Online Journal — Columbia Undergraduate Law Review

After Sulfur and Flame: Anti-Sodomy Laws and the Fourteenth Amendment

On September 23, 2020, the American Civil Liberties Union of Idaho and accompanying civil rights parties filed Doe v. Wasden, a complaint for injunctive and declaratory relief before the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho. The plaintiff, an Idaho resident using the pseudonym John Doe, moved for a judgment to declare Idaho Code § 18-6605 facially unconstitutional. The state law in question, infamously labeled as Idaho’s Crime Against Nature statute, criminalizes consensual oral and anal sex. Doe’s conviction is a blatant violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause and patently disregards the Supreme Court’s 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas.

Banksy Hits a Wall: Why the Artist Secured Trademarks Out of Necessity, Not Bad Faith

Banksy, whose real name and identity have never been formally disclosed, has long made anonymity central to his work and identity as an artist. His anonymity is not only central to his artistic persona, but it also contributes to the value of his creations, many of which have fetched seven and eight-digit prices at the world’s most prestigious auction houses. Yet as Banksy’s fame and notoriety have increased, so too have the number of people profiting off the appropriation and sale of his designs. However, Banksy’s anonymity made the fulfillment of this wish difficult: in order to allege copyright infringement on his designs, Banksy would have to reveal his full, legal identity to prove he is the “unquestionable owner,” which would severely, if not irreparably, undermine his persona and the value of his work.

Mariah HesserJanuary 1, 2021copyright law, trademark, art

The Fourth Amendment and Privacy Risks in the Digital Age

As individuals progressively incorporate digital devices into their daily lives, many aspects of law need to be adjusted to better reflect the interests of those individuals. One particularly glaring blind spot in the law is the collection of internet users’ data. Every occurrence in cyberspace is recorded, and anything recorded is accessible. It is thus critical for the Supreme Court to revise and update their interpretation of the Fourth Amendment to better address the current conditions of online privacy.

Michelle TangDecember 31, 2020Fourth Amendment, online privacy, cybercrime

Kahler v. Kansas (2020): Unjust Abolition of the Insanity Defense, or Criminal Justice Reform?

On November 28, 2009, following a divorce and an episode of severe depression, James Kahler drove to a family gathering where he shot and killed his ex-wife, two daughters, and their grandmother. At trial, he was convicted of four counts of first-degree murder. Despite Kahler’s history of mental illness, the defense was barred from using the insanity defense because Kansas state law denies its use when criminal intent can be proven.

Brian PerlsteinDecember 31, 2020Eighth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, Insanity Defense, Mental Illness

Bringing Sex Discrimination Under Strict Scrutiny: The Need for an Equal Rights Amendment

This year, the United States celebrated the 100th anniversary of the Nineteenth Amendment’s ratification. This amendment began a decades-long process of enfranchising women across the country. By enshrining, for both sexes, the right to vote, the Nineteenth Amendment formally recognized that women do indeed have a role in making political, legal, social, and economic decisions. However, while this amendment legitimized women’s presence in the public sphere, it did not fully grant them equal rights within it.

Liability Immunity for Healthcare Providers Against Medical Malpractice Claims During the Coronavirus Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed jarring shortcomings in America’s healthcare system. Between the shortage of resources and exhausted health practitioners, all aspects of healthcare, even ones not directly related to COVID-19, have been impacted. Though the legal repercussions of one of the “largest medical disasters in [U.S.] history” have yet to fully unravel, over four thousand medical malpractice complaints are reported to have already been filed against physicians as of August 12.

Alison QiOctober 5, 2020COVID-19, liability, healthcare industry, state law

TikTok: The Newest Social Media Trend or a Threat to National Security?

From sensational dances to personalized news, TikTok has become one of the most popular social media platforms of today’s generation. Since its 2018 release in the United States, TikTok has soared in popularity, surpassing two billion global downloads in April 2020. Owned by the Beijing-based startup ByteDance, Tiktok has sparked apprehension among world leaders and politicians that sensitive user data could end up in the hands of the Chinese government.

Elissa KimOctober 5, 2020TikTok, national security, data privacy, social media

Impunity, Immunity, and the Politics of Accountability: A Transnational Imbalance

At the height of the Black Lives Matter movement, posters at protests and rallies across the United States read “End qualified immunity.” Whether it be the growing public demands to shift into an abolitionist framework or the more centrist voices calling for reform from within the existing justice system, many Americans have called into question the mid-twentieth century doctrine that effectively shields public officials from civil suit. Likewise, across the Atlantic, Spaniards have for decades attempted to hold ex-Francoist police officers accountable for thousands of documented instances of torture and enforced disappearance under the fascist regime, with little success on account of national amnesty law.

William George KanellopoulosOctober 5, 2020Qualified immunity, Spain, Franco, fascism

The State of Religious Liberty After Bostock, Little Sisters, & Our Lady of Guadalupe

In June 2020, the Supreme Court delivered a victory for LGBTQ+ rights in Bostock v. Clayton County. In this case, the Court ruled that firing an employee for being gay or transgender violates the prohibition on discrimination “because of … sex” in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. While many Americans rejoiced over this victory, others were concerned about the ruling’s implications for religious liberty.

Will FosterOctober 4, 2020Supreme Court, First Amendment, Religion, Religious Freedom, LGBTQ+ Rights, Discrimination