Despite the humanitarian goals of landmark legislation and other anti-trafficking initiatives, the state responses to human trafficking has followed suit with the central consequence of state responses to illicit flows: unintended consequences that fuel circumvention and inflict harm on the wrong actors. Where do these anti-trafficking policies fall short and what can policymakers do to mitigate unintended consequences?
Read MoreThis article looks into the case Garland v. Cargill and how the Supreme Court should examine it. (Image via Getty Images)
Read MoreA surge of migrants arriving in New York City has strained the city’s resources and caused Eric Adams to challenge the right to shelter established in Callahan v. Carey.
Read MoreThis past October, the looming threat of a government shutdown revealed a turbulence in essential federal funding for Native American reservations. This threat to healthcare, energy, and other essential services perpetuates a history of broken treaties and may indicate a violation of established laws outlining federal support for indigenous populations.
Read MoreMinority children bear the burden of environmental pollution inequity, examined through asthma rates and air quality studies.
Read MoreOn February 24, 1999, Soriano was spotted leaving her school. This was the last time she was seen.
Read MoreUnderlying every death penalty case in the United States is the jury death qualification process. What is it, and why should you care? This article explores the standards the Supreme Court has articulated in the past century for capital juries and their implications.
Read MoreKevin McCarthy's tenure as Speaker of the House of Representatives was marked by political fluctuations and a notable absence of firm leadership, partly attributable to a faction of disruptive members within his caucus.
Read MoreAmerica has historically invalidated the testimony of women– even women testifying against their murderers from their deathbeds. Court opinions Seifert v. State, State v. Long, State v. Keller, and Winfrey v. State allow insight into the justice system’s treatment of women and demand a reevaluation of contemporary protections.
Read MoreThe rising momentum of AI is already revolutionizing the provision of healthcare across the continuum, but the resulting integration of its innovation is leaving patients the most vulnerable — are traditional legal safeguards, like HIPAA, enough to protect patient privacy?
Read MoreThis article looks into the Indian Supreme Court’s refusal to codify same-sex marriage into law. It argues that India should have used the legal framework established by the U.S. to legalize same-sex marriage.
Read MoreIn the third part of this three-part series, Professor Ari Gabinet wraps up his discussion of the cases of SEC v. Ripple Labs, Inc. and SEC v. Terraform Labs Pte. LTD. He points outs issues with a court analysis regarding the marketing of XRP.
Read MoreIn the second part of this three-part series, Professor Ari Gabinet dives further into the cases of SEC v. Ripple Labs, Inc. and SEC v. Terraform Labs Pte. LTD, providing a discussion about whether to classify cryptocurrency or digital tokens as “investment contracts”.
Read MoreIn the first part of this three-part series, Professor Ari Gabinet explores the cases of SEC v. Ripple Labs, Inc. and SEC v. Terraform Labs Pte. LTD. The decisions made in these two court cases raises questions of whether purchases of cryptocurrency would be classified as an “investment contract” under federal securities law.
Read MoreAs universities and governments worldwide grapple with the illicit side of the antiquities trade, notoriously associated with criminal activity like money laundering and terrorism funding, consideration of the shortcomings of standing legislation has become increasingly necessary. (Image via HistoryToday)
Read MoreFreedom of speech has long been one of the hallmarks of American democracy, but the exact limits of which sort of speech is protected (and where) has an equally tenured history of contention. The freedom of speech has been controlled and analyzed in public school environments, and has most recently been expanded under the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. The Court’s ruling has widespread implications for the freedom of speech of minors and in public settings as social media continues to grow.
Read MoreThe Fifth Circuit’s recent decision in favor of Texas House Bill 20 may lead to harm policy implication by facilitating the spread of disinformation. (Image via Twitter)
Read MoreThis article examines the expansion of RICO charges over the past 50 years. From mobsters to gangsters to a former President, it examines the legal evolution and future implications of the law. (Image via ABCNews)
Read More
