Northeastern University Law Review
Missing the Bus: The Promise and Failure of the ...

By Thomas Hislop

In 1965, Massachusetts became the first state in the nation to enact a law that directly addressed racial imbalances in its public schools.[1] Championing the legacy of Brown v. Board of Education (1954) (“Brown”), the Racial Imbalance Act (“the RIA”) strived for “promotion of racial balance and the correction of existing racial imbalance in the public schools.”[2] This unprecedented legislation, however, never achieved its purpose. A court order designed to implement the RIA that required Boston public schools to integrate was met with fierce opposition and, eventually, prompted significant white flight.[3] Today, Boston public schools are more segregated than they were sixty years ago.[4]


[1] Dennis Ford Eagan, Note, The Past, Present, and Future of School Desegregation Law in Massachusetts, 34 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 541, 556 (2001).

[2] Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 71, § 37C (1965).

[3] See infra notes 44-54.

[4] See Christina Pazzanese, Boston Busing in 1974 Was About Race. Now The Issue Is Class, The Harv. Gazette (June 18, 2024), https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2024/06/school-reform-expert-on-50-year-legacy-of-boston-busing/#:~:text=Current%20enrollment%20is%20now%20roughly,mental%20health%20and%20behavioral%20problems (“Students of color are now more racially isolated in Boston public schools than ever before.”); Desegregation Busing, Bos. Rsch. Ctr., https://bostonresearchcenter.org/projects_files/eob/single-entry-busing.html (“As of 2018, more than half of Boston Public Schools are profoundly segregated, more so than they were in 1965.”).

Northeastern University Law Review
Reforming Res Judicata for the Sake of Diffuse ...

By Cansu Koça

This article discusses the contemporary challenges of diffuse interest class actions. The primary issue is the limited access to justice for members of the diffuse class, exacerbated by the res judicata principle and inadequate due protection mechanisms. Therefore, the intricate process of certifying a diffuse class and ensuring adequate representation will be addressed. Concerns regarding the inability of various notice methods to reach all members of the diffuse class will also be highlighted, further underscoring the need for comprehensive reform. Drawing insights from innovative approaches in countries like Brazil and Argentina, this article proposes a nuanced res judicata framework in the U.S. that addresses adequacy concerns and upholds the principle of due process, while navigating the complexities of diffuse interest class actions.

Northeastern University Law Review
An Analysis of the Current U.S. Regulatory ...

By Joseph Steinbach

For the past decade, cryptocurrency companies have found themselves squarely in the crosshairs of litigation initiated by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). The question that is currently dominating the courtroom in this arena is whether the sale of a company’s key digital assets, commonly referred to as “cryptocurrency” or "crypto," constitutes the sale of securities under federal law.Tasked with overseeing the securities market, the SEC seeks to ensure safe and fair participation in federal securities exchanges. With recent scandals and accusations of fraud plaguing major players in the industry, the SEC is now taking a firmer regulatory stance than it had in the past. Today, circuit splits concerning the applicable regulatory framework and the appropriate definition of  “securities” continue to fuel the fire of this contentious debate.

Northeastern University Law Review
What is a “Meaningful Opportunity?” Disparities ...

BY EILIDH CURRIE

When it comes to criminal culpability, the Supreme Court has consistently treated children in a manner different than adults. Because of this understanding, the Court has recognized that sentences of life without parole may be too harsh for minors. The Court has banned mandatory juvenile life without parole (JLWOP) but permits courts to issue discretionary JLWOP sentences. The Supreme Court also permits courts to impose lengthy sentences, often called “virtual” or “de facto” life sentences. However, when issuing these lengthy sentences, courts must ensure that a minor retains a meaningful opportunity for release. Striking this balance is a challenge for sentencing courts: how long of a sentence is too long? Which sentences equate to JLWOP? What is a meaningful opportunity?…

Kid Row: The Case Against Sentencing Juveniles to Life Without the Possibility of Parole

By Eliza Lockhart-Jenks

In June 2012, the United States Supreme Court acknowledged that adults and juveniles—even those convicted of major offenses—are fundamentally different and entitled to different sentencing standards.  In Miller v. Alabama , the Supreme Court decreed that courts must consider mitigating factors in a juvenile’s life when the juvenile faces a possible sentence of life without parole (LWOP); in other words, mandatory LWOP sentences will no longer apply to minors.  Before this decision, state legislatures could and, in many cases, did mandate LWOP sentences for certain crimes, regardless of the offender’s age.  In Miller, the Supreme Court held that the failure to consider mitigating factors, including age, when sentencing a juvenile to LWOP constitutes cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. 

The NFL in Los Angeles? Eminent Domain and the Revitalization of Rule 4.3: A look at tools that may keep a city from losing its NFL team

By Michael J. Cullen

Sports fans are well-accustomed to their franchises relocating. In the National Basketball Association, it is why a city with no lakes - Los Angeles, California - has a team called the Lakers, and a city not known for its jazz scene - Salt Lake City, Utah - has a team called the Jazz. In the 1990s, the National Football League (NFL) saw a huge upswing in relocations. In particular, 1995 was a significant year for NFL franchise relocation: the Cleveland Browns moved to Baltimore and became the Ravens, the Houston Oilers moved to Nashville and became the Titans, and the Raiders returned to their original home in Oakland. Most NFL fans are aware of Los Angeles’ attempts to be the destination of the next franchise relocation. While relocating to Los Angeles would undoubtedly increase a team’s profits, franchise relocation negatively affects fans and the city losing its team. “This is the picture of the current NFL: the owners make demands upon their cities for public subsidies, and if their demands are not met, they flee to another city willing to offer them favorable terms and unlimited control.”

The Shaky Foundation of Expansion in the Face of Drought: Reclaimed Water Encouraging Irrational Growth

By Clark Wheeler

This article seeks to supplement the ongoing debate concerning reclaimed wastewater programs. Highlighting a series of legal challenges to a snow-making program in Arizona using reclaimed water, I argue that widespread reclaimed water usage is problematic, both as a potential environmental calamity and as a support mechanism for irrational urban development. Reclaimed water may ultimately serve as a supplemental resource that, when combined with subsidized water programs, allows municipalities to continue to grow without recognizing the true cost of water resources. If the summer drought of 2012 is a forecast of future events, then challenging decisions lie ahead concerning the growth of cities as their fresh water sources evaporate. Legal challenges against reclaimed water systems will allow municipalities and states to begin stricter regulation of water usage in arid climates, and may address the impending reality of long-term drought conditions in a rational manner.

Flood Plans: A Comparison of New Jersey’s Use of the National Flood Insurance Program and New York’s Buyout Program

By Ariella N. Sparr

In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, state and federal governments are creating plans to protect coastlines from future devastation with uncertain outcomes for homeowners. The Governors of two of the hardest hit states, New York and New Jersey, have announced two different plans for the devastated property on their shores. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie proposed that homeowners either spend tens of thousands of dollars to elevate their homes, or pay up to $31,000 per year for federally-funded flood insurance. In lieu of federal flood insurance, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo proposed a buyout program for certain coastal areas destroyed by the storm. Under this plan, Governor Cuomo proposes to offer the pre-devastation market value of the property to homeowners, and re-purpose the land as dunes, wetlands, natural buffers or public parkland to protect the coast. While homeowners could benefit from both plans, the question arises, which of these programs offers better remedies to homeowners?

Compassion for Patients but Not for Parents? Medical Marijuana, Decriminalization & Child Protective Services

By Jess Cochrane

Despite the federal Controlled Substances Act’s wholesale prohibition of cannabis—classifying marijuana as a Schedule I substance with no potential medical use—twenty states and Washington D.C. have approved medicinal marijuana programs, and 17 have “decriminalized” possession of small amounts of the plant for personal use. In 2008 and 2012, Massachusetts voters approved marijuana reform ballot initiatives in recognition of marijuana’s potential medicinal value and the unnecessarily harsh consequences for petty possession of the substance. Both laws carve out certain circumstances under which an adult may use and possess limited amounts of marijuana, subject to minimal oversight from state agencies.

In this article, I analyze the protections which both laws offer to pregnant women, parents, and caretakers of minor children, who, compared with non-parenting individuals, face an added layer of possible state sanctions for marijuana possession in the form of child protective services (“CPS”) actions.

Tripping Over TRIPS: Developing Countries’ Access to Lifesaving Medications

By Ashley Cohen and Cassandra Montgomery

After years of pressure, the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) has become a prerequisite for any country if it wishes to join the World Trade Organization (WTO).  TRIPS is an international treaty which globalizes and regulates intellectual property.  Article 31 in the TRIPS Agreement deals with authorized use of patents without the authorization of the patent holder.   In this article we specifically examine some problems and potential solutions of authorized use for emergencies provided for in Article 31.   Many countries sign onto the TRIPS Agreement in order to benefit from joining the WTO.  However, most developing countries are not equipped to meet the demands of the TRIPS Agreement, though they are allowed four years to comply with its requirements.   These third-world countries often need lifesaving drugs they cannot afford to produce themselves and cannot acquire without special provisions.  Consequently, it is necessary to allow special provisions in the TRIPS Agreement to meet the pharmaceutical and health care needs of these developing countries.  New provisions and clarifications are required to remove this barrier to pharmaceutical access. The dilemma lies in how to successfully implement such provisions.