine, Parker Siegel
Fordham Law Review
The doctrine of fugitive disentitlement allows federal courts to decline to entertain a defendant’s claims when that defendant is deemed a fugitive from justice. Once disentitled, defendants cannot seek relief from the judicial system until they submit to the court’s jurisdiction. But complications emerge when federal district courts disentitle non–U.S. citizens who reside outside of the United States, who are indicted for alleged misconduct committed abroad, and who attempt to dismiss charges while remaining in their home countries. Federal circuit courts of appeals are split on whether such defendants can appeal from a fugitive disentitlement ruling without submitting to the …
Criminalizing Threats Against Schools: A Divergence Of Mens Rea And Punishment Severity In Recent State Legislation, Max Kaufman
Criminalizing Threats Against Schools: A Divergence Of Mens Rea And Punishment Severity In Recent State Legislation, Max Kaufman
Fordham Law Review
School shootings occur on a regular basis in the United States. Fear of the next school shooting leads schools to take any potential threat of violence seriously, but responding to a threat can be extremely disruptive to a school’s operations and the community that it serves. In the last five years, nine state legislatures have attempted to deter these threats by specifically criminalizing threats of violence against schools.
Despite the proximity in time in which these states enacted school threat statutes, these laws diverge in two important ways: First, the nine statutes employ several different mens rea requirements. Second, these …
The President's Subjective And Objective Legal Obligations, Shalev Gad Roisman
The President's Subjective And Objective Legal Obligations, Shalev Gad Roisman
Fordham Law Review
Congress has granted the President enormous power. This is well known, but how we are to assess the legality of exercises of such power still is not. Put simply, there is no clear framework to understand the legality of presidential exercises of statutory power. Scholars have noticed this and, in response, have largely turned to administrative law for guidance. This turn to administrative law is somewhat intuitive but misguided.
Administrative law is a highly reticulated body of law that has developed over decades to regulate executive branch agencies, not the President. It has focused on legitimizing agency power in the …
Manufacturing Uncertainty In Constitutional Law, Ari Ezra Waldman
Manufacturing Uncertainty In Constitutional Law, Ari Ezra Waldman
Fordham Law Review
Civil rights litigation is awash in misinformation. Litigants have argued that abortion causes cancer, that gender-affirming hormone therapy for adolescents is irreversible, and that in-person voter fraud is a massive problem. But none of that is true. The conventional scholarly account about law and misinformation, disinformation, and dubious claims of fact focuses on the power of legislatures and amici to engage in perfunctory fact-finding and to rely on “alternative facts” or outright falsehoods to justify laws that harm and restrict the rights of marginalized populations. At the same time, the literature suggests that judges and the law are inundated with …
Ripple Effect: The Sec's Major Questions Doctrine Problem, Matt Donovan
Ripple Effect: The Sec's Major Questions Doctrine Problem, Matt Donovan
Fordham Law Review
Crypto assets and blockchain technology have the potential to create unprecedented equitable access to financial institutions. Despite this potential, there is a robust debate regarding federal agencies’ jurisdiction over the novel asset class. Without clear statutory guidelines, federal agencies have been forced to resolve this debate through the rulemaking process. However, agency rules regarding jurisdiction over crypto assets could be scrutinized by a reviewing court under the major questions doctrine. Once highly deferential to agency rules, the U.S. Supreme Court in recent terms has repeatedly struck down agency rules when an agency claims an unheralded power to regulate an issue …
Close Enough To Stand?: Reconsidering The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act's Relationship With The Right To Privacy, Ryan Karerat
Close Enough To Stand?: Reconsidering The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act's Relationship With The Right To Privacy, Ryan Karerat
Fordham Law Review
With the passage of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) in 1977, Congress created a private right of action through which consumers could sue debt collectors for overzealous and improper conduct traceable to their debt collection efforts. FDCPA violations can abridge a consumer’s rights under the statute without producing tangible economic or physical injury. As a result, many plaintiffs bringing claims under the FDCPA plead different theories of intangible harm to establish the required injury in fact conferring Article III standing to file suit in federal court. To establish that they have suffered an injury in fact, a plaintiff …
Dirty Dancing: Is The Texas Two-Step A Bad Faith Filing?, Katharine H. O'Neill
Dirty Dancing: Is The Texas Two-Step A Bad Faith Filing?, Katharine H. O'Neill
Fordham Law Review
The Texas Two-Step is both a style of line dancing and a legal maneuver used by several large, profitable companies to enable a newly created entity to access the bankruptcy system and, thus, discharge the tort liabilities of its predecessor. This type of filing has been criticized by some as a tool used by healthy companies to evade responsibility for their tortious conduct and lauded by others as an efficient means to achieve a global resolution of crushing mass tort liability. Whether Texas Two-Step filings may properly access the bankruptcy courts is a question governed by § 1112(b) of the …
Bridging The Ai Inventorship Gap, Jeffrey Wu
Bridging The Ai Inventorship Gap, Jeffrey Wu
Fordham Law Review
In Thaler v. Vidal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that an artificial intelligence (AI) machine cannot be an inventor under patent law. This decision leaves open the question of whether a natural person can be the legal inventor of AI-generated inventions. This is a pressing question because it decides whether AI-generated inventions are patentable, as no patent rights can exist without an inventor.
Scholars have proposed two doctrines that might resolve this question: (1) the doctrine of simultaneous conception and reduction to practice and (2) the doctrine of first to recognize and appreciate. This …
Dual Sovereignty In The U.S. Territories, Emmanuel Hiram Arnaud
Dual Sovereignty In The U.S. Territories, Emmanuel Hiram Arnaud
Fordham Law Review
This Essay examines the emergence and application of the "ultimate source" test and sheds light on the dual sovereign doctrine’s patently colonial framework, particularly highlighting the paternalistic relationship it has produced between federal and territorial prosecutorial authorities.
Judicial Antifederalism, Anthony M. Ciolli
Judicial Antifederalism, Anthony M. Ciolli
Fordham Law Review
The United States has a colonies problem. The more than 3.5 million Americans who live in the U.S. territories of American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands lack some of the most fundamental rights and protections, such as the right to vote. This is due to a series of decisions decided more than a century ago, collectively known as the Insular Cases, in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that the “half-civilized,” “savage,” “ignorant and lawless” “alien races” that inhabited America’s overseas territories were not entitled to the same constitutional rights and …
Concepts Of Citizenship In The Controversy About Constitutional Citizenship For People Born In U.S. Territories, Janet M. Calvo
Concepts Of Citizenship In The Controversy About Constitutional Citizenship For People Born In U.S. Territories, Janet M. Calvo
Fordham Law Review
In 2019, the District of Utah in Fitisemanu v. United States rejected the Insular Cases and held that persons born in American Samoa acquired Fourteenth Amendment constitutional citizenship at birth. The Tenth Circuit reversed through an analysis that attempted to “repurpose” the Insular Cases. This Essay discusses the differing concepts of citizenship presented in Fitisemanu, which raise significant questions about the nature and import of American constitutional citizenship. The Supreme Court’s recent denial of certiorari in Fitisemanu unfortunately leaves these questions unresolved, further continuing the second-class status of individuals born in the territories and underscores the uncertainty of …