This Essay argues that the Twenty-Second Amendment is enforceable by the states against any two-term president—including Donald Trump—who attempts to evade its requirements and seek an extraconstitutional third term. Whether Trump actually seeks such a term is an open question, though he professes to be serious about doing so, and allegedly sees multiple methods for appearing on the ballot. The...
Episode 11.3 - A History of Critical Race Theory from Those Who Helped Build It with Professor Kimberlé Crenshaw and Professor Cheryl Harris
In this episode, we are joined by two renowned legal scholars who helped build the field of Critical Race Theory. Professor Kimberlé Crenshaw (UCLA School of Law, Columbia Law School) established and championed the concept of intersectionality; she is the host of the podcast Intersectionality Matters! and the author of many books, including #SayHerName: Black Women's Stories of State Violence and...
Episode 11.2 - Sisters-in-the-Law: Conversations Toward a Critical Race Memoir with Dr. Kimberlé Crenshaw and Dr. Dorothy Roberts
In this episode, we are pleased to share a live recording of Sisters-in-the-Law: Conversations Toward a Critical Race Memoir with Dr. Kimberlé Crenshaw (UCLA School of Law) and Dr. Dorothy Roberts (Penn Carey Law School). This event was hosted by the Bunche Center for African American Studies, UCLA School of Law, and the African American Policy Forum. The conversation was moderated by UCLA...
Antitrust's Fading Bright Line: In Defense of Per Se
This Comment confronts the mounting challenges of antitrust jurisprudence. Modern courts struggle to enforce the Sherman Act—an 1890 statute increasingly strained by the realities of contemporary markets. These difficulties are compounded by a shifting regulatory landscape: a Trump administration that champions free-market ideals, legislation aimed at curbing corporate dominance, and a judiciary...
Republicanism, Reconstruction, and Federalism: Article IV's Guarantee of a Republican Form of Government as a Forgotten Source of Congressional Power
In recent years, the Supreme Court of the United States has expressed profound skepticism of congressional action that risks intruding upon the operation of state governments. Simultaneously, the Court has taken a dim view of federal efforts to protect the right to vote. Th is Comment argues that both doctrinal shift s are in tension with the Constitution’s requirement that the federal government...
The War on Immigrants
Resurgent rhetoric equating border crossing with invasion and migrants with criminality has fueled a new wave of state criminal-immigration legislation. Although scholars have extensively critiqued crimmigration—the long-running fusion of immigration enforcement and criminal law—this Article identifies a distinct escalation. Invoking dehumanizing notions of “illegality,” states are directly...
The Legitimacy of Institutional Reform Litigation
Institutional reform litigation (IRL) includes lawsuits brought to reform dysfunctional government bureaucracies. These cases attempt to improve prison conditions, the operation of child welfare systems, the provision of indigent defense, and other policy regimes whose incompetent administrations inflict systemic harm on groups of vulnerable people. IRL originated in school desegregation...
"Smoke and Mirrors": Disingenuous Litigation and Article III's Imminent Injury Problem
Article III standing is supposed to shut the courthouse doors to ideologically motivated plaintiff s with no personal stake in their litigation and open its doors to good-faith plaintiff s with a real risk of future injury—but the doctrine sometimes does the opposite. Th at malfunction is due to three inconsistencies in standing’s imminent injury requirement: (1) courts make erratic evidentiary...