Online Journal — Columbia Undergraduate Law Review

How International Children’s Rights Law Can Force Governments to Prioritize Tackling Climate Change

The United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) guarantees youth the human right to be protected from threats. According to the convention, which was ratified by 196 UN member nations, all children are entitled to the “inherent right to life” and education, with the goal of these rights being the “development of the child’s personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential.” Of all the threats children face, climate change is, without a doubt, proving itself to be the most formidable and existential. Today, the planet increasingly hurdles over temperature records, while extreme weather phenomena worsen in intensity and frequency each year. It has become increasingly evident that, due to climate change, children will lack an environment conducive to their development in the coming decades.

The Self-Defense Principle Re-examined: The Israel-Palestine Conflict in International Law

May 2021 clashes in the Gaza Strip between the Israeli Defense Forces and Hamas, Gaza’s de facto government, have caused the Israel-Palestine conflict to capture international attention yet again. The conflict can be dated back to the early 20th century, when the British Empire first took control over what was then known as the Palestinian mandate after the end of the First World War. Since then, the region has seen bitter disputes between the Arab majority and the Jewish minority over the ownership of the land. The conflict intensified after the United Nations (UN) proposal to partition the territory in 1948, which culminated in the eviction of more than 700,000 Palestinians in an event known as the Nakba, as well as increasing Israeli infringement upon the delineated Palestinian lands. Since 2005, Israel has committed to a process known as “distanciation,” in which Israel reduced its direct military occupation of Palestinian territories, leaving the strip of Gaza to stand alone.

COVID-19 and Intellectual Property Rights: The Promises and Limitations of a WTO Vaccine Intellectual Property Waiver

Over the past year and a half, COVID-19 has ravaged the planet. However, in the past few months, while the developed world, spurred by high-efficacy vaccines, has enjoyed relative normalcy, the developing world has suffered the worst of the pandemic. This disparity has sparked debate around whether the World Trade Organization (WTO) should grant an Intellectual Property (IP) waiver for technology related to COVID-19 vaccine production. This waiver would protect national governments that issue a compulsory license—the right to produce a patented product—to its companies for the vaccine from legal action by other members. The resulting increase in producers would theoretically fuel a decrease in vaccine prices, making vaccines available to poorer nations.

The New Public Square of Opinions: Technocratic Giants and Public Utilities

Following a series of state-led cases against technocratic giants, Ohio attorney general David Yost attempted another path to regulation through a 2021 lawsuit demanding that Google be declared a public utility and Google Search become a public utility in the state of Ohio. Such a lawsuit, if successful, would subsequently place Google under the supervision of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO). Public utilities are generally defined as private and public entities that provide essential service to the public, most often in association with energy and telecommunication establishments.

Skylar WuAugust 22, 2021Technology, Public Utilities, Monopoly, Regulation, Google Search, Antitrust Law

Georgia’s Election Integrity Act of 2021: How Strict Voter ID Requirements Negatively Impact People of Color

On March 25, 2021, Georgia passed the Election Integrity Act of 2021, also known as Senate Bill 202, following the first Democratic victories in presidential and Senate elections in Georgia in a generation. The law enacted several restrictions that curtail access to absentee ballots for voters in booming urban and suburban counties. But the tightening of ID requirements will have the most harmful impact on the turnout of voters of color. President Joseph Biden went so far as to call this law “the 21st century Jim Crow,” referring to laws that effectively blocked Black men and women from voting in the American South. According to Kristen Clarke, the president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, “These are laws that attempt to make it more difficult for certain kinds of voters to participate, particularly African Americans and Latinos.” Georgia’s Election Integrity Act of 2021 constitutes a form of voter suppression, as it will negatively impact minority voters due to its strict new ID requirements for absentee ballots, due to minorities disproportionately lacking access to the required documents, and possible financial and transportation burdens in attaining forms of identification.

Rebecca ReyesAugust 22, 2021voting rights, election integrity act, voter ID, Georgia, minority voters

Milieudefensie et al v. Royal Dutch Shell: Budding Legal Corporate Accountability in the Climate Change Fight

In the past fifty years, torrents of environmental regulations have washed down upon corporate activity around the world, collecting into what many have termed an ‘environmental alphabet soup.’ Indeed, over 1,300 multilateral environmental agreements, 2,200 baseline environmental assessments, 250 other environmental agreements, and 90,000 individual country actions in accordance with these assessments currently exist. Yet, because international environmental standards lack systematic means of enforcing corporate adherence, corporate heads have the leeway to continue prioritizing profit over their environmental responsibilities, and, as a consequence, the world has seen a 75 percent increase in global greenhouse gas emissions between 1970 and 2004. To remedy this lack of oversight, the corporate accountability movement aims to build an environmental standard of care: a set of responsibilities each corporate entity has to prevent any anticipatable environmental damage.

Possibilities for Constitutional Enforcement: How Compensation Cases Clarify the Role of the Chinese Constitution

The Chinese Constitution occupies a precarious position in the Chinese legal system. Though it is regarded as the supreme legal authority, it is not judicialized, meaning that its articles are not allowed to be used as legal basis in court. In recent years, Chinese President Xi JinPing’s judicial reforms have only raised further questions about the role of the Constitution. While Xi has advocated for increased enforcement of the Constitution and of law-based governance, he has also emphasized that the rule of law cannot threaten the rule of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). [

The Liancourt Rocks Dispute: Is Terra Nullius a Relic of Colonialism?

The two nations of South Korea and Japan have been embroiled in bitter diplomatic disputes for the past several decades. One matter of contention is the Liancourt Rocks Dispute: a question of sovereignty over a group of small islands situated between the coasts of the two countries. Early records provided by South Korea and Japan voice a common narrative. While evidence of early human activity, primarily fishing, remains, the rocky terrains rendered permanent residence on the islands nearly impossible. Currently, only ten Korean citizens are officially registered by the South Korean government as residents of the Liancourt Rocks. No further requests of residency have been accepted.

Subin KimAugust 22, 2021terra nullius, territorial dispute, international court, colonialism, international law

The Right to Safe Work: How COVID-19 Reveals Socioeconomic Gaps in Workers’ Protection Laws

As of mid-2021, the United States is struggling with a resurgence of the COVID-19 pandemic amid reports that the new Delta variant of the virus can infect fully vaccinated individuals. Consequently, many nonessential workers are hesitant to return to their workplaces in person. Their concerns about workplace safety during the pandemic’s resurgence call for legal scholars and policymakers to revisit the Occupational Health and Safety Act of 1970 (OSH Act), which requires employers to ensure that workplaces are “free of recognized harms” and entitles employees to file a complaint to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) without retaliation from their employer.

Ilana GutAugust 22, 2021OSHA, COVID-19, Vaccines, Labor Law, Employees, Employers, Workplace Safety, Workplace Discrimination, ADA