Law Commons^™

Are Your Secrets Safe?: Imposing A Fiduciary Duty On Healthcare Ai Developers Dealing With Sensitive Health Information, Lauren Quinn

Fordham Law Review

In 1996, Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) to establish standards for transmitting health information. For decades, the HIPAA Privacy Rule has operated as the primary regulation protecting health information in the United States. However, in the decades since HIPAA was enacted, new technologies have demonstrated the shortcomings of the Privacy Rule. In particular, the development of healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) has created new privacy concerns and exacerbated existing ones. This Note examines the current healthcare privacy framework in the United States and considers how healthcare AI complicates it. This Note also explores how AI developers …

The Inevitability Of Local Environmental Law, Keith H. Hirokawa, Cinnamon Carlarne Hirokawa, Lauren A. Vanwagoner

Fordham Environmental Law Review

The United States is entering a new era of environmental law. Within the first few months of President Trump’s second term in office, the administration issued a mass of executive orders, memoranda and policy changes that seek to peel back environmental protections, in many cases, to the point of erasure. The administration shuttered entire agencies, such as USAID, dissolved the Environmental Protection Agency’s research arm, terminated life-saving programs like the National Weather Service’s translation service, cut funding to housing and public health initiatives, and eliminated diversity, equity, and inclusion programs across the country. Given the reality of these large-scale drawbacks, …

Rethinking Aquaculture Regulation In A Post-Chevron World, Kamaile A. N. Turčan

Fordham Environmental Law Review

After the Supreme Court overruled Chevron deference in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, commentators warned of the detriment to federal agencies resulting from the loss of judicial deference to agencies’ interpretations of the statutes they administer. This Essay takes a different approach and examines how advocates for agency authority can use this shift away from judicial deference to their advantage—by refocusing litigation strategy toward congressional delegations. Statutory interpretation arguments need no longer focus on whether an agency is intruding on the judicial prerogative to interpret the law and can now focus instead on whether a court is intruding on the …

An Alternate History Of Chevron, With A Lesson For Today, Michael Herz

Fordham Environmental Law Review

It is a banal truism that judicial deference to agency decisionmaking enables the executive branch to pursue its agenda, whatever that agenda may be. That was obvious to all in the early years of the Chevron decision, which was greeted enthusiastically on the right and skeptically on the left. In Chevron itself, and for a while thereafter, deference advanced the Reagan deregulatory program. Over the years, a subtler conclusion gained consensus: overall and in the long haul, judicial deference is likely to have a net pro-regulatory impact. Hence the right’s hardened opposition to Chevron leading up to its demise. But …

Does The Major Questions Doctrine Apply To The Federal Courts?, Michael Coenen, Seth Davis

Fordham Law Review

The new “major questions doctrine” (MQD) requires courts to apply a “distinct” approach to statutory interpretation when reviewing challenges to an agency action of “vast economic and political significance.” Under that approach, courts must assume that such an action exceeds the scope of that agency’s statutory authority unless there exists “clear congressional authorization” for it. In this Article, we examine whether this new rule for administrative agencies (or what we call the “agency MQD”) implies the existence of a similarly strong constraint on the federal courts’ power to interpret and apply statutes for themselves (or what we call the “judicial …

Abortion Travel Restrictions Under The Dormant Commerce Clause After National Pork Producers Council V. Ross, Katherine Bartley

Fordham Law Review

Since Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, twelve states have banned abortion entirely, and seven states have banned abortion earlier in pregnancy than the standard set in Roe v. Wade. As abortion access dwindles, patients increasingly cross state lines to seek reproductive healthcare. In response, antiabortion state officials and lawmakers have made efforts to restrict interstate travel for abortion care.

This Note examines abortion travel restrictions under the “Dormant” Commerce Clause doctrine, which limits state laws that burden interstate commerce. In 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed but narrowed the judge-made doctrine in National Pork Producers Council v. …

Procedural Justice In Parallel Lawsuits, Sarah Parks

Fordham Law Review

The American public places a high value on access to justice and having the opportunity to be heard. These values can either be upheld or diminished by routine procedural rules. The first-to-file rule is an example of an innocuous procedural rule that is a barrier to justice. Under the first-to-file rule, when two parallel suits are filed in different federal district courts, the first-filed suit will proceed, and the second-filed suit will ordinarily be dismissed or transferred to the venue of the other suit. Transfers often terminate an individual’s case because most people cannot afford to litigate far from home. …

A Distinctive Court: A Glimpse Into The History And Significance Of The D.C. Circuit, Judge J. Michelle Childs

Fordham Law Review

Judge J. Michelle Childs serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Before her appointment, Judge Childs received a B.A. from the University of South Florida Honors College and a J.D. from the University of South Carolina School of Law. She also received Masters degrees from the University of South Carolina’s Darla Moore School of Business and from Duke University School of Law, as well as an Honorary Doctorate Degree from the University of South Carolina. After working in private practice for eight years, Judge Childs received an appointment to serve as the Deputy Director for the …

Litigating Corporate Risk, Henry B. Blaikie

Fordham Law Review

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) requires companies to disclose risk factors in Item 105 of Regulation S-K, which calls for “a discussion of the material factors that make an investment speculative or risky.” Whether companies incur liability for omitting or mischaracterizing risk factors in their disclosures is the subject of a three-way split between eight federal courts of appeals. The majority approach among the circuits—consisting of the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the First, Second, Third, Fifth, Tenth, and District of Columbia Circuits—imposes liability when companies omit or mischaracterize a risk factor that, at the time of disclosure, is …

Text, Context, Or Both?: Considering When And How To Use Statutory History In The New Textualist Framework, Devon Brostoff

Fordham Law Review

Statutory history represents the evolution of a statute through enacted amendments. Although textualists have widely rejected traditional forms of legislative history, statutory history has not received the same fate. Instead, textualists have accepted the use of statutory history as a resource separate from—and superior to—legislative history. Thus, this Note examines how courts are using statutory history, focusing primarily on the author’s analysis of a set of courts of appeals cases that rely on statutory history. Using these cases, this Note explores whether statutory history is best understood as text or context within the interpretation process. Further, this Note challenges the …

The Conversation Continues: The Judiciary’S Evolving Role In Perpetuating Racial Disparities In Addiction Treatment, Sydney Crute

Fordham Law Review

Language is a powerful means of social control, an idea that resonates deeply with court rhetoric as it relates to race. This Note examines the language courts use when discussing cases related to drug use and addiction. During the crack epidemic, when Black individuals represented the race of the primary drug user and drug dealer, courts relied on racially coded language related to crime and fear. Alternatively, during the opioid epidemic, when White individuals represented the race of the primary drug user, courts relied on more neutral language related to the health and well-being of society. Finally, the language courts …

Misusing Eminent Domain: Pretextual Takings For A Traditional Public Use, Cameron P. Hellerman

Fordham Law Review

Eminent domain is a powerful tool at the disposal of local, state and federal governments. The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution imposes two conditions on this sovereign power: the taking must be for “public use,” and the condemner must pay “just compensation” to the property owner. There are minimal guardrails in place to police potential misuse of the eminent domain power in the courts. The U.S. Supreme Court equates “public use” with “public purpose” and applies a deferential standard of review to a condemner’s determination that a taking serves a public purpose. Nonetheless, the Court in Kelo v. City …

When Prenatal Care Becomes A Crime, Casey Hunter

Fordham Law Review

For decades, pregnant women have increasingly faced criminalization for their actions and conduct during pregnancy, with Alabama emerging as a focal point due to its aggressive use of section 26-15-3.2: Chemical Endangerment of Exposing a Child to an Environment in Which Controlled Substances Are Produced or Distributed. Originally intended to protect children from the dangers of methamphetamine labs, this law has been reinterpreted to prosecute pregnant women who test positive for controlled substances. Central to these prosecutions are positive drug tests obtained from prenatal health records, causing many women to avoid prenatal care for fear of legal consequences.

This Note …

“Shipping” Away The Captive Audience Meeting, Nathan Kakalec

Fordham Law Review

On November 14, 2024, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) overturned seventy-six years of labor law precedent by banning captive audience meetings in Amazon.com Services LLC. Captive audience meetings, mandatory meetings where employers discuss unionization with their employees, were a powerful anti-union tool used by employers to coerce their employees into rejecting unionization. The NLRB argues that captive audience meetings are inconsistent with § 7 and § 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Employers reject the NLRB’s assertion and contend that banning captive audience meetings infringes on their First Amendment right to communicate their views on unionization. …

“The Gun’S Not Mine!”: The Admissibility Of Defendants’ Exculpatory Hearsay Statements Under Federal Rules Of Evidence 803(2) & (3), Faustino S. Galante

Fordham Law Review Online

Exculpatory hearsay statements made by criminal defendants often warrant admission under the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) as excited utterances, under Rule 803(2), or as statements reflecting a then-existing state of mind, under Rule 803(3). Nevertheless, defendants often struggle to have their exculpatory statements admitted pursuant to these rules—even when those statements fulfill their categorical requirements.

This Comment surveys the different approaches courts take to determine whether exculpatory hearsay statements made by criminal defendants are admissible under Rules 803(2) and (3). It argues that courts too often misapply these rules to exclude defendants’ exculpatory statements. In particular, courts counteract the …

An Electoral College Compromise Constitutional Amendment: Bridging Partisan Divides To Improve Presidential Elections, John Rogan

Fordham Law Review Online

Abolishing the Electoral College in favor of using a national popular vote to elect the president and vice president is unlikely to attract sufficient bipartisan support to reach the high thresholds for amending the U.S. Constitution. However, the Electoral College has flawed features that both Democrats and Republicans might support reforming because those defects can undermine either party’s candidates. This Essay highlights three such defects. First, contingent elections—a process by which Congress selects the president and vice president if no ticket wins a majority of electoral votes—are deeply unrepresentative of the American electorate while also being subject to unpredictable dysfunction …

Evaluating The Ncaa’S Responsiveness To Tampering In The Nil Era, Josh Lens

Fordham Law Review Online

Recent and significant changes in college athletics have led to an increase in the number of athletes who transfer between universities. This requires college coaches to expend significant effort retaining key athletes, especially in the face of widespread “tampering”—recruiting athletes enrolled at other universities who are not in the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) transfer portal. Despite NCAA rules explicitly forbidding it, coaches have been outspoken regarding the prevalence of tampering, with some going so far as to publicly beg the NCAA to more strictly enforce its anti-tampering rules.

This Essay scrutinizes whether the oft-maligned NCAA has been responsive to …

Why Top-Two Primaries Can't Be Fixed, Quinn Yeargain

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

No abstract provided.

Residency Requirements In Initiative Ballot Access: The Limits Of First Amendment Rights And The Fight Against Atlanta's 'Cop City', Ross Levin

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

When election procedure is challenged, courts must balance First Amendment rights against states’ prerogative to regulate elections. Residency requirements are an election procedure that require petition circulators be a resident of the jurisdiction. Residency restrictions on petition circulators—who collect signatures to achieve ballot access—weigh too heavily against First Amendment rights. In jurisdictions where residency requirements remain in place for initiative ballot access, voters are unconstitutionally shut out of the political process.

In this Article, I examine two cases in which the Supreme Court extended its First Amendment ballot access jurisprudence to ballot initiatives, Meyer v. Grant and Buckley v. American …

Voter Confidence And The World Of Appearances: Where Campaign-Finance And Election-Administration Law Collide, Kishore S. Chundi

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Scholarship on election-administration measures (like voter ID laws) and campaign-finance laws has been siloed. American political affiliations, in their current form, dictate that liberals support campaign-finance restrictions and oppose voter ID laws, and vice versa for conservatives. But the Court has analyzed both measures using the similarly odd lens of appearances—the perception of electoral integrity in voter ID cases and the perception of corruption in campaign-finance cases. Yet despite the nearly identical justifications for campaign-finance and election-administration measures, the Court has treated these claims quite differently. Election-administration laws receive nearly automatic deference, whereas campaign-finance laws are routinely overturned. This Article …

The Law Of Disqualification And Problems With The Supreme Court Code Of Conduct, Donald K. Sherman, Marco A. White, Virginia Canter

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

In this Article, we analyze the federal disqualification statute applicable to federal judges, magistrates, and Justices of the Supreme Court as compared to the disqualification provisions of the United States Supreme Court Code of Conduct and detail the ways in which the standards contained within the Code are contrary to law and history. To provide proper context, we examine the history, case law, and statutory framework that have created the current standards of judicial disqualification for all Article III judges and Justices. We demonstrate that the Court is bound to apply disqualification procedures in accordance with the United States Constitution, …

Fordham Lawyer, No. 24 - Spring 2025, Fordham Law Alumni Association, Fordham Law School

Fordham Lawyer

Fordham Lawyer magazine was first published in 1988 and continued through 2004. It returned in 2011 under Dean Michael M. Martin. The magazine shines a spotlight on faculty research, the Law School community, and the accomplishments of our alumni. No issues were published between 2004 and 2011.

Social Movement Lawyering And Due Process Values, Susan D. Carle

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Government Lawyers, Ethical Dilemmas: The Case Of Herbert Wechsler And Japanese American Incarceration, Eric L. Muller

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Law Jobs: Professional Regulation, The Division Of Legal Labor, And Institutional Change, Emily S. Taylor Poppe

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Democratic Self-Defense, Claudia E. Haupt

Fordham Law Review

Four U.S. states recently took diametrically opposed approaches to address fundamental problems that their respective state legislatures identified in the online speech environment. While controversial legislation in Florida and Texas sought to limit the ability of platforms to remove users or content, New York and California passed laws ultimately aimed at curbing hate speech and other forms of abuse on platforms. In isolation, each of these legislative approaches raises significant First Amendment concerns, and all are likely insufficient to address the problems posed by online speech. But what if the impetus behind these laws were combined into a unified regulatory …

Properly Partitioning Prejudice: Analyzing Mixed Brady And Napue Claims, Patrick Scariano

Fordham Law Review

Due process affords criminal defendants the right to receive evidence possessed by the government that would aid in their defense. This right was codified in Brady v. Maryland. Brady’s lesser-known ancestor is Napue v. Illinois, which gave defendants the right to a new trial if the government knowingly offered perjured testimony in their original trial. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that these rights are critical to support verdicts worthy of confidence necessary to ensure due process.

Unfortunately, defendants victimized by misconduct are often affected by multiple violations of their rights. Courts have developed ways to examine …

Efta Coverage Of Modern Consumer Wire Transfers: Consumer Financial Regulation In The Wake Of Loper Bright, Benjamin Gygi

Fordham Law Review

The rise of online banking has led to a proliferation of consumer fraud. Schemes aimed at stealing consumer funds using wire transfers executed through online banking portals have proven particularly devastating to consumers because of a perceived loophole in the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) that leaves consumers with full liability for funds stolen through wire transfers. Consumer advocacy groups, and most notably the New York Attorney General, have recently argued that this loophole does not really exist; they claim that the EFTA’s text conclusively covers certain parts of modern wire transfer processes initiated through online banking portals. Considering the …

Jewish Lawyers And The Labor Movement, Catherine L. Fisk

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Can Prosecutors’ Offices Preserve Public Confidence In Their Nonpartisanship—And, If So, How?, Bruce A. Green, Rebecca Roiphe

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.