Current Issue

Antitrust’s Consumer Tradeoffs

By Samuel N. Weinstein.  In modern antitrust law, courts are required to ask only one question: did the challenged action harm consumers? This Article asks a different question: which consumers? Over the last few decades, the Supreme Court has increasingly required antitrust plaintiffs to prove not only that they were harmed, but also that their […]

Private Control in Medicare’s Off-Label Drug Coverage

By Elenore Wade. Medicare Part D’s compendium restriction on coverage of off-label drugs often prevents enrollees from receiving necessary medications. The restriction serves as a uniquely durable administrative barrier to coverage because, unlike other Medicare coverage issues, it requires patients to mount legal rather than factual challenges to coverage decisions. Agency deference to and defense […]

The Crime Victim’s Right to Justice

By Steve Twist & Vanessa A. Kubota.  The crime victim’s “right to justice” in the Arizona Victims’ Bill of Rights is more than a lofty ideal—it is a substantive constitutional guarantee that predates its enactment. But what does it mean in practice? By tracing justice from its philosophical and etymological roots to its place in […]

The Rights of Detained Child Migrants

Garreth W. McCrudden.  This Article presents empirical analysis of new data relating to the detention of more than 500,000 child migrants who arrived unaccompanied in the United States between 2015 and 2022. It then develops a novel, data-informed approach for determining the time beyond which detention of child migrants becomes presumptively unconstitutional as a violation of […]

Fadely v. Encompass Health Valley of Sun Rehabilitation Center: Bolstering the Pre-existing Enterprise Liability of the Arizona Adult Protective Service Act

By Amanda Lombard.  In Fadely v. Encompass Health Valley of Sun Rehabilitation Hospital, the Arizona Court of Appeals clarified enterprise liability under the Arizona Adult Protective Services Act (APSA). According to Fadely, APSA enterprise liability applies to any member of the “continuing unit” of care, not merely direct perpetrators of elder abuse. The court’s interpretation […]

The Aftermath of Grants Pass: How Permitting the Criminalization of Homelessness Will Impact Phoenix, Arizona

By Sarah Kerr.  How will the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Grants Pass affect Phoenix’s treatment of the unhoused? The author argues that Grants Pass will give Phoenix the “green light” to aggressively enforce the city’s recently expanded anti-camping ban, which will further the criminalization of homelessness and police officers’ inhumane treatment of the unhoused. Instead of turning to criminal […]

Dignity and Deepfakes

By Michael P. Goodyear.  Increasingly realistic deepfakes pose new threats to preserving human dignity in the technological age. Over a century ago, the right of publicity emerged in response to a similar problem of a likeness-capturing new technology and the ability to disseminate one’s likeness to the masses. We can learn from, and leverage, the […]

Remediating Cultural Appropriation

By Aman K. Gebru.  The Article introduces a quadrant of cultural appropriation keyed to two factors—the cultural symbol’s level of diffusion and the degree of its commercial use (diffused/non‑commercial; distinct/non‑commercial; diffused/commercial; distinct/commercial) and concluding that legal remedies are largely unworkable in the first three because of free‑speech and standing concerns. Focusing on the distinct‑commercial quadrant, […]

The 2023 Names Rule Amendment: An Unnecessary, Unjustifiable, and Consequential Expansion

Matteo DeVincenzo.  In 2001, the SEC implemented the Names Rule to protect investors by ensuring that mutual funds invest in a manner consistent with their names. In 2023, however, the SEC amended the rule in a way that is unnecessary, unjustified, and consequential. As the 2026 compliance deadline approaches, the fund industry faces significant and immediate […]

Federalism Limits on State Criminal Extraterritoriality

By Matthew P. Cavedon.  Based on research into English common law and early American jurisprudence, this article concludes that states ordinarily cannot prosecute actions committed beyond their borders. It explores this rule’s consequences for abortion, cybercrime, and election interference cases. Full Article