Law Commons^™

The Fresh Start Paradox: Economic Disaster Relief Available To Title 11 Debtors, Kellsie Davis Ruane

Emory Bankruptcy Developments Journal

The Small Business Administration (“SBA”) has been providing disaster relief in the form of Economic Injury Disaster Loans (“EIDLs”) since its inception in 1953. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the CARES Act charged the SBA with issuing forgivable loans through the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) to small businesses which would otherwise face permanent closure. Though the CARES Act did not specifically grant the SBA authority to do so, the SBA interpreted its powers to include the ability to set requirements for loan approval which were not laid out in the Act itself. Specifically, the SBA promulgated a rule …

Is "Public Company" Still A Viable Regulatory Category?, George S. Georgiev

Faculty Articles

This Article suggests that the ubiquitous “public company” regulatory category, as currently constructed, has outlived its effectiveness in fulfilling core goals of the modern administrative state. An ever-expanding array of federal economic regulation hinges on public company status, but “public company” differs from most other regulatory categories in that it requires an affirmative opt-in by the subject entity. In practice, firms today become subject to public company regulation only if they need access to the public capital markets, which is much less of a business imperative than it once was due to the proliferation of private financing options. Paradoxically, then, …

Off-Label Speech, David A. Simon

Emory Law Journal

This Article argues that the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) should regulate drug manufacturer speech about off-label uses based on the evidentiary support for the relevant use. The more evidence that an off-label use is safe and effective, the less restrictive the regulation should be. The less evidence that an off-label use is safe and effective, the more restrictive the regulation should be. Although intuitive, this is not exactly how current regulation of off-label information works. If the FDA approves a drug, the manufacturer can advertise to doctors and patients for the approved indication. Drug manufacturers cannot, however, promote or …

How They Get Away With Murder: The Intersection Of Capital Punishment, Prosecutor Misconduct, And Systemic Injustice, Rushton Davis Pope

Emory Law Journal

Black defendants are executed at a disproportionately high rate, an injustice quietly persisting in the shadow of America’s dark history of slavery and Jim Crow. While a variety of intersectional factors have perpetuated this injustice, the role of prosecutors who commit misconduct to secure a conviction is significant. Defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty, but when the prosecutors who carry the burden of proving that guilt choose not to play by the rules, they wantonly and recklessly embrace the risk of convicting—even killing—an innocent person.

This Comment focuses on two primary forms of prosecutor misconduct: Batson violations that occur …

Jackpot! The Gambler’S Chance To Win Big Through Rico: The Definitive Argument Of Liability Against The Gambling Industry, Anna Lu

Emory Law Journal

Compulsive gamblers and their family members have had a long, unsuccessful history of lawsuits against the gambling industry in the United States. With the emergence of online gambling and sports betting, the gambling industry is becoming less and less regulated, preying on compulsive gamblers and nurturing their addiction for profit. Although gambling is diagnosed as a legitimate addiction disorder in medicine, the law has been slow and even reluctant to recognize and grant legal protection to addicted gambler plaintiffs. However, the recent wave of litigation brought against a similar addiction-for-profit industry, the opioid industry, seems to suggest there is an …

Sovereign Immunity Tests Bankruptcy’S Least Contested Axioms, Deborah L. Thorne, Luke L. Sperduto

Emory Bankruptcy Developments Journal

Section 106 of the Bankruptcy Code expressly abrogates the sovereign immunity of governmental units with respect to fifty-nine other provisions of the Code. There are currently two distinct issues splitting circuit courts over the meaning of this provision. First, does section 106 waive the sovereign immunity of the Internal Revenue Service in avoidance actions brought against it by a bankruptcy trustee under section 544(b)? Second, are Native American Indian Tribes “governmental units” within the meaning of section 101(27), such that their sovereign immunity is abrogated to the extent set forth in section 106? Invoking conventional canons of statutory construction, this …