What Constitutes Discrimination in the Courts? Proving Discriminatory Intent and Systematic Racism in the Death Penalty
Despite overwhelming evidence of systemic racial discrimination within the United States, it is almost impossible to prove its existence within the court. In the historic decision, McCleskey v. Kemp (1987) decision, the Supreme Court ruled that statistical evidence cannot be used to overturn a previous court decision; specifically, the court stated that statistical evidence proving the presence of racial discrimination is not sufficient to warrant re-evaluation under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. [1] The Supreme Court cited the precedent set in Washington v. Davis (1976), which stated that the plaintiff must prove that the state intended to discriminate in order for the case to undergo review through the Equal Protection Clause. [2] Not only is this burden of proof difficult to achieve on its own, but the ruling in McClesky also makes it nearly impossible to meet by excluding statistical data as evidence of intent. Thus, the Supreme Court should reevaluate the standard set for proving discrimination in Washington, which would provide grounds to overturn McCleskeyunder the Equal Protection Clause. By accounting for the specific wording and historical context present in Washington, statistical evidence could qualify as sufficient evidence for discrimination—allowing for challenges regarding racial discrimination to be better accounted for in the courts.
Read More
The 2022 Sino-Russian Statement: A Legal Justification for War?
On February 4th, 2022, as the Beijing Winter Olympics opened, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping declared a “no limits” partnership between their two nations. [1] Their Joint Statement proclaiming a new global era affirmed support for Russian and Chinese territorial ambitions in Ukraine and Taiwan, respectively, and promised to strengthen collaboration between the two nations against the West. The Joint Statement underscored their ambition to collaborate on a wide variety of issues—from climate change to cybersecurity. Less than three weeks later, the world watched as Russia unilaterally invaded Ukraine—overlooking its international obligations under the United Nations (UN) Charter Article 2(4) which states that “all members shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” [2] Russia and China's claim of “no forbidden areas of cooperation” and their endorsement of each other’s territorial ambitions may be indications that Russia’s use of force serves as an implicit threat against international law. [3] By claiming a “New Era” for global affairs, the Joint Statement poses an unprecedented challenge to the existing world order and disrupts the legally binding standards of the UN international system.
Read More
Innovation or Intellectual Scam: Patent Damages and Their Exploited History
With the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s revocation of the decision in the six-year-long case Caltech v. Apple and Broadcom (2022), Apple has been relieved of paying $1.1 billion in damage-based compensation demanded by Caltech, due to alleged infringement on the ‘710 and ‘032 patents held by the latter institution. [1] Given this was the highest patent-related damage amount demanded to date, there is perhaps no better time to highlight the financially exorbitant and highly exploitable nature of the patent law industry. [2] Given that universities attain about three thousand patents a year from either funding research or venture capital investment funds, this issue is only growing in prominence. [3] The denial of Caltech’s “two-tiered damage” theory garners support for a more careful revision of current patent law, specifically its overly-broad interpretation, that maintains its ability to promote innovation and better integrate technology.
Read More
The College Tax Scam: Addressing University Exploitation of The 501(c)3 Tax Status
In the past decade, the tax-exempt status held by higher education institutions has come under increased scrutiny. In 2016, Congress sent a letter to private institutions with endowments over $1 billion, challenging the increase in tuition at rates far above inflation, despite these institutions’ large and growing assets. [1] A significant portion of this growth in college endowments has come from huge land-holdings, with universities paying essentially no property tax as they are 501(c)3 organizations. For example, while imposing massive tuition increases, Columbia University has become the largest landowner by number of addresses in New York City, owning 209 properties, with the next largest private property-holder being New York University (NYU). [2] Columbia and other universities' commercial land holdings illustrate that their organizations are not being exclusively operated as academic or research centers and, therefore, lack justification for 501(c)3 benefits. However, the most egregious display of 501(c)3 status abuse still lies in the college sports complex.
Read More
Teaching the Vote: The Right to Civic Education and Cook v. McKee
Education is the “very foundation of good citizenship,” wrote Justice Earl Warren in his 1954 opinion for Brown v. Board of Education. [1] Nearly twenty years later, in Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972), Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote that “some degree of education is necessary to prepare citizens to participate effectively and intelligently in our open political system.” [2] Often, however, public school curricula lack civic education requirements, and thus do not adequately prepare citizens to understand and engage with the United States’ democratic system of government.
Read More
The Russian Invasion of Ukraine: Examining the Legality of US Interference
The Russian invasion of Ukraine initiated this past February was the culmination of significant regional tension that had been brewing for several years. Ukraine regained independence when the Soviet Union fell in 1991. A decade later, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) began expanding further into Eastern Europe; in 2004, former Soviet states Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia became members of the organization. NATO also adopted an “Open Door Policy,” meaning that any European State that wishes to embody the principles of NATO and its treaty can apply to join the organization. These developments implied that Ukraine, as a post-Soviet European state, could also one day join NATO—such a possibility was first put on paper at the 2008 Bucharest Summit. At this summit, the allies reaffirmed Ukraine’s right to determine its own security dispositions, a right that Russia had also accepted through treaties such as the NATO-Russia Founding Act in 1997. [1] The recent Russian invasion of Ukraine thus raises the question of whether the United States is legally allowed to interfere in the event that Russia takes over Ukraine; this question arises due to the conflict behind US military intervention. [2] Due to the violation of the law of aggression during armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine and the principle of collective self-defense, the United States is legally able to intervene in the conflict of the Russian occupation of Ukraine.
Read More
Current Events | International Humanitarian Law Amid Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine
On the morning of February 24, Russian forces invaded Ukraine ending diplomatic efforts to resolve post-Cold War disagreements between NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) members and Russia, the superpower built from the remnants of the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics). [1] The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has confirmed 925 casualties as of March 17 and proposed that the real number could be higher. [2] The conflict has prompted a massive refugee crisis in Europe, with nearly 3.4 million people having fled the war, over 2 million of whom have taken shelter in Poland. [3] This has prompted the Council of the European Union to implement a temporary protection for refugees and asylum seekers fleeing from the war by augmenting “[residence rights], access to the labour market and housing, medical assistance, and access to education for children.” [4] The World Economic Forum estimates that 16 million people will be in need of humanitarian assistance as a result of the conflict, [5] and the UN Security Council has repeatedly raised concerns about the blockage of emergency relief channels that would lead to a worsening of the humanitarian crisis. [6] Amid the rapidly increasing number of military and civilian casualties, families’ time-sensitive need for humanitarian assistance, and the destruction of crucial infrastructure and health services, the relevance of international humanitarian law as well as its protection and punishments are of timely importance.
Read More
Is the Gang Database Unconstitutional? An analysis of the 1988 STEP Act against Fourth Amendment Rights
As the New York City Department of Investigation continues its three-year probe of the New York Police Department’s gang database, questions are being raised about the database’s constitutionality. To determine the constitutionality of the database, we have to look at the decades-long practice of criminalizing gangs in the United States and what implications it has had for policing. In order to prosecute gangs, the term itself must firstly be defined. Yet the term “gang” in U.S. law remains full of ambiguity. As such, while the penalties for alleged gang members are harsh, the grounds on which gang affiliation is determined are unclear—as is demonstrated by an analysis of gang-prosecution laws across the country.
Read More
Fighting Gentrification: Litigation is Not “the Only Source of Support”
Harlem is a cultural Mecca for Black America, giving birth to some of the most celebrated musicians, artists, writers, and activists in history. However, as Columbia University grows larger and larger in its population and wealth, it has been looking to expand further into West Harlem. This expansion threatens the important history of Harlem and its residents, as the community, which would be displaced by further encroachment, is what makes Harlem, Harlem. Many Harlem residents fear that the expansion of Columbia’s campus, in addition to destroying several acres of historic buildings, will cause an influx of higher income residents, increasing rent prices and pushing out many of the Black and brown residents who have lived in Harlem for generations and depend on affordable housing. Harlem is just one of many lower-income neighborhoods of color facing the reality of gentrification at the hands of municipal governments and private developers, begging the question of if and how the legal system might protect marginalized communities from the whims of the rich, white, and powerful.
Read More
