Law Commons^™

Red Scare Or Red Herring: How The “China Initiative” Strategy For Non-Traditional Collectors Is Stifling Innovation In The United States, Bianca Tillman

Seattle Journal of Technology, Environmental & Innovation Law

In 2018, the U.S. Department of Justice launched the “China Initiative” in response to the growing economic and national security threat posed by China. The China Initiative is a sweeping federal plan designed, in part, to protect the United States’ status as a leader in global innovation and scientific discourse. The U.S. is justified in its concern over China’s unfair practices to achieve military, technological, and economic prominence. While U.S. and Chinese intelligence agencies have spied on each other for decades, China has increased both the scope and the sophistication of its efforts to steal secrets from the U.S. in …

“A Climate Of Lawlessness”: Upholding A Government’S Affirmative Duty To Protect The Environment Using Deshaney’S Special Relationship Exception, Katherine G. Horner

Journal of Law and Policy

The Industrial Revolution introduced an era of exceptional technological advances. However, it also led to rampant environmental pollution and degradation. The proliferation of toxic pollutants in the air, water and soil has led us to the precipice of an unimaginable future; a future defined by climate change. This Note argues for the use of the special relationship exception, affirmed by the Supreme Court in DeShaney v. Winnebago, in environmental litigation in order to uphold governments’ affirmative duty to protect the environment. As federal and state governments have the sole power to regulate environmental pollution and enforce environmental protections, individuals are …

Splendid Isolation: Va’S Failure To Provide Due Process Protections And Access To Justice To Veterans And Their Caregivers, Yelena Duterte

Journal of Law and Policy

Imagine you are a spouse and caregiver of a severely injured post-9/11 veteran. Your spouse served in the Marine Corps, with several deployments to Iraq. During their last deployment, your spouse sustained a severe traumatic brain injury and suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder. Due to these injuries, they need consistent care throughout the day. Thankfully, upon their return, the VA provided a caregiver program that allowed you to step away from your job and focus on caring for your spouse full time. As part of this program, you received a caregiver stipend of $2,400 per month, healthcare, and support from …

Brave New World: A Post-Coronavirus Perspective On Trade, Kevin J. Fandl

Journal of Law and Policy

Trade policy during the Obama Administration largely reflected the pinnacle of the globalist moment in history. The dream of global peace through economic security was on the cusp of being achieved, with a comprehensive set of trade alliances linking countries both economically and politically to one another, a worldwide system of rules which nearly all countries abided in their economic relationships, and a deeply integrated global supply chain that not only enabled companies to satisfy consumer demands at exceedingly low cost and rapid development, but also empowered more and more workers in poor countries to join the global economy. This …

A Constitutional Right To A Functioning United States Government? Are Government Shutdowns Unconstitutional?, Allen Shoenberger

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

The Weaponization Of The “Alien Harboring” Statute In A New-Era Of Racial Animus Towards Immigrants, Hannah Hamley

Seattle University Law Review

Federal law 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii), commonly referred to as the “Alien Harboring” statute, was passed sixty-eight years ago and has been used as a weapon against immigrants and their allies. Spanning back decades, numerous scholars, alarmed by the dangerous use of the statute, have written about its muddled congressional intent and the unclear definition of “harboring.” These issues continue to be relevant and are foundational concerns with the enforcement of the harboring statute. However, in the era of President Donald J. Trump, we are faced with a new danger. We are confronted with an Administration that is ferociously anti-immigrant …

Enough Is As Good As A Feast, Noah C. Chauvin

Seattle University Law Review

Ipse Dixit, the podcast on legal scholarship, provides a valuable service to the legal community and particularly to the legal academy. The podcast’s hosts skillfully interview guests about their legal and law-related scholarship, helping those guests communicate their ideas clearly and concisely. In this review essay, I argue that Ipse Dixit has made a major contribution to legal scholarship by demonstrating in its interview episodes that law review articles are neither the only nor the best way of communicating scholarly ideas. This contribution should be considered “scholarship,” because one of the primary goals of scholarship is to communicate new ideas.

Government Tweets, Government Speech: The First Amendment Implications Of Government Trolling, Douglas B. Mckechnie

Seattle University Law Review

President Trump has been accused of using @realDonaldTrump to troll his critics. While the President’s tweets are often attributed to his personal views, they raise important Constitutional questions. This article posits that @realDonaldTrump tweets are government speech and, where they troll government critics, they violate the Free Speech Clause. I begin the article with an exploration of President Trump’s use of @realDonaldTrump from his time as a private citizen to President. The article then chronicles the development of the government speech doctrine and the Supreme Court’s factors that differentiate private speech from government speech. I argue that, based on the …

Court-Packing In 2021: Pathways To Democratic Legitimacy, Richard Mailey

Seattle University Law Review

This Article asks whether the openness to court-packing expressed by a number of Democratic presidential candidates (e.g., Pete Buttigieg) is democratically defensible. More specifically, it asks whether it is possible to break the apparent link between demagogic populism and court-packing, and it examines three possible ways of doing this via Bruce Ackerman’s dualist theory of constitutional moments—a theory which offers the possibility of legitimating problematic pathways to constitutional change on democratic but non-populist grounds. In the end, the Article suggests that an Ackermanian perspective offers just one, extremely limited pathway to democratically legitimate court-packing in 2021: namely, where a Democratic …

Winners And Losers In The American Political Debates Of The Nation’S Health: An Ethical And Moral Dilemma, Dr. Sheila P. Davis

Journal of Health Ethics

The third and final issue of the Online Journal of Health Ethics for 2020 presents two poignant articles that are rankled with current health ethics and moral issues as the world races to a resolve for the COVID pandemic. There appears to be no easy, quick-fix solutions to the pandemic that has claimed over 1.11 million lives worldwide in this first wave. The Gellert article addresses his view of the U.S. government’s political response and the Gunn article presents an ethical perspective of the emerging promised vaccine to halt the virus.

David Versus Godzilla: Bigger Stones, Jerry Ellig, Richard Williams

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

For four decades, U.S. Presidents have issued executive orders requiring agencies to conduct comprehensive regulatory impact analysis (RIA) for significant regulations to ensure that regulatory decisions solve social problems in a cost-beneficial manner. Yet experience demonstrates that agency RIAs often fail to live up to the standards enunciated in executive orders and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) oversees agency compliance with the executive orders, but OIRA is about half the size it was when it was established in 1980. Regulatory agency staff outnumber OIRA staff by a ratio of 3600 …

It Is Time To Get Back To Basics On The Border, Donna Coltharp

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

Jail By Another Name: Ice Detention Of Immigrant Criminal Defendants On Pretrial Release, Kerry Martin

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

This Article assesses the legality of an alarming practice: Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) routinely detains noncitizen criminal defendants soon after they have been released on bail, depriving them of their court-ordered freedom. Since the District of Oregon’s decision in United States v. Trujillo-Alvarez, 900 F. Supp. 2d 1167 (D. Or. 2012), a growing group of federal courts has held that when ICE detains federal criminal defendants released under the Bail Reform Act (BRA), it violates their BRA rights. These courts have ordered that the government either free the defendants from ICE custody or dismiss their criminal charges. This …

Rethinking The Federal Courts: Why Now Is Time For Congress To Revisit The Number Of Judges That Sit On Federal Appellate Panels, Mitchell W. Bild

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

The Trump Administration Should Have Attorney Whistleblowers, Carliss N. Chatman

SMU Law Review Forum

No abstract provided.

Court Expansion And The Restoration Of Democracy: The Case For Constitutional Hardball, Aaron Belkin

Pepperdine Law Review

Neither electoral politics, norms preservation, nor modest good government reform can restore the political system because they cannot mitigate the primary threat to the American democracy, Republican radicalism. Those who believe otherwise fail to appreciate how and why radicalism will continue to impede democratic restoration regardless of what happens at the ballot box, misdiagnose the underlying factors that produce and sustain GOP radicalism, and under-estimate the degree of democratic deterioration that has already taken place. Republicans do not need to prevail in every election to forestall the restoration of democracy or to prevent Democrats from governing. The only viable path …

A Call For America's Law Professors To Oppose Court-Packing, Bruce Ledewitz

Pepperdine Law Review

A Court-packing proposal is imminent. Mainstream Democratic Party Presidential Candidates are already supporting it. The number of Justices on the Supreme Court has been set at nine since 1869, but this is merely a statutory requirement. As soon as Democrats regain control of the Presidency and the Congress, Court-packing will be on the agenda, either expressly or under the guise of Court-reform. Now is the time for the American legal academy to join together to oppose this threat. Court-packing would threaten democracy, destroy the rule of law and undermine judicial independence. It is a pointless and unnecessary reaction born of …

The Kavanaugh Court And The Schechter-To-Chevron Spectrum: How The New Supreme Court Will Make The Administrative State More Democratically Accountable, Justin Walker

Indiana Law Journal

In a typical year, Congress passes roughly 800 pages of law—that’s about a seveninch

stack of paper. But in the same year, federal administrative agencies promulgate

80,000 pages of regulations—which makes an eleven-foot paper pillar. This move

toward electorally unaccountable administrators deciding federal policy began in

1935, accelerated in the 1940s, and has peaked in the recent decades. Rather than

elected representatives, unelected bureaucrats increasingly make the vast majority

of the nation’s laws—a trend facilitated by the Supreme Court’s decisions in three

areas: delegation, deference, and independence.

This trend is about to be reversed. In the coming years, Congress will …

A Survivor's Perspective: Federal Judicial Selection From George Bush To Donald Trump, Leslie H. Southwick

Notre Dame Law Review

Over recent decades, federal judicial selection controversies are worsening in their frequency and intensity. They distort all three branches of government. My particular concern is with federal judicial selection for judgeships below the Olympian heights of those on the United States Supreme Court, namely, the judges on the twelve regional circuit courts of appeals and the ninety-four district courts.

The depth of partisan acrimony over judicial confirmations has placed us in the infernal regions, and we seem to be continuing our descent. Analyzing how we got there is invariably affected by the biases, or more gently, by the perspectives of …

Understanding The Spirit Of The Constitution On Corruption: Emoluments, Impeachment, And The Primacy Of Political Virtue, Lea Mano

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

“Opening The Door” To Presidential Press Conferences: A Framework For The Right Of Press Access, Alexandria R. Taylor

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

Since President Donald Trump took office in 2017, there has been tension between the White House and the press. While this tension has been present in prior presidencies, its current manifestation raises important First Amendment issues. This Note discusses the limitations of the President to restrict the press’s right of First Amendment access to presidential press conferences. After delving into the Supreme Court’s development and recognition of the press’s right of access and how the lower courts have interpreted this right, this Note proposes a framework to analyze the press’s right of access and addresses the question of when and …

Remarks: "When They Go Low, We Go Local" Strategies For Pursuing Dc Democracy In The Age Of Trump, Jon S. Bouker Esq.

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

Remarks of Jon S. Bouker, Esq., Chair, DC Appleseed Center for Law and Justice, at the University of the District of Columbia, David A. Clarke School of Law, Law Review Symposium, DC Democracy During the Time of Trump: 51 and 45.

2017 Keynote Speech: Dc Democracy During The Time Of Trump: 51 And 45!, Wade Henderson

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

Keynote speech of Wade Henderson at the University of the District of Columbia, David A. Clarke School of Law, Law Review Symposium, DC Democracy During the Time of Trump: 51 and 45.

The Politics Of Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Risky Bet For Environmental Law And Policy In Brazil, Julio Borges

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

Seeking to disseminate cost-benefit analysis as part of a global agenda of reforms on regulatory policy, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (“OECD”) has advocated this economic tool to all its member countries. A key partner of that international organization since 2007, Brazil officially sought in 2017 to be a permanent OECD member, which means accepting orientation from that organization on policy reforms, namely regulatory policy. This Article disagrees with OECD’s recommendation because traditional cost-benefit analysis has been technically flawed and politically biased towards a deregulatory agenda. The purpose of this Article, therefore, is to analyze the potential impacts …

Minority Vetoes In Consociational Legislatures: Ultimately Weaponized?, Devin Haymond

Indiana Journal of Constitutional Design

In societies emerging from or at risk for conflict, dividing power among rival groups—called power-sharing—can be an appropriate arrangement to maintaining peace. But how can groups, who are often emerging from violent conflict, trust sharing a government with rival groups that were just recently shooting at them?

A potential solution is the minority veto, which is allows minority groups to block the government from harming those groups’ vital interests. But what sorts of change blocking mechanisms constitute a minority veto? Who gets the veto power, and when can they be used? Do minority vetoes function as effective incentives for ensuring …

Fee Shifting: A Proposal To Solve Maine’S Intractable Access To Justice Problem, Donald F. Fontaine

Maine Law Review

The Maine Legislature should enact a new statute to award attorney’s fees in civil cases to poor litigants against their opponents. Under the proposed statute the opponent must be a corporation or other legal entity and the poor litigant must be the prevailing party in the case. The statute proposed is needed because multiple studies show that there has been an unrelenting decline during the last four decades of the poor’s access to justice. Their numbers increase and the support of the federal government declines. For those who find themselves in legal positions opposing the poor, there is little deterrent …

Correcting Judicial Errors: Lessons From History, Louis Fisher

Maine Law Review

On June 18, 2018, the Supreme Court in Trump v. Hawaii finally acknowledged that its decision in Korematsu v. United States (1944) was in error. It took seventy-four years to make that admission, even though it was widely recognized by scholars and a congressional commission that the decision was fundamentally defective. In the 1936 Curtiss-Wright decision, the Court completely misinterpreted a speech by John Marshall when he served in the House of Representatives. Although he referred to the President as “the sole organ of the nation in its external relations,” he never argued that the President controlled all of foreign …

Resolving Alj Removal Protections Problem Following Lucia, Spencer Davenport

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

When the Supreme Court decided Lucia v. SEC and held that administrative law judges (ALJs) are Officers under the Constitution, the Court opened a flood of constitutional issues around the status of ALJs and related government positions. One central issue relates to ALJs’ removal protections. ALJs currently have two layers of protection between them and the President. In an earlier Supreme Court decision, the Court held that two layers of tenure protection between an “Officer of the United States” and the President was unconstitutional as it deprived the President the power to hold his officers accountable. As impartial adjudicators, ALJs …

Out Of Options: The Obstructions Hindering Victims Of Non-State Actor Violence Under Current Asylum Law, Kenneth D. Law Jr.

Brooklyn Law Review

Each year tens of thousands of immigrants head to the United States’ shores in the hope of achieving their version of the “American Dream.” This dream is now more elusive than it has ever been due to the Trump Administration’s attempts to limit legal migration by, to an extent, removing certain avenues of entry. Specifically, the Trump Administration severely hindered the ability of victims of domestic and gang violence to apply for one of the few forms of relief afforded to them: asylum. This note analyzes how decisions such as former Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ opinion in Matter of A-B- …