Law Commons^™

The Native American Graves Protection And Repatriation Act As A Model Of Cultural Sovereignty For Protecting Indigenous Sacred Site, Michalyn Steele

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Remarks, Amassador Abubakar Jidda

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Defining “Cases” Or “Controversies”: A Fundamental Confusion In Article Iii Standing Doctrine And Its Consequences In Multi-Plaintiff Litigation, Dominic Signa

Fordham Law Review

The United States Supreme Court has addressed the absolute core requirements of standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution on several occasions. However, the Court has not clearly articulated what purpose standing serves relative to Article III’s limitations on the exercise of judicial power to only “cases” or “controversies,” and this has led to major downstream effects in the realm of multi plaintiff litigation. Specifically, the Court has not explained whether standing is meant to ensure (1) that all potential plaintiffs demonstrate that they are properly parties to the same case or controversy before a federal court or (2) …

Remarks, The Honorable Michael Mukasey

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Cultural Property Protection As A National Security Enforcement Priority, Andrew C. Adams

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Corporeal Property And The Limits Of Nagpra, M. Alexander Pearl

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Hcpo Way: Resolving Claims Through Cooperation, Anna Rubin

Fordham Law Review

The Nazi regime systematically stripped Jews and other persecuted groups of property through a framework of laws that gave their spoliation a veneer of legality. Postwar restitution programs, though groundbreaking in their efforts to provide individual victims with either compensation or the return of their property, were hampered by strict legal limitations, inconsistent procedures, and the slow pace of resolution. Contemporary restitution efforts increasingly recognize that legal avenues alone cannot fully redress these injustices. This Essay examines the work of the Holocaust Claims Processing Office (HCPO) of the New York State Department of Financial Services, which has developed a model …

Recalibrating Risk Under Dobbs, Yvonne Lindgren, Michelle Oberman

Fordham Law Review

In response to mounting evidence of the devastating harms patients have experienced under abortion bans, abortion opponents and the Supreme Court of Texas have argued that the bans are clear but that doctors are willfully refusing to provide care. Instead of reforming the bans, they argue that doctors should be sued in medical malpractice for their failure to meet the standard of care. This Article interrogates that claim, investigating whether the crisis in reproductive healthcare that has resulted from delayed and denied care can be remedied by suing doctors. Specifically, can medical malpractice litigation provide guardrails against the erosion in …

Competition, Comity, And Confusion: Reconciling The Ftaia’S Import Exclusion With Its Direct Effects Provision, Elliot Lam

Fordham Law Review

The debate surrounding the Sherman Act’s extraterritorial scope represents a tension between two competing objectives: protecting the U.S. economy from foreign anticompetitive conduct on one hand and respecting the sovereign authority of other nation-states on the other. Applying U.S. law abroad risks undermining sovereign authority by regulating foreign economies, though such regulation appears necessary in some cases to protect U.S. consumers.

Congress’s attempt to square these objectives through enacting the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 (FTAIA) failed to settle the matter. The statute left courts with two new questions: how to distinguish “import” from “nonimport” commerce, and how …

When The Taxpayers Are Not Innocent: The Need For Punitive Damages Against Municipalities Under The Fair Housing Act, Charlotte Saltzman

Fordham Law Review

Combatting housing discrimination by municipalities is a core function of the Fair Housing Act (FHA). Courts disagree, however, as to whether punitive damages can be awarded against municipal defendants. The purpose of this Note is twofold. First, it compares the Second Circuit’s recent decision in Gilead Community Services, Inc. v. Town of Cromwell, which held that punitive damages were appropriate against the Town of Cromwell, with the reasoning of district courts that came to the opposite conclusion in reliance on § 1983 precedent. Second, notwithstanding the sufficiency of the statutory analysis, it evaluates the public policy concerns of awarding …

The Roberts Court Paradox, John C. P. Goldberg, Benjamin C. Zipursky

Fordham Law Review

As perhaps the most conservative Supreme Court of the past century, the Roberts Court regularly touts its commitment to traditional ideals, including the rule of law. Yet Trump v. United States seems ready to place presidents entirely or largely above the law by granting them absolute or near absolute immunity from criminal prosecutions for official conduct. And Trump is not a one-off: from judicial recusal to qualified immunity to due process decisions, the Court frequently seems to display indifference to values of accountability and impartiality that have long been thought integral to the rule of law. What is going on? …

Emotionally Unstable: Addressing Emotional Distress As A Concrete Injury In Data Breach Cases Post-Transunion, Anna P. Cox

Fordham Law Review

Data breaches and data breach litigation are exponentially on the rise. Plaintiffs whose information is stolen in a data breach often claim emotional distress for fear of future harm the data breach may cause. However, plaintiffs who bring suit in federal court must show that they have suffered an injury in fact for purposes of Article III standing before a federal court will exercise jurisdiction. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez requires that plaintiffs who seek money damages under a theory of risk of future harm show that they have suffered a present concrete injury to …

Fixing The Fix: The Case For Unifying The Remedial Framework Of Apa Rulemaking Challenges, Dea Devlin

Fordham Law Review

Vacatur is the default remedy for successful administrative rulemaking challenges brought under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Yet its broad and sweeping effects raise critical questions regarding its appropriateness as a one-size-fits-all remedy. Unlike injunctive relief, which is subject to a rigorous heightened standard, and remand without vacatur, which has a comparable standard of its own, vacatur is routinely awarded without similar scrutiny, leading to inconsistencies in the judicial application of remedies in APA challenges.

Although vacatur can provide a plaintiff with relief, its award conflicts with underlying principles of equity and proportionality. In rulemaking challenges, vacatur can create regulatory …

The Presumption Against Extraterritoriality And Wire Fraud, L. Jackson Howell Jr.

Fordham Law Review

As globalization and technology increasingly blur geographic boundaries, federal prosecutors have turned to the wire fraud statute as a powerful tool for targeting transnational misconduct. Despite its popularity in international fraud prosecution, the statute’s application to foreign conduct continues to raise unresolved and pressing questions under the presumption against extraterritoriality. Specifically, courts have struggled to identify when a domestic wire communication is sufficient to bring a largely foreign fraudulent scheme within the reach of U.S. law. With the U.S. Supreme Court silent on the wire fraud statute directly, and zigzagging in its extraterritoriality jurisprudence more generally, lower courts are split …

When The Screen Lies: Navigating Privacy And Publicity In An Ai World, Nancy M. Menagh

Fordham Law Review

A key issue of the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike was the use of generative AI in the entertainment industry and, more specifically, the creation of uncanny digital replicas of performers being used without their knowledge or consent. Since then, concerns have only intensified around the unauthorized creation and use of digital replicas and the ease with which they can be made and disseminated online. Currently, there is a patchwork of state laws that attempt to target these issues, but they have proven ineffective against the challenges presented by digital replicas.

This Note analyzes the problems digital replicas have raised in the …

Venturing Into Health, Rachel E. Sachs

Fordham Law Review

In recent years, the landscape of venture capital (VC) investment in healthcare technologies has been altered by the introduction of new types of VC firms: those that have emerged from hospital systems and health insurers. However, the legal literature has not yet analyzed these new VC firms, the role they may play in healthcare innovation, and how innovation law and policy ought to consider their involvement. Hospital system and health insurer VC firms operate very differently than traditional VC firms, even those that have historically developed healthcare specializations. Instead of simply investing capital into start-up firms, hospital system and health …

Is Your Data Good, Bad, Or Neutral?: Redefining Concreteness For Data Breach Harms, Jeeyoon Lim

Fordham Law Review

In recent years, the Supreme Court has tightened federal court standing requirements for intangible harms, including statutory harms. In TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, the Court held that a mere statutory violation, absent a common-law analogue, is not sufficiently concrete to grant standing. The Court did not provide clear guidance as to how stringent the common-law analogue analysis must be, other than that it does not require an “exact duplicate.” Because of the ever-evolving nature of digital data, data breach victims attempting to enforce their statutory right to privacy in federal court have struggled to rely on tradition and history …

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 …

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. …

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.