The regulation of pregnant women in medical research and FDA labeling has created a system in which they and their fetuses are unprotected from drug risks.
- Judging Remorse
- Judicial Fact-Finding in the Wake of Alleyne
- From Jack to Jill: Gender Expression as Protected Speech in the Modern Schoolhouse
- Encouraging Maternal Sacrifice: How Regulations Governing the Consumption of Pharmaceuticals during pregnancy Prioritize Fetal Safety over Maternal Health and Autonomy
- Wrecking Ball Disguised as Law Reform: Alec's Model Act on Private Enforcement of Consumer Protection Statutes
- Voters Strike Back: Litigating against Modern Voter Intimidation
- How a Secondary Earner Deduction Will Reduce the Gender Bias in the U.S. Tax Code
- Addressing All Heads of the Hydra: Reframing Safeguards for Mentally Impaired Detainees in Immigration Removal Proceedings
- The Breach of the Common Law Trust Relationship between the United States and African Americans: A Substantive Right to Reparations
- Searching for Optimal Governance on the Nonprofit Board: Dynamic Resource Constraints and a Rejection of Board Bifurcation
- From the Picket Line to the Courtroom: A Labor Organizing Privilege to Protect Workers
- North Carolina's Failure to Perform Comparative Proportionality Review: Violating the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments by Allowing the Arbitrary and Discriminatory Application of the Death Penalty
In Depth Reading
Volume 39 Issue 1
This study uses interviews with judges to examine the role of remorse in judicial decisionmaking.
This article argues Allyene signals a shift in the availability of constitutional challenges in cases where sentencing factors are particularly important.
A transgender student's expression of her gender identity, including through the use of gender consistent bathrooms, is First Amendment protected speech,
Volume 39 Issue 2
DOJ guidance for mentally impaired detainees in immigration removal proceedings should be amended to provide counsel at earlier signs of incompetence.
Model legislation drafted by the American Legislative Exchange Council would effectively repeal the private enforcement of state consumer protection statutes.
Voting rights advocates should explore section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act as a vehicle to combat voter intimidation.
Currently, the tax code disincentivizes dual income marriages. Congress should create a secondary earner tax deduction to reduce the tax code's gender bias.
Volume 39 Issue 3
The Court's Equal Protection jurisprudence adopts a false equivalency between discrimination against oppressed minorities and against white people.
Black americans whose ancestors were slaves are less likely to receive affirmative action than "Black multiracials" and "Black Immigrants."
Affirmative action policies are harmed by institutional obsession with rankings, which incentivizes prioritizing high scores over diversity.
Affirmative action advocates should trade race-conscious affirmative action for race-neutral disadavantages that disporportionately affecting people of color.
Volume 39 Issue 4
A reparations suit for african americans based on the common law trust relationship is supported by reparations litigation for american indians.
Non-profit boards should be more attentive to resource constraints when implementing governance best practices.
The death penalty in North Carolina is unconstitutional because of the North Carolina Supreme Court's failure to perform statutorily mandated review.
An evidentiary privilege to protect workers' confidential communications from disclosure in federal and state court proceedings would support unions.