Founded in 1927, Temple Law Review is a student-edited, quarterly journal dedicated to providing a forum for the expression of new legal thought and scholarly commentary on important developments, trends, and issues in the law.
“Standing Beyond Reason” examines the Supreme Court’s ruling in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, affirming that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the FDA’s regulation of mifepristone. In doing so, the Court reinforced the principle that Article III standing requires a concrete, particularized, and imminent injury—which the plaintiffs failed to establish. The decision curbs judicial […]
“The Quest to Normalize Questments” explores the use of “questments”—a hybrid of questions and statements—in cross-examination, advocating for their normalization as an effective trial tool. While cross-examination is a vital aspect of the adversarial trial system, governed by the Federal Rules of Evidence, courts remain inconsistent in recognizing questments as valid leading questions. The article […]
Scholars across disciplines such as sociology, economics, and urban planning are writing about gentrification. The literature and beliefs surrounding gentrification are very diverse, but what often connects the various views is a negative perception that gentrification always disadvantages and displaces low-income minority residents, physically or culturally. But the connotations of race and class associated with […]
Since the United States first began thinking about international law and cyberspace in the 1990s, it has been clear to us that international law applies to what States do in cyberspace, just as it does to what they do in other domains. When I say international law, I mean all of it treaties, of course, […]
On January 29, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit decided Martinez v. UPMC Susquehanna, sending a series of holdings into the world with little fanfare. The organizations and law firms that did report on the decision discussed the narrowest holding that the appellant/plaintiff, Dr. Zeferino Martinez, did not need to […]
Patents are pragmatic public policy tools, used in different places and times to encourage the creation, disclosure, and diffusion of technologies. Positioned as both the gatekeeper and inspirer of technological change, patent law’s hyperstitional power commodifies chemical structures, computer codes, and genetic sequences. This positioning has also made patent law susceptible to a particular kind […]
In response to Professor Melanie C. Regis’s article, Testing the Validity of a Verdict, about the complexities of addressing juror misconduct, Professor Cynara Hermes McQuillan offers a nuanced analysis of the procedural challenges surrounding Remmer hearings. She underscores the urgent need for a uniform standard to resolve the growing circuit split on what constitutes sufficient grounds for such […]
Much of the focus on the upcoming NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton case has been on First Amendment theory and the imagined direct impacts of the social media laws at issue. This Essay takes a different tack, focusing not on the precedent that will inform the case, but the impacts that different proposed limiting principles could […]
The befuddling interplay of state income taxation schemes has been eloquently characterized by legal scholarship as “a mess.” State taxes involve fifty jurisdictions applying distinct rules and differing tax rates. To add more complexity to this tangled web, many states also permit cities, counties, and municipalities to levy separate income taxes. With multiple governmental entities sinking their teeth into the same bundle of earnings, individual taxpayers are often left feeling as though they are paying too much in taxes.
On February 21, 2023, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Arkansas Times LP v. Waldrip (Waldrip III). Opponents of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) campaign rejoiced. Arkansas is one of dozens of states with such a law on the books. And prior to the Eighth Circuit’s decision to uphold the Arkansas law in 2022, no anti-boycott law of similar content had ever survived appellate-level scrutiny. How did the Eighth Circuit come to a different conclusion than the district courts that preceded it? This Note argues that a close read of the decision reveals a failure to apply settled law on boycotts and the protections of the First Amendment.