Allie Carter (CMC ’19) On October 25th, 2017, an undocumented pregnant minor being held under federal custody finally received the controversial abortion she had been approved for a month prior, thanks to a federal appeals court decision. Lawyers and advocates for the undocumented minor have argued that federal officials took extreme measures to hinder her and other undocumented pregnant...
A Right to Privacy for India’s 1.3 Billion Citizens
Allie Carter (CMC ’19) India’s Supreme Court asserted privacy as a basic right in August of 2017, formally joining the United States, Canada, South Africa, the European Union, and the United Kingdom in doing so. While privacy as a right does not have an explicit definition, it has generally initially applied to data protection and eventually incorporated the disclosure personal information...
Pitting Rights against Rights: Religious Freedom and Birth Control
By Daisy Ni (PO ’21) For the past few years under the Affordable Care Act, employers were required to provide birth control coverage in the health insurance plans they offered employees. Last Friday, however, the Trump administration rescinded that regulation as announced by the Department of Health and Human Services; starting immediately, employers can now deny contraceptive care coverage on...
Vagueness and Violence: Sessions v. Dimaya
Dina Rosin (CMC ’20) On October 2, 2017, Sessions v. Dimaya was argued in front of the Supreme Court of the United States. The case involves the rights of non-citizens to invoke the Vagueness Doctrine to challenge immigration policy within the U.S. court system. The decision of the Supreme Court will help determine what constitutional rights are afforded to legal non-citizens residing...
Have Your Cake, But Eat It Too? A Look at Anti-Discrimination Laws in Everyday Life
Dina Rosin (CMC ’20) Is baking a cake an act of “speech”? This question is at the heart of the case Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission which will be heard by the Supreme Court of the United States in the fall of 2017. In this case, the Supreme Court will have to decide whether refusing to bake a cake on the basis of religious beliefs is a protected right under the...
Inadequacies in the Legal System: Rape and Sexual Assault
By Bonnie Binggeli (The State University of New York at Fredonia ‘17) Rape and sexual assault have rendered the face of domestic issues within the United States. It has been exemplified in the media that the U.S judicial and legal systems are not adequate in handling and prosecuting instances of sexual offenses. A series of highly publicized cases have shown how reform in the legal system...
California State Right-to-Try: Unconstitutional Legislation that Endangers Public Health
By Helen Guo (PO ’20) In recent years, “right-to-try” laws, which aim to grant terminally-ill patients access to experimental drugs or devices, have become a contentious policy issue and have gained speed throughout the U.S. In the latter months of 2014 alone, five states—olorado, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, and Arizona—passed right-to-try legislation.[1] As of September 2016, California has...
War in the Modern Era: Interview with Professor John Yoo
By James McIntyre (PO ’19), Staff Writer John Yoo, a law professor at the University of California Berkeley and former Justice Department attorney, specializes in constitutional law. On April 13th 2017, Yoo discussed war powers during his talk at Claremont McKenna College. He is the author of countless articles and books, including his upcoming book Embracing the Machines: Robots, Cyber...
Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Debate Over the Death Penalty in Arkansas
Dina Rosin (CMC ’20) An ongoing debate over the death penalty has been taking place in Arkansas over the last several weeks. The state is racing to execute convicts before the end of April. This urgency is present because one of the drugs necessary for executions will expire after that date. If Arkansas fails to execute the convicts on death row before the drugs expire, it is unclear if the...
The Case for (and Against) Sanctuary Jurisdictions
Isaac Cui PO ‘20 Introduction On January 25, 2017, Donald Trump issued two sweeping executive orders which removed many of the previous administration’s policies regarding immigration enforcement in favor of a stringent, restrictionist approach. More specifically, one[1] punishes so-called sanctuary policies for causing “immeasurable harm to the American people and to the very fabric of our...