New on the UC Law Review Blog, Emmy Blane argues that the effective dismantling of the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights violates the Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine and analyzes the Victim Rights Law Center litigation to demonstrate how the structural changes harm students.
Jin Lim examines conflicting interpretations of the major questions doctrine and calls for clearer limits on executive power.
New on the UC Law Review Blog, Jacob Davenport explores how executive control over official facts shapes the exercise of constitutional authority. It argues that recognizing and constraining this epistemic executive power is essential to preserving constitutional accountability.]
In this blog, author Collin Derrig discusses the Trump Administration’s January 2025 memorandum rescinding protections from immigration enforcement activities in “sensitive locations” such as houses of worship. The blog focuses on the constitutionality of the policy as applied to houses of worship under the First Amendment right to freedom of expressive association.
New on the UC Law Review Blog, Professor John B. Pinney explains why international commercial arbitration is far more than simply "arbitration across borders." By comparing it with domestic arbitration in the United States, the Article highlights the procedural, evidentiary, and enforcement mechanisms that have made international arbitration the principal means of resolving cross-border commercial disputes.
New on the UC Law Review Blog, Maggie Traubert explores how U.S. labor and immigration laws create a structural paradox in agriculture, relying on migrant farmworkers while denying them meaningful legal protections. The Article argues that this system of vulnerability is not economically inevitable but rather legally constructed and calls for reforms that align worker protections with their essential role in the nation’s food system.
Joanna Swaiss analyzes Ohio’s proposed Holly Act and its implications for bail reform and pretrial detention. She argues that the Act’s categorical, offense-based restrictions are both constitutionally problematic and practically ineffective, as they risk sweeping in low-risk defendants while failing to identify individuals who pose genuine threats to public safety. She advocates for a more measured, evidence-driven framework centered on individualized risk assessments, judicial discretion, and reduced reliance on wealth-based detention.
New on the UC Law Review Blog, Brookelynn Stone discusses how the “American Dream” of homeownership is increasingly out of reach for many Americans as housing costs surge nationwide. She examines how Idaho’s recent legislation seeks to restore affordability and whether state intervention is necessary when local zoning boards fail to act.
In this article, Nathan Steineker analyzes how the Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision in Anderson v. Intel Corp. and the Department of Labor’s Proposed Rule may jointly reshape ERISA fiduciary standards and expand the use of alternative investments in defined contribution plans.
Kennedy Aikey examines the legal implications of ABC’s abrupt cancellation of a fully filmed season of The Bachelorette following the resurfacing of a domestic violence incident involving its lead, Taylor Frankie Paul. The piece analyzes whether ABC and Disney acted within their contractual rights, focusing on the likely presence and scope of a morality clause and how reputational harm provisions function in an era where social media can rapidly amplify public outrage
