News 13 - College of Law

Fairness in sport case is already moot, Mazzone and Amar contend

One of the cases before the U.S. Supreme Court in its latest term is already moot, Professors Jason Mazzone and Vikram Amar argue in a new editorial published at Justia Verdict. Little v. Hecox present the justices with the question of whether laws to protect women’s and girls’ sports by limiting participation based on sex assigned at birth violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Examining the facts in the case, they find that the justices should find the case moot and order vacatur.

Read their full article on Justia Verdict.

Mazzone shares what to watch for in new Supreme Court term

An American flag flies over Memorial Stadium.

Tariffs, voting rights, conversion therapy—these are a few of the biggest issues that will be debated before the U.S. Supreme Court in their new term, which began in October. Professor Jason Mazzone, writing at the News-Gazette, shares his take on these issues, as well as the Court’s use of the emergency docket. With this term, “the justices are plainly not interested in keeping a low profile,” he writes.

Read the full article on the News-Gazette website.

Article on diminishing number of jury trials cites Thomas

Detail of rare book at Rare Book & Manuscript Library.

Since the 1960s, the number of jury trials a judge presides over has been steadily decreasing, with state courts only seeing one or two percent of cases resolved by a jury. This significant shift has great effects, such as depriving the public of a view on how the justice system works. A recent article about this trend cites the work of Professor Suja Thomas and her work exposing significant problems with the justice system.

Read the full article from Legal Reader.

Kaplan presents forthcoming paper at George Mason

Professor Kaplan teaches in front of a blackboard

Professor Richard Kaplan recently presented his paper, entitled “The Law and Economics of Financing Long-Term Care: An Unrecognized Impediment to Wealth Transmission,” at a symposium on The Law and Economics of Wealth Management and Transmission sponsored by the George Mason University Law School. The paper will be published in the George Mason Law Review.

Brubaker ’89 and Sprayregen ’85 debate at National Conference of Bankruptcy Judges

Professor Ralph Brubaker ’89 and Jamie Sprayregen ’85 had a collegial debate about current bankruptcy issues at the National Conference of Bankruptcy Judges in Chicago in late September. The conversation was moderated by Bankruptcy Judge Michelle Harner.

Watch the video of their debate online.

Rebranding the Department of Defense is a miss, Curtis writes

ROTC members take part in the Illinois Homecoming parade

In an opinion piece written for Stars and Stripes, Professor Yulanda Curtis shares her feeling that rebranding the Department of Defense as the “Department of War” is a damaging decision. She draws on her background as the daughter of service members as well as the founder of the Veterans Legal Clinic at the College of Law to share uncommon insight into the issue. “I see firsthand the mental and physical sacrifices service members make. As the daughter of veterans, I watched my parents serve this country for decades,” she writes. “There’s a high risk our troops will experience a lasting moral injury as they are ordered to act as political instruments.”

Read the full editorial on Stars and Stripes.

Aronson writes op-ed about protecting immigrant students

Professor Lauren Aronson teaches a class.

Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) allows abused, abandoned, or neglected children a pathway for lawful permanent residence, and eventually US citizenship, once a state court judge determines they have suffered maltreatment and it was not in their best interest to return home. The Trump administration stopped considering SJIS applicants for deferred action, stating “a juvenile court determination relating to the best interest” of children is not a “sufficiently compelling” reason to protect them from deportation and allow them to legally sustain themselves while here. Writing at Common Dreams, Professor Lauren Aronson shares her view of this shift in policy.

“Many SIJS kids, like Sonia, lived their entire lives dreaming of this kind of freedom, which those of us born in the United States take for granted. They deserve, as all children do, the chance to be children,” Aronson writes.

Read her full editorial on Common Dreams.

IGPA interviews Gerke on Illinois’s ban on AI therapists

Recent legislation made Illinois the first state to enact a ban on artificial intelligence serving as mental help therapists without oversight from a licensed clinician. To add context to this development, the Illinois Institute of Government and Public Affairs spoke to Professor Sara Gerke, an expert in the ethical and legal challenges of artificial intelligence and big data for health care and health law. “The problem with unsupervised AI in mental health is that chatbots are designed to keep conversations flowing, not to ensure accuracy or safety,” Gerke explained.

Read the full interview with IGPA online.

Wexler and Ghiotto pen two-part series on military lawyers in civilian law

The Trump administration’s decision to use military lawyers to enforce civilian law was found to violate the Posse Comitatus Act in the Northern District of California, but the simple act of using military lawyers as prosecutors in federal courts and judges in immigration cases is alarming, write Professors Lesley Wexler and Tony Ghiotto. In a two-part series for Justia Verdict, they examine the consequences of the increasing use of the military domestically and why such use should be concerning to all Americans.

“This Administration’s…lawful, but awful policies leave us…hoping for effective political pushback from the public,” they write.

Read part one and part two on Justia Verdict.

Thomas cited in article on disappearing jury trials

Today, juries decide only about 1% of civil cases, a far cry from 1962 when juries decided about 6% of civil cases. An article examining this trend, published by The Conversation, the authors cite Professor Suja Thomas’ book “The Missing American Jury” to illustrate their point about how the trend has the effect of less fairness. “They…benefit political and economic elites by wresting away some of the power that formerly belonged to juries. The cumulative effect is fewer community judgments and more private, judicial and legislative control over outcomes,” the authors write.

Read the full article on The Conversation.