Professors Rimalt and Yefet respond to Dean Chemerinsky and Professor Goodwin’s recent article by arguing for a supplementary equality framing that defines the scope and substance of the right to abortion on the basis of equal treatment standards and measures the female right against other comparable male rights.
Category Archives: SA Vol. 95
In this note, Stamm argues for folding young adults into the juvenile justice system by reviewing the various ways in which many states have already taken the lessons of the juvenile system—lots of treatment and programming, age-limited facilities, shorter sentences, and sealed records—and applied them to the developmentally similar young adult population.
Prof. Levinson responds to Prof. Law’s article on constitutional archetypes, and in so doing, Prof. Levinson proffers four—instead of Law’s three—archetypes for consideration.
Prof. Brown responds to Prof. King and Prof. Wright’s article studying judicial participation in plea negotiations.
In this article, Prof. Blackman discusses three critical errors in the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Washington v. Trump and analyzes the panel’s refusal to narrow the injunction. Please note that this draft version is subject to change.