Blog Articles

Is Social Media the Next Big Tobacco? Public Nuisance Litigation and the Limits of Section 230

Kennedy Aikey examines the growing wave of litigation against major social media companies, specifically the recent case holding Meta and YouTube liable, and asks whether social media could become the next Big Tobacco. She explores how plaintiffs use nuisance theories to argue that platforms such as Meta, YouTube, TikTok, and Snap Inc. intentionally designed addictive platforms that harm youth mental health. She also analyzes whether claims that focus on the design of social media platforms, rather than on user-generated content, could allow plaintiffs to bypass the liability shield created by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

AI as a Force Multiplier: The New Era of Serial ADA Litigation

AI is transforming ADA litigation, making it easier than ever for serial filers to generate high volume claims. But as courts confront fabricated citations and AI assisted filings, the system’s vulnerabilities are becoming increasingly apparent. In her latest article, Mofe Koya explores how AI is reshaping enforcement—and the challenges that come with it.

Steps, Sleep, Safety: Rethinking Privacy for Wearable Health Devices

Katie Bunch examines how wearable healthcare devices collect sensitive health data that often falls outside of HIPAA protections. She explores potential gaps in federal and state privacy laws and argues for stronger consent requirements, expanded HIPAA coverage, and more uniform protections to ensure consumers’ health information is safeguarded as technology continues to advance.

A Silver Lining: Could the Repeal of the Endangerment Finding Allow for a New Mechanism to Challenge Power Companies Through Public Nuisance Litigation?

Stella Brocker explores how the repeal of the endangerment finding may open the door to public nuisance claims against power companies. This action was previously barred by the 2011 Supreme Court decision in American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut, which held that the EPA’s Endangerment Finding formed part of a congressional statutory scheme that displaced federal public nuisance claims. She argues that in the absence of this statutory scheme, these claims should now be able to proceed in federal court, allowing injured parties an opportunity to seek relief from those who are largely responsible for the emissions contributing to climate change.

Below the Floor: How States are Challenging Federal Child Labor Law

Maggie Traubert explores how recent state efforts to expand youth employment create conflicts with federal child labor laws, leaving businesses uncertain of the law and young workers potentially at risk of abuse. The article examines how state child labor statutes disrupt the cooperative federalism model, function as “zombie laws,” exploit enforcement gaps, and impose asymmetric legal burdens on businesses.

The Tragedy of Adriana Smith: Remedying Statutory Ambiguity in a Post-Dobbs Society

Joanna Swaiss argues that ambiguity in post-Dobbs fetal personhood statutes encourages hospitals to adopt risk-averse practices that undermine patient autonomy and family decision-making—illustrated by the case of Adriana Smith. She argues that legislative reform, such as “Adriana’s Law,” is needed to clarify that abortion restrictions do not override end-of-life principles once a pregnant patient is legally dead.

“Forever Chemicals”: The Shifting Landscape of PFAS Regulation

Brookelynn Stone discusses the current PFAS regulatory landscape and the harmful effects these forever chemicals have on communities throughout the United States. She contends that the current EPA’s actions regarding delaying compliance timelines and weakening reporting requirements for importers and manufacturers undermines public health. She discusses the need for a more coordinated and stable approach to address PFAS as the current patchwork of state level regulations and a fragmented federal approach is insufficient to address issues concerning public health.

Up ↑

Skip to content