Law Commons^™

A Vicious Cycle: United States’ Failure To Protect Immigrant Women’S Reproductive Rights At The Irwin County Detention Center, Lizet Palomera Torres

Golden Gate University Law Review

The United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) detained Jane Doe #15, an immigrant woman, at the Irwin County Detention Center (ICDC) in Georgia. During Jane’s time at ICDC, Doctor Mahendra Amin hastily examined her because she was experiencing severe pain in her pelvic area. Abandoning established professional and legal protocols for diagnosis and treatment, the medical staff scheduled Jane for surgery. Jane did not know what to expect from the surgery or what the medical personnel would do. After the surgery, the staff at ICDC neglected Jane’s care. She could not get out of bed on her own; …

Case Summary: Dr. Seuss Enterprises V. Comicmix Llc: Ninth Circuit Affirms Copyright Fair Use And Trademark Infringement Precedents

Golden Gate University Law Review

More than twenty years ago, in Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. v. Penguin Books USA, Inc., the Ninth Circuit favored Seuss, concluding that The Cat NOT in the Hat!, a self-described “parody” of The Cat in the Hat, did not represent “fair use” of the children’s book under the Copyright Act. In 2019, Seuss entered litigation with ComicMix, the creator of Oh, the Places You’ll Boldly Go!

(“Boldly”), another self-proclaimed parody of the Dr. Seuss classic Oh, the Places You’ll Go! (“Go!”). The case presented a set of facts strikingly similar to those in …

Dyroff V. Ultimate Software Group, Inc.: A Reminder Of The Broad Scope Of § 230 Immunity, Alex S. Rifkind

Golden Gate University Law Review

Part I of this Note examines the factual and procedural history of Dyroff and discusses the Ninth Circuit’s application of § 230 immunity in the case. Part II outlines the history of the CDA and examines how the federal courts have interpreted § 230 immunity leading up to its application in Dyroff. Part III discusses judicial interpretation of the scope of § 230 immunity. Lastly, Part IV argues that the Ninth Circuit correctly applied the law in the Dyroff decision, but failed to adequately define the term content-neutral. Further, by not defining what falls within the scope of content-neutral, the …

Gagged By Big Ag: Whistleblower Silencing Bill Threatens The Employee’S Right To Uncover Workplace Wrongdoing, Tara Cooley

Golden Gate University Law Review

This Comment analyzes the court’s application of the standing doctrine in PETA v. Stein to demonstrate that the dismissal of a challenge to a whistleblower silencing statute because the plaintiff lacked standing is detrimental to First Amendment rights. This Comment argues that a relaxed standing requirement must be applied to future pre-enforcement challenges of legislation that aims to silence whistleblowers, and therefore chills First Amendment rights.

Part I examines the court’s relaxed application of the standing requirement to criminal statutes that chill First Amendment rights. Part II argues for a relaxed application of the standing requirement to whistleblower silencing statutes, …

Nordstrom V. Ryan: Inmate’S Legal Correspondence Between His Or Her Attorney Is Still Constitutionally Protected, Christina Ontiveros

Golden Gate University Law Review

Prison administrations have been given much deference as to the limitations of prisoners’ rights. Still, even though the courts have shown regard to the prison administration, they have also recognized that there are two important interests at play: those of the prison administration and that of the prisoners’ constitutional rights. Because there are two important interests at play when an issue arises as to a prison’s regulation and its effect on a prisoner’s constitutional right, the courts turn to the Turner standard to determine the regulation’s constitutionality. Recently, the Ninth Circuit used this standard in Nordstrom v. Ryan to determine …

C.R. Ex Rel. Rainville V. Eugene School District 4j: Slowly Expanding A School’S Ability To Reach Off-Campus Speech, Mary R. Loung

Golden Gate University Law Review

The United States Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law to all citizens regardless of race, color, religion, and gender. However, there are special circumstances when constitutional rights can be restricted. The First Amendment rights of public school students fall under one of these special circumstances. While parents have a responsibility to care for, protect, and discipline their child, the responsibility transfers to the school’s in loco parentis authority when the child becomes a student under their supervision. The salient issue then becomes how to determine when the school’s authority begins and ends. The Ninth Circuit’s decision in C.R. ex …

Anti-Slapp Confabulation & The Government Speech Doctrine, Steven J. Andre

Golden Gate University Law Review

NOTE: The attached article is an updated version of the print edition, 9Dec2014.

California was the first state to find judicial acceptance of the notion that government may avail itself of anti-SLAPP protections against private citizens who petition for redress of grievances. It is the purpose of this article to explore the judicial entrenchment of such a misguided balancing of government interests against constitutional rights, and to illustrate why it is shortsighted and a very harmful misinterpretation of otherwise very worthy and beneficial statutes.