Spring 2017: Volume 101

Heuristic Interventions in the Study of Intellectual Property

Professor Silbey expands on the work of Professor Burk by elaborating on three of Burk’s central points, while noting that Burk’s work serves as a crucial step in explaining intellectual property as a social practice.

Read More :: View PDF

Truth, Lies, and Power at Work

Professor Estlund discusses Professor Norton’s analysis on the collision of regulating the speech of employers with protecting employees, finding that Norton “makes a persuasive case that relative power should be and sometimes is relevant to the constitutionality of both speech restrictions and compelled disclosure of information.”  

Read More :: View PDF

A New Social Contract: Corporate Personality Theory and the Death of the Firm

In their article The Death of the Firm, June Carbone and Nancy Levit argue that, “the firm as entity is disappearing as a unit of legal analysis.” More specifically, they argue that by dismissing the corporation as a mere legal fiction and equating the rights of this legal fiction with the rights of its owners, […]

Read More :: View PDF
De Novo

Obama Cared

OBAMA CARED: THE IMPORTANCE OF ESSENTIAL HEALTH BENEFITS IN THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT By: Jesse Goldfarb, Volume 101 Staff Member A key provision in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandates that certain types of benefits be included in any healthcare insurance plan on the state and federal exchanges.[1] While there are no specific benefits required, […]

Read More

Cats and Dogs and the Takings Clause

CATS AND DOGS AND THE TAKINGS CLAUSE: BALANCING THE REGULATORY TAKINGS DOCTRINE AND INNOVATION IN THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT By: Austin J. Spillane, Volume 101 Staff Member We are currently living through an intriguing period of time that is marked by the digitization of many facets of the traditionally non-digital economy—a period dubbed by one commentator as “the […]

Read More

The Future of Class Actions

THE FUTURE OF CLASS ACTIONS By: Caroline Bressman, Volume 101 Staff Member Far from being the exception to individual adversarial suits in modern U.S. litigation,[1] an early prototype of class action litigation was common in medieval England.[2] During a period shaped by strong group cultures, judges largely did not question group litigation.[3] The early U.S. […]

Read More

Running from the Law Doesn’t Mean You Broke It

RUNNING FROM THE LAW DOESN’T MEAN YOU BROKE IT: COMMONWEALTH V. WARREN CONSIDERS RACE WHEN DETERMINING REASONABLE SUSPICION By: Vanessa R. Colletti, Volume 101 Staff Member Jimmy Warren is probably just grateful to be free; however, his case presents a greater opportunity for freedom for people of color everywhere. Commonwealth v. Warren[1] is a notable […]

Read More

Do Two Wrongs Make a Right?

DO TWO WRONGS MAKE A RIGHT? By: Mitchell Ness, Volume 101 Staff Member On April 19th, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Weaver v. Massachusetts.[1] The case concerns an intersection of two constitutional guarantees, the guarantee to the effective assistance of counsel and the guarantee to a fair trial.[2] In Weaver the Supreme Court […]

Read More

The (Mad) Fight to Legalize Sports Betting in New Jersey

THE (MAD) FIGHT TO LEGALIZE SPORTS BETTING IN NEW JERSEY By: Bradley Machov, Volume 101 Staff Member New Jersey wants to legalize sports betting within its borders.[1] In 1992, Congress, with the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 (“PASPA”), made it clear that despite the potential revenue legalized sports betting could generate, “the […]

Read More

Recent State Legislation Seeks to Limit Disruptive Protests

RECENT STATE LEGISLATION SEEKS TO LIMIT DISRUPTIVE PROTESTS By: Jorgen Lervick, Volume 101 Staff Member On January 21, 2017, just one day after President Donald Trump was sworn in as the forty-fifth President of the United States of America, more than two million people in cities all across the country and the world gathered to […]

Read More

Can President Trump Be Sued for Defamation Because of His Personal Tweets?

CAN PRESIDENT TRUMP BE SUED FOR DEFAMATION BECAUSE OF HIS PERSONAL TWEETS? By: Alex Walsdorf, Volume 101 Staff Member If you happen to visit President Trump’s private Twitter page,[1] you will notice his affinity for tweeting. Some of his tweets, at least on their face, promote respectful discourse and are fitting of the office.[2] Other […]

Read More

Hiring Shouldn’t Give License for Firing

HIRING SHOULDN’T GIVE LICENSE FOR FIRING: AFFORDING THE SAME ACTOR INFERENCE APPROPRIATE WEIGHT By: Bailey Drexler, Volume 101 Staff Member In 1991 the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals articulated what would come to be known as the “same actor inference” in the context of employment discrimination cases. In Proud v. Stone,[1] the court announced that […]

Read More

See You in Court

SEE YOU IN COURT: ANALYZING JUDGE GORSUCH’S VIEWS ON THE SEPARATION OF POWERS By: Nathan Rice, Volume 101 Staff Member Judge Neil M. Gorsuch has been cast into a political warzone since his nomination on January 31 to fill the late Antonin Scalia’s now long-vacant seat on the Supreme Court.[1] As he prepares for his […]

Read More

De Novo

  • What the Tax Bill Means for Students

    WHAT THE “TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT” MEANS FOR STUDENTS: DO WE WANT INCENTIVES OR SIMPLIFICATION? By: Melanie Pulles Benson, Volume 102 Staff Member The new House tax reform bill, the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” (“Act”), significantly departs from the current tax code.[1] The Act alters the tax brackets, […]

  • Losing Bigly

    LOSING BIGLY: HOW THE ACLU’S COMPLAINT FORCED THE U.S. GOVERNMENT TO RELEASE ROSA MARIA By: David Racine, Volume 102 Staff Member On October 25, 2017, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) detained Rosa Maria Hernandez, a ten-year-old child with cerebral palsy who was recovering from an emergency surgery she endured […]

  • Silent and Ambiguous

    SILENT AND AMBIGUOUS: THE SUPREME COURT DODGES CHEVRON AND LENITY IN ESQUIVEL-QUINTANA V. SESSIONS By: David Hahn, Volume 102 Staff Member[1] Twenty-year-old Juan Esquivel-Quintana—a lawful permanent resident from Mexico—had consensual sex with his sixteen-year-old girlfriend.[2] This violated California’s statutory rape statute,[3] and he pled no contest in state court.[4] The […]

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