This Article reveals that Freedom of Information Act requests at seven federal agencies are dominated by individuals seeking records about themselves, including immigration, investigation, and medical records. Yet FOIA is ill-suited to meet the vital needs of first-person requesters, and these requests may be crowding out FOIA’s intended purpose.
It is an age-old maxim of criminal jurisprudence that the state must never punish people for their mere thoughts—for their beliefs, desires, and unexecuted intentions. Yet its justification is something of a mystery. This Essay argues that each of the prevailing justifications is deficient and proposes a novel one.
In this Review of James Forman, Jr.’s Pulitzer Prize-winning Locking Up Our Own: Crime and Punishment in Black America, Darren Hutchinson reconciles Forman’s research with antiracist accounts of U.S. crime policy. Literature on implicit bias, social dominance orientation, and right-wing authoritarianism contextualizes black punitive sentiment within antisubordination criminal law theory.
Administrative finality jurisprudence is mired in a doctrinal morass. Specifically, courts have not converged on a finality doctrine for interpretative rules. This Note integrates an historical analysis of the Administrative Procedure Act with the revolution that Chevron deference fostered to provide a coherent and workable finality doctrine for interpretative rules.
The President is increasingly the epicenter of national security decision making, a development in tension with the shared war-making power in the Constitution. This Note explores how Congress could use an Appropriations Clause lawsuit to reassert its constitutional prerogative against the President’s unilateral national security actions.
Online search renders most advertising obsolete for conveying product information. Today, the only purpose of most advertising is to persuade consumers to purchase products. Because the information function of advertising is now obsolete, this Article argues that the Federal Trade Commission should renew its mid-twentieth century campaign against persuasive advertising.
Through an analysis of the challenges facing the “new working class,” this Essay argues that in order to advance their clients’ interests, progressive lawyers must redefine public interest law such that it centers on a commitment to developing left political power.
Conversation about Masterpiece Cakeshop has focused on the Court’s holding that decisionmakers must treat those seeking religious exemptions with respect. This Essay brings to light the case’s broader guidance on religious exemptions under the Free Exercise Clause and what that means for judicial and legislative actors going forward.
This Essay argues that the definition of professional speech should not be expanded beyond the doctrine’s purpose: ensuring that clients receive accurate, comprehensive, and reliable advice in accordance with the insights of the relevant knowledge community. It then examines these limits of professional speech through NIFLA v. Becerra.
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s student Note in Volume 99 of the Yale Law Journal.
Arbitration has begun to take a new form: mandatory arbitration provisions built into corporate charters and bylaws. The debate about the merits of arbitration is well worn, but its application to shareholder claims opens the door to a different set of responses. This Essay provides one, explaining why the overlapping
The #MeToo movement has prompted a national dialogue about sexual harassment. This Companion Collection, launched in collaboration with the Stanford Law Review, aims to draw lessons from the #MeToo movement for activists, scholars, policymakers, lawyers, and judges. Across the two journals, the Collection offers twelve scholars’ insights on the
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s student Note in Volume 99 of the Yale Law Journal.
The #MeToo movement has prompted a national dialogue about sexual harassment. This Companion Collection, launched in collaboration with the Stanford Law Review, aims to draw lessons from the #MeToo movement for activists, scholars, policymakers, lawyers, and judges. Across the two journals, the Collection offers twelve scholars’ insights on the
In 1980, Stephen Reinhardt, a graduate of Yale Law School, joined the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Thirty years later, The Yale Law Journal asked five distinguished contributors to reflect on the unique legacy that Judge Reinhardt crafted in his first thirty years on the bench.