Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Seattle University School of Law (38)
- Cleveland State University (14)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (11)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (9)
- Brooklyn Law School (6)
-
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (6)
- University of Colorado Law School (6)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (5)
- Notre Dame Law School (5)
- Mississippi College School of Law (4)
- Pepperdine University (4)
- St. Mary's University (4)
- William & Mary Law School (4)
- Emory University School of Law (3)
- Fordham Law School (3)
- University of Washington School of Law (3)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (3)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (2)
- James Madison University (1)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- Mitchell Hamline School of Law (1)
- Roger Williams University (1)
- SJ Quinney College of Law, University of Utah (1)
- University of Georgia School of Law (1)
- University of Michigan Law School (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- University of Richmond (1)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- Supreme Court (17)
- Abortion (10)
- Law (10)
- Affirmative Action (7)
- Felix Frankfurter (7)
-
- SFFA (6)
- Democracy (5)
- Diversity (5)
- Dobbs (5)
- First Amendment (5)
- Brad Snyder (4)
- Civil rights (4)
- Constitutional Law (4)
- Constitutional law (4)
- Judicial restraint (4)
- Democratic Justice (3)
- Due process (3)
- ESG (3)
- Education (3)
- Jurisprudence (3)
- Legal judgments (3)
- Marbury v. Madison (3)
- Supreme court (3)
- U.S. Supreme Court (3)
- Administrative state (2)
- Affirmative action (2)
- Article III (2)
- Bankruptcy Code (2)
- Capital punishment (2)
- Chevron USA Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council Inc. (2)
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (38)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (11)
- Touro Law Review (9)
- Cleveland State Law Review (7)
- Journal of Law and Health (7)
-
- Brooklyn Law Review (6)
- University of Cincinnati Law Review (6)
- University of Colorado Law Review (6)
- Northwestern University Law Review (5)
- Mississippi College Law Review (4)
- Notre Dame Law Review (4)
- Pepperdine Law Review (4)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (4)
- Fordham Law Review (3)
- Villanova Environmental Law Journal (3)
- Catholic University Law Review (2)
- Emory Bankruptcy Developments Journal (2)
- Washington Journal of Social & Environmental Justice (2)
- William & Mary Law Review (2)
- Emory International Law Review (1)
- Georgia Law Review (1)
- Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality (1)
- James Madison Undergraduate Research Journal (JMURJ) (1)
- Journal of Legislation (1)
- Michigan Law Review (1)
- Mitchell Hamline Law Review (1)
- Nevada Law Journal (1)
- Roger Williams University Law Review (1)
- University of Richmond Law Review (1)
- Utah Law Review (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 140
Full-Text Articles in Law
Better Late Than Never: Climate Displacement And The Case For Expanding Temporary Protected Status, Anna C. Cincotta
Better Late Than Never: Climate Displacement And The Case For Expanding Temporary Protected Status, Anna C. Cincotta
Villanova Environmental Law Journal
No abstract provided.
The Modern Energizer Bunny-Hopping Into The Nuclear Energy Revolution: The Tenth Circuit's Analysis In New Mexico Ex Rel.Balderas V. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Jack A. Mansur
Villanova Environmental Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Houston, We Have A Problem: The D.C. Circuit Closes Pathway To National Judicial Review In Sierra Club V. Environmental Protection Agency, Alison O. Moyer
Houston, We Have A Problem: The D.C. Circuit Closes Pathway To National Judicial Review In Sierra Club V. Environmental Protection Agency, Alison O. Moyer
Villanova Environmental Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Era Of Confusion: The State Of Patent Eligibility Jurisprudence And The Need For Intervention, Alyssa Boggs
Era Of Confusion: The State Of Patent Eligibility Jurisprudence And The Need For Intervention, Alyssa Boggs
St. Mary's Law Journal
No abstract provided.
The Poor Man's Problem In Bankruptcy, Rylee Stanley
The Poor Man's Problem In Bankruptcy, Rylee Stanley
St. Mary's Law Journal
No abstract provided.
From College Campus To Corner Office: The Impact Of Sffa V. Harvard On Voluntary Affirmative Action Programs, Ellen Whitehair
From College Campus To Corner Office: The Impact Of Sffa V. Harvard On Voluntary Affirmative Action Programs, Ellen Whitehair
University of Cincinnati Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Toothless Tcpa: An Analysis Of Article Iii Standing, Personal Jurisdiction, And The Disjuncture Problem’S Impact On The Efficacy Of The Telephone Consumer Protection Act, Sebastian W. Johnson
A Toothless Tcpa: An Analysis Of Article Iii Standing, Personal Jurisdiction, And The Disjuncture Problem’S Impact On The Efficacy Of The Telephone Consumer Protection Act, Sebastian W. Johnson
University of Cincinnati Law Review
No abstract provided.
Parental Rights Or Political Ploys? Unraveling The Deceptive Threads Of Modern “Parental Rights” Legislation, Cecilia Giles
Parental Rights Or Political Ploys? Unraveling The Deceptive Threads Of Modern “Parental Rights” Legislation, Cecilia Giles
University of Cincinnati Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Rights And Retrenchment: The Elusive Promise Of Equal Citizenship, Deborah L. Brake
Constitutional Rights And Retrenchment: The Elusive Promise Of Equal Citizenship, Deborah L. Brake
University of Cincinnati Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Vagueness Of The Independent State Legislature Doctrine, Jason Marisam
The Vagueness Of The Independent State Legislature Doctrine, Jason Marisam
Washington and Lee Law Review Online
The Independent State Legislature (ISL) Theory has been one of the hottest topics in election law, with conservative thinkers championing a strong version of the theory. In Moore v. Harper, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to turn this controversial theory into actual doctrine. The Court, though, declined to adopt a maximalist version of the theory and declined to reject it outright. Instead, it offered a vague standard that gives close to zero guidance as to where, between these two poles, the doctrine sits. Several scholars and commentators have responded to the opinion with a mix of relief, because the …
Agency Deference After Loper: Expertise As A Casualty Of A War Against The “Administrative State”, Michael M. Epstein
Agency Deference After Loper: Expertise As A Casualty Of A War Against The “Administrative State”, Michael M. Epstein
Brooklyn Law Review
Chevron deference has been a foundational principle for administrative law for decades. Chevron provided a two-step analysis for determining whether an agency would be given deference in its decision-making. This deferential test finds its legitimacy on the grounds of agency expertise and accountability. However, when the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in Loper Bright Enterprise v. Raimondo, it positioned itself to potentially overrule or severely limit Chevron. An overruling of Chevron would place judicial deference to administrative agency decisions in peril by allowing courts to substitute their own views over the informed opinions of agency experts. This …
Clarett, Moultrie, And Applying The Nonstatutory Labor Exemption To Professional Sports’ Draft Eligibility Rules, Mathew Santoyo
Clarett, Moultrie, And Applying The Nonstatutory Labor Exemption To Professional Sports’ Draft Eligibility Rules, Mathew Santoyo
Brooklyn Law Review
Collective bargaining is the mechanism by which major sports leagues and their players unions have negotiated the terms and conditions of employment for many decades. One standard provision of these collective bargaining agreements is a draft eligibility rule governing the conditions by which prospective athletes are eligible for the league’s entry draft. These collective bargaining agreements exists at the intersection of two somewhat discordant areas of law: antitrust and labor law. Under antitrust law, Congress enacted a policy favoring competition and prohibiting unreasonable restraints on trade. On the other hand, under labor law, Congress enacted a policy favoring collective bargaining. …
When Life Takes Your Lemons: Resolving The Legislative Prayer Debate In School Board Settings In Light Of Kennedy V. Bremerton School District, Jordan Halper
Brooklyn Law Review
The COVID-19 pandemic fanned the flames of a fire that had been slowly but steadily burning since 2016, arming the loudest warriors of America’s endless culture war with a slew of new divisive issues. Virtually overnight, parental rights groups began capitalizing on the frustration in their communities in order to spur political change, training their ire toward public schools. What began as a crusade against mask mandates and vaccines manifested into a well-funded effort by ultraconservative groups to undermine the public education system as a whole. Against this backdrop, the legislative prayer exception—which was meant to sanction the practice of …
The Major Questions Doctrine’S Domain, Todd Phillips, Beau J. Baumann
The Major Questions Doctrine’S Domain, Todd Phillips, Beau J. Baumann
Brooklyn Law Review
In West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court elevated the major questions doctrine to new heights by reframing it as a substantive canon and clear statement rule rooted in the separation of powers. The academic response has missed two unanswered questions that will determine the extent of the doctrine’s domain. First, how will the Court apply the doctrine to a range of different regulatory schemes? The doctrine has so far only been applied to nationwide legislative rules that are both (1) economically or politically significant and (2) transformative. It is unclear whether the doctrine applies to alternative modes of regulation …
From Poll Tests To The Purcell Doctrine: Merrill V. Milligan And The Precarious Preservation Of Voting Rights, Charis Franklin
From Poll Tests To The Purcell Doctrine: Merrill V. Milligan And The Precarious Preservation Of Voting Rights, Charis Franklin
Fordham Law Review
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 (“the Voting Rights Act”) is one of the primary vehicles by which plaintiffs receive injunctive relief ahead of elections. More specifically, § 2 of the Voting Rights Act allows plaintiffs to challenge gerrymandered maps before they are used in contentious elections. However, Justice Kavanaugh’s reframing of the Purcell doctrine in Merrill v. Milligan weakened § 2’s ability to interrupt the use of these maps. This Note discusses how Justice Kavanaugh’s interpretation of the Purcell doctrine recenters the doctrine on bureaucratic inconvenience rather than voter enfranchisement, restricting voters’ access to relief prior to elections. Furthermore, …
The Anti-Innovation Supreme Court: Major Questions, Delegation, Chevron, And More, Jack M. Beermann
The Anti-Innovation Supreme Court: Major Questions, Delegation, Chevron, And More, Jack M. Beermann
William & Mary Law Review
The Supreme Court of the United States has generally been a very aggressive enforcer of legal limitations on governmental power. In various periods in its history, the Court has gone far beyond enforcing clearly expressed and easily ascertainable constitutional and statutory provisions and has suppressed innovation by the other branches that do not necessarily transgress widely held social norms. Novel assertions of legislative power, novel interpretations of federal statutes, statutes that are in tension with well-established common law rules, and state laws adopted by only a few states are suspect simply because they are novel or rub up against tradition. …
How Close Is Close Enough: A Step-By-Step Analysis To Resolve The Circuit Split Created By Misunderstanding The Spokeo Ruling, Cason Shipp
St. Mary's Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Foiled Foia: The Excessive Exemption, Edward L. Wilkinson Jr.
Foiled Foia: The Excessive Exemption, Edward L. Wilkinson Jr.
St. Mary's Law Journal
The Freedom of Information Act permits requestors access to government information unless an exemption applies. Exemption (b)(3)(B) permits the government to protect information if there is a specific reference to a FOIA exemption in the withholding statute. Congress created this new requirement in 2009 in order to remove decision making power from administrative agencies and courts and reserve the power to disclose or withhold information with the legislative branch. This exemption poses problems to courts when there is a clear intent to protect information in the withholding statute without a clear reference to Exemption (b)(3)(B). As a result, courts have …
Public Accommodations And The Right To Refrain From Expressing Oneself, Mark Strasser
Public Accommodations And The Right To Refrain From Expressing Oneself, Mark Strasser
Cleveland State Law Review
The United States Supreme Court has been unable to articulate a coherent position when addressing the right of individuals to refrain from expressing themselves. The Court has applied various tests inconsistently—emphasizing principles in some cases, ignoring them in subsequent cases, and then emphasizing them again in later cases as if those principles had always been applied. The Court’s approach is incoherent, offering little guidance to lower courts except to suggest that public accommodations laws may soon be found inconsistent with First Amendment guarantees.
Questioning The Legitimacy Of The Expedited Removal Process – The Tall Task Of Protecting The Constitutional Rights Of One Of America’S Most Marginalized Groups, Jacob J. Bourquin
Questioning The Legitimacy Of The Expedited Removal Process – The Tall Task Of Protecting The Constitutional Rights Of One Of America’S Most Marginalized Groups, Jacob J. Bourquin
Cleveland State Law Review
This Note explores the origin and development of 8 U.S.C. § 1225—a heavily debated facet of the United States’ immigration law. Section 1225, colloquially referred to as the “expedited removal process,” has been interpreted to permit low-level immigration officers to summarily remove certain “arriving” noncitizens from the United States without affording them the procedural due process protections guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution to all individuals present in the United States. This Note posits that the current interpretation of § 1225, particularly the interpretation of “is arriving,” and application of the expedited removal process is inconsistent …
"Money That Flows In The Shadows": Citizens United, Dark Money, And The Need For Rhetorical Competence, Kristy Kocot
"Money That Flows In The Shadows": Citizens United, Dark Money, And The Need For Rhetorical Competence, Kristy Kocot
James Madison Undergraduate Research Journal (JMURJ)
The 2010 United States Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. FEC, has the potential to present a significant threat to American democracy. The landmark decision removed limits on corporate contributions, allowing disproportionate dark money influence from corporations in American political campaigns. This paper explores the ethical dilemmas of the Citizens United decision, drawing from peer-reviewed scholarly journals, legal documents, and advocacy organizations to highlight the negative impact that dark money has on American politics. Citizens United and its aftermath demonstrate the necessity for rhetorical competence in a democracy with broad protections for individual and corporate speech. The paper argues …
Privileges, Immunities, And Affirmative Action In Medical Education, Gregory Curfman
Privileges, Immunities, And Affirmative Action In Medical Education, Gregory Curfman
Journal of Law and Health
In Students for Fair Admissions v. President & Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, the Supreme Court ruled that affirmative action in university admissions, in which an applicant of a particular race or ethnicity receives a plus factor, is unconstitutional. This ruling was based on both the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This article argues that a more natural fit as the basis for constitutional analysis would be a different clause in the Fourteenth Amendment, the Privileges or Immunities …
A Trigger Warning: Red Flag Laws Are Still Constitutionally Permissible And Could Reduce The Suicide Rates In The Country's Most Vulnerable States, Joseph C. Campbell
A Trigger Warning: Red Flag Laws Are Still Constitutionally Permissible And Could Reduce The Suicide Rates In The Country's Most Vulnerable States, Joseph C. Campbell
Journal of Law and Health
Montana, Alaska, and Wyoming lead the United States in a category coveted by no one: the suicide rate. Firearm ownership drives the rate to the disproportionate level it reaches year after year and the states are left with little recourse. This article argues the usefulness and constitutionality of narrowly tailored red-flag laws aimed exclusively at reducing the rate of suicide in these mountain states. The article follows Supreme Court jurisprudence leading up to New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen and offers an analysis that complies with the hyper textualist history and tradition test laid out by Scalia in …
California V. Texas: Avoiding An Antidemocratic Outcome, Jon Lucas
California V. Texas: Avoiding An Antidemocratic Outcome, Jon Lucas
Journal of Law and Health
The Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) contains a section titled “Requirement to Maintain Essential Minimum Coverage.” Colloquially known as the Individual Mandate, this section of the Act initially established a monetary penalty for anyone who did not maintain health insurance in a given tax year. But with the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the monetary penalty was reset to zero, inducing opponents of the ACA to mount a legal challenge over the Individual Mandate’s constitutionality. As the third major legal challenge to the ACA, California v. Texas saw the Supreme Court punt on the merits and instead decide …
Secrets Clutched In A Dead Hand: Rethinking Posthumous Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege In The Light Of Reason And Experience With Other Evidentiary Privileges, Jason S. Sunshine
Secrets Clutched In A Dead Hand: Rethinking Posthumous Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege In The Light Of Reason And Experience With Other Evidentiary Privileges, Jason S. Sunshine
Journal of Law and Health
Attorney-client privilege was held by the Supreme Court to extend beyond death in 1996, albeit only ratifying centuries of accepted practice in the lower courts and England before them. But with the lawyer’s client dead, the natural outcome of such a rule is that privilege—the legal enforcement of secrecy—will persist forever, for only the dead client could ever have waived and thus end it. Perpetuity is not traditionally favored by the law for good reason, and yet a long and broad line of precedent endorses its application to privilege. The recent emergence of a novel species of privilege for psychotherapy, …
Tying Law For The Digital Age, Daniel A. Crane
Tying Law For The Digital Age, Daniel A. Crane
Notre Dame Law Review
Tying arrangements, a central concern of antitrust policy since the early days of the Sherman and Clayton Acts, have come into renewed focus with respect to the practices of dominant technology companies. Unfortunately, tying law’s doctrinal structure is a self-contradictory and incoherent wreck. A conventional view holds that this mess is due to errant Supreme Court precedents, never fully corrected, that expressed hostility to tying based on faulty economic understanding. That is only part of the story. Examination of tying law’s origins and development shows that tying doctrine was built on a now-dated paradigm of what constitutes a tying arrangement. …
Admiralty, Abstention, And The Allure Of Old Cases, Maggie Gardner
Admiralty, Abstention, And The Allure Of Old Cases, Maggie Gardner
Notre Dame Law Review
The current Supreme Court has made clear that history matters. But doing history well is hard. There is thus an allure to old cases because they provide a link to the past that is more accessible for nonhistorian lawyers. This Article warns against that allure by showing how the use of old cases also poses methodological challenges. The Article uses as a case study the emerging doctrine of foreign relations abstention. Before the Supreme Court, advocates argued that this new doctrine is in fact rooted in early admiralty cases. Those advocates did not, however, canvass the early admiralty practice, relying …
Pretrial Commitment And The Fourth Amendment, Laurent Sacharoff
Pretrial Commitment And The Fourth Amendment, Laurent Sacharoff
Notre Dame Law Review
Today, the Fourth Amendment Warrant Clause governs arrest warrants and search warrants only. But in the founding era, the Warrant Clause governed a third type of warrant: the “warrant of commitment.” Judges issued these warrants to jail defendants pending trial. This Article argues that the Fourth Amendment Warrant Clause, with its oath and probable cause standard, should be understood today to apply to this third type of warrant. That means the Warrant Clause would govern any initial appearance where a judge first commits a defendant—a process that currently falls far short of fulfilling its constitutional and historical function. History supports …
Who Is A Minister? Originalist Deference Expands The Ministerial Exception, Jared C. Huber
Who Is A Minister? Originalist Deference Expands The Ministerial Exception, Jared C. Huber
Notre Dame Law Review
The ministerial exception is a doctrine born out of the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment that shields many religious institutions’ employment decisions from review. While the ministerial exception does not extend to all employment decisions by, or employees of, religious institutions, it does confer broad—and absolute—protection. While less controversy surrounds whether the Constitution shields religious institutions’ employment decisions to at least some extent, much more debate surrounds the exception’s scope, and perhaps most critically, which employees fall under it. In other words, who is a "minister" for purposes of the ministerial exception?
The Impossibility Of Corporate Political Ideology: Upholding Sec Climate Disclosures Against Compelled Commercial Speech Challenges, Erin Murphy
Northwestern University Law Review
To address the increasingly dire climate crisis, the SEC will require public companies to reveal their business’s environmental impact to the market through climate disclosures. Businesses and states challenged the required disclosures as compelled, politically motivated speech that risks putting First Amendment doctrine into further jeopardy. In the past five years, the U.S. Supreme Court has demonstrated an increased propensity to hear compelled speech cases and rule in favor of litigants claiming First Amendment protection from disclosing information that they disagree with or believe to be a politically charged topic. Dissenting liberal Justices have decried these practices as “weaponizing the …