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?…

Drug-Induced Homicide: A Comprehensive Statutory Proposal

BY ANNA BEAVERS

The staggering increase in US opioid overdose deaths in the last decade has prompted federal and state governments to aggressively pursue drug-induced homicide prosecutions, underscoring the propensity for punitive rather than policy responses to drug use. State and federal drug-induced homicide laws are too often overly broad and consequently incriminate individuals who lack the requisite mens rea for homicide prosecution. This paper addresses the issues with the current status of drug-induced homicide legislation and offers a legal framework to resolve certain deficiencies. In Part I, this paper explains the problematic approaches federal and state governments currently employ to combat today’s opioid epidemic while Part II explores the legal conundrum resulting from overly broad statutory language. The paper then offers, in Part III, a comprehensive statutory proposal that includes key elements paramount to the fair and just administration of our laws. Finally, the paper explains, in Part IV, why this statutory scheme is best designed to target culpable parties without incriminating blameless individuals. 

303 Creative v. Elenis – It's Not About Religious Liberty

BY PROFESSOR STEPHEN SMITH

In 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, a web designer complained that Colorado state law required her to “speak” in a way that supports same-sex marriage, against her will. The Supreme Court concluded that public accommodation laws requiring the provision of services to the public on a non-discriminatory basis must give way to free speech concerns when those laws “compel an individual to create speech she does not believe.” The majority’s opinion puts a religious liberty tint on a case that purports to have no religious component, in terms of legal doctrine. The case was decided under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. The Free Exercise Clause – the typical source of religious liberty claims – is never mentioned in the decision. …

Exploring Community-Based Alternatives to Youth Incarceration

BY SHREYA VIJAY

The thought of completely transforming our current juvenile justice system may seem impossible, and when alternatives are posed, concerns about public safety, rehabilitation, and accountability are often cited in opposition. However, our current system does not actually address any of these concerns. The majority of youth in the system today are incarcerated for status offenses or probation violations rather than violent crimes. Rates of recidivism also remain high among youth who are incarcerated rather than diverted to community-based programs. For a system that costs taxpayers an exorbitant amount per juvenile, it is failing to deliver on its promises. Instead, it punishes youth for normal adolescent behavior and worsens existing trauma while continuing to target youth from marginalized communities. Though the rate of youth incarceration is decreasing, there is still a need to reform the existing system to promote safety, positive relationships, and involve developmentally appropriate services that can better serve youth who become trapped in this cycle…

What is a “Meaningful Opportunity?” Disparities in Youth Sentencing as Courts Test the Constitutional Floor

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?…

Juvenile “Justice”: A Preface

BY PRINCESS R. DIAZ-BIRCA

Less than twenty years ago, the United States Supreme Court ruled that sentencing a child to death is a violation of the Eighth Amendment. Since then, the juvenile legal landscape has rapidly evolved with advocates achieving a monumental victory in which the Supreme Court held that children are constitutionally different from adults, recognizing the growing science related to adolescent brain development and its key role in understanding the actions, and reduced culpability, of youth. However, following that decision, the political and legal landscape of the Court has again undergone major change, though in a different direction. Now a political minefield, advocates need to once again re-draw the maps to our former victories in order to know which legal challenges have the greatest chance of solidifying crucial protections for our youth…

Recognizing the Human Right to a Healthy Environment: Annotated Bibliography

By Solène Kerisit, Master’s Student in Public Economic Law, Sciences Po Law School and Martha F. Davis, University Distinguished Professor and Co-Director, Program on Human Rights and the Global Economy, Northeastern University School of Law

 

On July 28, 2022, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted Resolution 76/300 recognizing the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment.  This is a historic step forward for environmental rights, but it is not the end point. Rather, this signals a new phase of international engagement, with more focused debates, more international consultations, and fierce, new legal actions to promote an effective “rights-based approach” to the crises of climate catastrophes, biodiversity loss, and pollution.

 

This guide was created to assist the scholars, advocates, and activists who are carrying this work forward and engaging with the further development and implementation of the human right to a healthy environment. Following this Introduction, Section I provides background on the development and recognition of this important new right. Section II addresses the challenges associated with defining the right to a healthy environment. Section III outlines human rights principles and standards related to the right. Section IV provides an annotated bibliography of resources that will support further research on, and development of, the right…