Courts Commons^™

Who Gets To Sue? Legal Standing After Fda V. Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine, Rachael Houston, Robert Stephen Earnest

Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity

This article examines how courts are invoking FDA v. Alliance to define the limits of legal standing in litigation—specifically, in a reproductive health context. Reproductive health, as used here, encompasses a broad range of medical, legal, and policy issues related to abortion access, gender-affirming care, pregnancy, and professional regulation of services connected to reproductive decision-making. It includes the provision of and restrictions on reproductive healthcare services, the regulation of speech related to those services (e.g., advertising and advocacy), and the institutional responses to contested laws and agency rules affecting bodily autonomy, medical practice, and expressive conduct. Drawing on an original …

Let Them Hear It: Peaceful Protests Near The Homes Of Supreme Court Justices, Srikanth Reddy

Lewis & Clark Law Review

All of us—not just attorneys and politicians—need to be more critical and skeptical of the Supreme Court. Criticism by ordinary people is good and appropriate, even if it hurts the Justices’ feelings. That includes public protests. When a case matters enough to them, members of the public can and should criticize the Court and its Justices, including by peacefully gathering and protesting near a Justice’s home, or when a Justice appears out in the world.

Taking Off The “Blindfold”: Exploring Montana’S Public Trust Doctrine And The Right To A Clean And Healthful Environment After Held V. Montana, Lizzy Gazeley

Lewis & Clark Law Review

As global average temperatures continue to rise, the threat of climate change looms closer. To evade climate catastrophe, greenhouse gas emissions will need to be substantially reduced. Despite climate change’s imminent risks, in the United States, both the federal government and states remain resistant to transitioning away from fossil fuel energy sources. To combat this government inaction, some litigants have turned to an ancient doctrine. The public trust doctrine provides that sovereigns must protect natural resources from substantial impairment to ensure the public’s right to use those resources.

In Held v. Montana, youth plaintiffs alleged that the State of Montana …

The Sec And Climate Litigation, Lisa Benjamin

Lewis & Clark Law Review

The controversy surrounding the SEC’s climate-related financial disclosure rule continues. This Essay updates my previous work on this issue, where I identified two opportunities and two obstacles to the SEC promulgating final rules on climate-related financial risk disclosures. The two opportunities were a shifting political landscape under the then-Biden Administration (which took a whole-of-government approach to addressing the climate crisis) and rising investor concern over the risks that climate change posed to their investments. The two obstacles I identified were business resistance to disclosure rules, and rising judicial hostility to the SEC. Today, the political landscape has shifted dramatically and …

The Eighth Amendment And Prison Staff-To-Sentenced Prisoner Sexual Violence, Matthew Lyskawa

Faculty Scholarship

In this Article, I provide the first comprehensive account of lower federal courts’ Eighth Amendment prison conditions jurisprudence regarding prison staff-to-sentenced prisoner sexual violence. I show that lower federal courts are systematically misunderstanding and misapplying Supreme Court case law in this context. The result is that sexually victimized prisoners must meet extremely burdensome doctrinal standards unique to sexual violence claims. Lower federal courts would faithfully follow Supreme Court precedent if they applied the excessive force standard to sexual assault claims and the conditions of confinement standard to sexual harassment claims. However, a faithful application of Supreme Court case law does …

Applying History As Law: The Role Of Historical Facts In Implementing Constitutional Doctrine, Joseph Blocher, Brandon L. Garrett

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court has long relied on historical evidence in constitutional cases, but recent years have seen a major change in how it does so: not only to interpret the meaning of constitutional text, but to establish doctrinal tests that call for historical evidence to be used in the application of those tests going forward. Broadly speaking, originalism has moved from the realm of legal interpretation to that of law declaration and then to law application. This transformation in the legal significance of history raises important questions for originalism as a practice of constitutional adjudication, not simply a theory …

The Trials We Remember: Exploring Historical Significance Through Interviews, Sara Mcdougall

Open Educational Resources

Students interview someone about a judicial trial that mattered to them and reflect on a trial of personal significance. They share what they learned through a classmate presentation, exploring how people assign meaning to trials while practicing communication skills.

Policy Recommendations To Reduce False Confessions By Juveniles In Wrongful Conviction Cases, Rohit R. Iyer

CMC Senior Theses

This research focuses on false confessions by juveniles in the United States justice system. False confessions are statements made by suspects during investigations in which individuals provide statements to investigators admitting to a crime in which they had no part. In these cases, individuals often spend years, if not the entirety, of their lives behind bars for crimes they did not commit. False confessions are the result of a number of systemic factors that will be discussed in this paper. While relatively rare, they are one of the largest blemishes in the U.S. justice system. Juveniles – individuals below the …

Under Pressure: Delaware, Corporate America, And Certified Questions, Derek S. Hubbard

Law Student Publications

With an advanced corporate code and a highly respected Court of Chancery, Delaware has long been America’s home for big business. But its status may be in jeopardy. Within the past year, the Court of Chancery has shattered two market practices and reminded stakeholders of the uncertain nature of fiduciary duties. Corporations have responded. Termed “DExit,” corporations are leaving Delaware for competing jurisdictions, namely Texas and Nevada. As corporations leave Delaware, so do their tax dollars. Delaware’s fiscal stability is directly tied to the continued presence of corporate charters in Delaware. Delaware residents enjoy a low tax burden, with the …

Reconstituting A Constitution, And A Republic: The Architecture Of Authoritarian Rule, J. Maria Glover

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

A constitution can be remade without tearing it down, or even changing a single word. It is done by law.

“The judicial power is vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior courts as Congress may establish,” whose “province and duty” it is to “say what the law is.” U.S. Const. Art. III §1; Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 (Cranch) 137 (1803). It is not the power to remake the Constitution that grants it.

The Supreme Court is turning the inherited powers that hold power to law into instruments of its own aggrandizement. It is taking authority from …

How To Apply Hertz Corp. V. Friend In The Age Of Remote Work, John Andrikos

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

The widespread adoption of remote work in the United States has strained the workability of the nerve center test of Hertz Corp. v. Friend. This comment analyzes how federal courts have applied the nerve center test to fact patterns involving partially or fully remote corporations. Further, it proposes a novel solution to this jurisdictional problem: the Key Person Test.

Court-Appointed Neutrals And Legal Ethics: Fish, Fowl, Or Platypus, Dennis A. Rendleman

NYLS Law Review

@font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-536870145 1107305727 0 0 415 0;}@font-face {font-family:Aptos; panose-1:2 11 0 4 2 2 2 2 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:536871559 3 0 0 415 0;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:107%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Aptos; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Aptos; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Aptos; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-font-kerning:1.0pt; mso-ligatures:standardcontextual;}.MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Aptos; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Aptos; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Aptos; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}.MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:8.0pt;}div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;}

A court-appointed neutral (CAN) is ethically neither fish nor fowl. A CAN who is a lawyer is …

Koziol Firearms, Inc. V. Marchand, 334 A.3d 439 (R.I. 2025)., Grace D. Guachione

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Trial By Character, Hillel J. Bavli

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

In this Article, I argue that courts regularly deviate from Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), which prohibits character evidence—evidence of a defendant’s past misdeeds offered to prove that the defendant acted in conformity with a certain character trait on the occasion in question. These deviations undermine the fairness of a trial and the presumption of innocence. The Article addresses this problem in three ways. First, it explains how courts have misinterpreted Rule 404(b)—an error that I call the permitted-purpose fallacy—and how they have fortified this misinterpretation with a body of flawed principles and precedent. Second, it reports the results of …

Rethinking Courtroom Presence In The Virtual Era, Jenia Iontcheva Turner

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Technological innovation has made virtual appearances by criminal defendants increasingly common. These appearances have advanced efficiency but also raised questions about the scope of both the right and the duty of defendants to be physically present in court. Should judges, for example, be allowed to hold virtual arraignments, even if a defendant wishes to appear in person? Can defendants opt for virtual appearances at will? While courts are beginning to address these questions, they have yet to develop a coherent framework to evaluate when virtual appearances are constitutional and appropriate. This Article seeks to contribute to this project by examining …

Leaning Into Absence: Lessons From Kony, Mark A. Drumbl

Scholarly Articles

This article begins with the confirmation of charges decisions undertaken by the International Criminal Court in the Kony case. These proceedings struggled with the reality of in absentia. This article addresses the high absentee rate among individuals against whom the International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants and notes the stark presence of absence in the ICC’s work as well as within the enforcement of international criminal law at large. This article suggests that international criminal lawyers lean into the prevalence of absence and reboot predominant collective thinking. One path forward is to truly and warmly embrace transitional …

Implementing Young Adult Court In Minnesota, Sarah Dohm

Mitchell Hamline Law Journal of Public Policy and Practice

No abstract provided.

Pricing Lies: Government Contracts And The False Claims Act, Fernando Mendoza López

Marquette Law Review

Courts have recognized the federal government’s use of government contracts not only as a commercial transaction but also as an instrument of policy. Governments routinely seek to promote small business interests, domestic industry, women-owned, minority-owned, and veteran-owned businesses. However, in cases of fraud involving these policy provisions, courts have consistently failed to recognize this dual nature of government contracts.

The intangible benefits that governments gain from these preferential policies complicate damage calculations for courts when dealing with fraud. Such complications have led to inconsistencies and the emergence of three main approaches. First, some courts have assessed that the government …

What Can Court-Appointed Neutrals Learn From Dispute Resolution Ethics?, Kristen M. Blankley

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court-Appointed Neutrals And Legal Education, F. Peter Phillips

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.