For those of us who want robust access to education, the internet can certainly help us in realizing that goal. But it would be deeply unfortunate if the drive for increased access led to an evisceration of the educational experience itself.
Even if the bombings and the shootings and yesterday’s regional lockdown have been occupying the national (and even international) media, it is important to work through some of the legal implications of these events.
Welcome to the CRCL 2013 Ames Moot Court Semi-Finals Liveblog! Tonight’s judges are: The Honorable Sandra Segal Ikuta (9th Circuit)
Welcome to the CRCL 2013 Ames Moot Court Semi-Finals Liveblog! Tonight’s judges are: The Honorable Ed Carnes (11th Circuit) The
The future of cybersecurity is in flux, but its shape will be affected by our constitutional protections. To that end, and because much of cybersecurity planning involves creative thinking about potential challenges in a dynamic environment, it is important to think creatively about the protections that we have. At the risk of being a little too “out there,” this post suggests a role for a forgotten constitutional amendment in limiting cybersecurity proposals to protect basic civil liberties.
We know that Obama has largely continued the drone policies of the Bush administration. Even so, the approving nod to Nixon’s expansion of the Vietnam War across Southeast Asia is an unexpected development.
It is entirely appropriate that we focus on data privacy in the context of sex scandals, and this points to something crucially important for privacy activists. The combination of concern about sexual autonomy and about technologically-enabled surveillance has been a crucial driver in privacy law.
With this year’s big affirmative action case, Fisher v. University of Texas, being one of the highlights of the Supreme Court’s current term, it is worth circling back to CRCL’s previous treatment of the issue and reflecting on the moment in the 1990s when Hopwood killed UT’s earlier attempt to use affirmative action to remedy a history of segregation. What can these articles tell us about the issues at stake in Fisher? There seem to be two general lessons.
A perspective on data collection that emphasizes dignity would bring the nature of these transactions into the open . . . when this is all done secretly and without sufficient concern for the transactions that occur between parties who are all deserving of basic respect and dignity, everyone loses.
This summer, the Supreme Court quickly dispensed with a campaign finance law from Montana in American Tradition Partnership, even though the state argued that there was, indeed, a history of corruption that gave the state a compelling interest in limiting independent campaign expenditures. This decision did not speak explicitly about judicial elections, but a more recent decision of the 9th Circuit has invoked Citizens United to weigh in on a different speech issue concerning judicial elections, making the relationship between money, speech, law, and politics deliciously convoluted.
Rather than condemning the profligacy of the State in providing basic human rights for its most marginalized, we must continue to demand positive rights for all. Demanding humane treatment of inmates is substantively necessary, but can also be strategically valuable because it is one of the few spaces in our jurisprudence that recognizes the language of positive human rights.
