De Novo

Is Auer Deference on the Way Out?

IS AUER DEFERENCE ON THE WAY OUT? By: Trevor Matthews, Volume 101 Staff Member In Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand, later reaffirmed in Auer v. Robbins, the Supreme Court announced a deferential standard of review for agency rules which interpret binding notice and comment regulations.[1] The standard, now commonly called Auer deference, instructs courts […]

Read More

Helping Others Die

HELPING OTHERS DIE: COMPARING POLICIES IN BELGIUM TO THOSE IN THE U.S. By: Ellie Bastian, Volume 101 Staff Member In the opening scenes of the Italian film Miele a woman makes her monthly journey from Europe to a Mexican pharmacy to buy Lamputin, a drug meant to end a pet’s life.[1] She brings two doses […]

Read More

From “Let Us Pray” to “Let Us Reconsider”

FROM “LET US PRAY” TO “LET US RECONSIDER”: THE FOURTH CIRCUIT GRANTS EN BANC REVIEW IN LUND V. ROWAN COUNTY By: Rachel Leitschuck, Volume 101 Staff Member “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . .”[1] This language is known as the Establishment Clause […]

Read More

Minnesota Supreme Court Elections

MINNESOTA SUPREME COURT ELECTIONS: CONSIDERING CONCERNS AND CRITICISMS By: Sara Lewenstein, Volume 101 Staff Member On, Tuesday, August 9, 2016, 173,884 voters turned out for primary elections in Minnesota.[1] In some districts, the only item on the ballot was a statewide election for a seat on the Minnesota Supreme Court. The candidates included the following: […]

Read More

It Takes Turner

IT TAKES TURNER: HOW STORIES SHAPE US By: Maisie Baldwin, Volume 101 Staff Member Anyone who’s been on any form of social media since early 2015 has likely read Brock Turner’s name. His name has come up in a variety of contexts: evidence of the continued existence of white privilege,[1] outrage regarding rape culture,[2] discussion […]

Read More

Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt

WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH V. HELLERSTEDT: A REAFFIRMATION OF REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS By: Payton George, Volume 101 Staff Member On June 27, 2016, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in the case of Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt.[1] In an opinion heralded by pro-choice supporters,[2] Justice Breyer, joined by Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, Kennedy, and Ginsburg (who issued […]

Read More

Does Mother Nature Get a Vote?

DOES MOTHER NATURE GET A VOTE? OUR NEXT PRESIDENT COULD IMPACT AMERICA’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE PARIS AGREEMENT ON CLIMATE CHANGE By: Taylor Mayhall, Volume 101 Staff Member Last December, representatives from 195 countries assembled in Paris to converse about a subject which they all felt was worthy of attention on a global scale: climate change.[1] […]

Read More

Dan’s Flaw

DAN’S [F]LAW: STATUTORY FAILURE TO ENFORCE ETHICAL BEHAVIOR IN CLINICAL DRUG TRIALS Noah Lewellen* I. INTRODUCTION Paul, a sophomore at the University of Minnesota, bursts into a lecture hall, loudly claims to see monsters sitting in the seats, and offers his services in slaying them. The police are called, and Paul is restrained and delivered […]

Read More

Case Comment: Bhogaita v. Altamonte

EVERY DOG CAN HAVE HIS DAY IN COURT: THE USE OF ANIMALS AS DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS Kyle R. Kroll, Volume 100, Online Managing Editor In Bhogaita v. Altamonte, the Eleventh Circuit recently decided whether to allow a dog in the courtroom as a demonstrative exhibit.[1] Although the case presented many serious issues regarding the Fair Housing […]

Read More

Revisiting Water Bankruptcy

REVISITING WATER BANKRUPTCY IN CALIFORNIA’S FOURTH YEAR OF DROUGHT Olivia Moe, Volume 100, Managing Editor This spring, as “extreme” to “exceptional” drought stretched across most of California—indicating that a four-year streak of drought was not about to resolve itself[1]—Governor Jerry Brown issued an unprecedented order to reduce potable urban water usage by twenty-five percent.[2] In […]

Read More

© 2011-2016 Minnesota Law Review. All Rights Reserved.