By Asantewaah Ofosuhene
“Justice delayed is justice denied.” We have all heard this saying, but what does it really mean? This legal maxim means, when there is equitable relief available to an injured party, but that relief is not given in a timely manner, then it is as if there is no remedy at all. Why is delayed justice, leading to no justice, normalized within the United States criminal justice system? . . .
By Sarah Nawab
Trigger warning/content warning: This blog post contains descriptions of state violence against Black people, including killing, brutalization, and sexual assault and harassment, as well as descriptions of physical and sexual brutalization of Black women during the chattel slavery era.
By Mackenzie Darling
During a public health crisis, the public is thinking about their health and the safety of their loved ones. However, while society is focused on protecting people from COVID-19, the sexual health and wellbeing of individuals is under major threat. This forum discusses three major concerns about the current state of sexual and reproductive health: (1) the impact the COVID-19 pandemic may have on people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV); (2) how state executive orders are preventing access to abortions; and (3) how the closures of doctor’s offices, Planned Parenthood health clinics, and non-essential stores pose a major threat to access to contraception and sexually transmitted infection (STI) healthcare . . .
By Professor Deborah Ramirez and Greer Clem
The investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller and subsequent impeachment of Donald Trump laid bare threats to the rule of law and weaknesses in our separation of powers doctrine. As President Trump continues to flex almost unrestricted executive authority, the question as to how we protect the rule of law and fortify the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers is one that begs answering . . .
By Elijah Miller
Drop a pin on any threadbare of our crises and you will find a thousand shifting layers of history folding in to form our social architecture. Over [100,000][1] U.S. residents and counting have now been snuffed out by a deadly combination of COVID-19 and an unrestrained dominance of racialized Neoliberal capitalism. Like so many diseases, Coronavirus is a threat, but it is the pre-existing conditions that make it so deadly. With blotted eyes and broken shoulders, rotted lungs, minds strung out of our gaslit sons, every organ in our social body aches in self-immolating class, gender, race . . .
By Margaret Foster
A year and a half ago, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law the California Consumer Protection Act, which went into effect on January 1, 2020. Though the bill was simultaneously hailed as a “groundbreaking,” “extremely powerful,” “landmark law,” and criticized as a “punitive . . . mistake,” there’s no dispute that it is currently the strongest privacy law in America, garnering comparisons to the European Union’s sweeping General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Kari Paul, California’s Groundbreaking Privacy Law Takes Effect in January. What Does It Do?, The Guardian (Dec. 30, 2019); Zack Whittaker, Silicon Valley Is Terrified of California’s Privacy Law. Good., TechCrunch (Sept. 19, 2019); Natasha Singer, Group Behind California Privacy Law Aims to Strengthen It, The New York Times (Sept. 24, 2019) . . .
By Nimesha Perera
It is 2020 and the new California Consumer Privacy Act has gone into effect. John Stephens, California Consumer Privacy Act, American Bar Association (Fe. 14, 2019), https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/publications/committee_newsletters/bcl/2019/201902/fa_9/. Facebook is publicly dealing with its groundbreaking $5 billion fine from the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) over data privacy concerns. See Brian Fung, Facebook will pay an unprecedented $5 billion penalty over privacy breaches, CNN (July 25, 2019); Michael Nunez, FTC Slaps Facebook With $5 Billion Fine, Forces New Privacy Controls, Forbes (July 24, 2019). Amazon is fiercely promoting its creatively titled facial recognition program “Amazon Rekognition” in the face of criticisms . . .
By Matthew Netti
As Justice Alito expressed in his majority opinion in a 2018 Supreme Court decision, “[t]he legalization of sports gambling is a controversial subject.” Murphy v. Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n, 138 S. Ct. 1461, 1484 (2018). Not only is the subject controversial; the effect it has on the country moving forward is unpredictable . . .
By Christie Dougherty
The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued Cambridge Analytica’s epitaph in late November 2019, when it published its settlement opinion. So, it came as a surprise to many Twitter users on January 1, 2020 as they scrolled through their feeds and read: “Data analytics firm #SCLGroup shut down amidst scandal when extensive data work in the shadows of elections globally was called into question via subsidiary #CambridgeAnalytica. To avoid document confiscation, SCL went bankrupt. Its [sic] time to release the files. #Hindsightis2020.” @HindsightFiles, Twitter (Jan. 1, 2020). Brittany Kaiser, former Cambridge Analytica business development director, blew the whistle on the company back in 2018 and now has begun leaking internal documents on Twitter under the username @HindsightFiles, stating that “democracy has been hacked.” @HindsightFiles, Twitter (Jan. 1, 2020). . .
By Andrew Farrington
Since 1978, the Business Roundtable, an association of chief executive officers of America’s leading companies, has been issuing annual statements regarding the purpose of a corporation. Each statement, from 1978 to 2018, has claimed that “corporations exist principally to serve shareholders.” Business Roundtable Redefines the Purpose of a Corporation to Promote ‘An Economy That Serves All Americans’, Business Roundtable (Aug. 19, 2019). However, on August 19, 2019, the Business Roundtable, led by Jamie Dimon, Chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase & Co., redefined the purpose of a corporation to include all stakeholders, namely a corporation’s customers, employees, suppliers, communities, and shareholders. Id. . . .
By David Rangaviz and Miranda Jang
Under what circumstances can a citizen be forced to unlock their smartphone for government inspection? On March 6, 2019, the Supreme Judicial Court decided Commonwealth v. Dennis Jones, in which the Court held that the government can compel a suspect to unlock their smartphone, and so disclose all of its contents, if it proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the suspect knows the passcode to the phone in question. The SJC held that the only “testimonial” aspect to an act of decryption is just the person saying that he or she knows the code to the target phone. Jones was the first decision from any state supreme court in the country to set out the constitutional rules around compelled decryption, which is one of the most significant self-incrimination issues in the digital age . . .
By Leo Beletsky
In the wake of the opioid overdose crisis, all United States jurisdictions have rapidly adopted Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (“PDMPs”). PDMPs electronically collect, monitor, and analyze controlled substance prescription information. Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs), CDC https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/pdf/pdmp_factsheet-a.pdf (last visited October 30, 2019). According to the CDC, PDMPs “continue to be among the most promising state-level interventions to improve opioid prescribing, inform clinical practice, and protect patients at risk.” What States Need to Know about PDMPs, CDC (Oct. 3, 2017), https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/pdmp/states.html. These purported benefits have been elusive, however, while various shortcomings and pitfalls have received little scrutiny . . .
By Jennifer S. Bard
For the symposium, I was asked to grapple with how health law teaching has been disrupted by technological innovation. On these occasions, my thoughts immediately go to the rapidly evolving expectations of privacy in the face of the ever growing breaches of cyber security in healthcare settings, the widespread access to communications technology, and the rapidly evolving technologies to establish identity and extract significant amounts of medical information from the genetic material left behind on a coffee cup . . .
We are pleased to present this symposium featuring commentary from participants in the Center for Health Policy and Law’s annual conference, Promises and Perils of Emerging Health Innovations, held on April 11-12, 2019 at Northeastern University School of Law. As a note, additional detailed analyses of issues discussed during the conference will be published in the 2021 Winter Issue of the Northeastern University Law Review . . .
We are pleased to present this symposium featuring commentary from participants in the Center for Health Policy and Law’s annual conference, Promises and Perils of Emerging Health Innovations, held on April 11-12, 2019 at Northeastern University School of Law. As a note, additional detailed analyses of issues discussed during the conference will be published in the 2021 Winter Issue of the Northeastern University Law Review. . .
By Oliver Kim
We are pleased to present this symposium featuring commentary from participants in the Center for Health Policy and Law’s annual conference, Promises and Perils of Emerging Health Innovations, held on April 11-12, 2019 at Northeastern University School of Law. Throughout the two-day conference, speakers and attendees discussed how innovations, including artificial intelligence, robotics, mobile technology, gene therapies, pharmaceuticals, big data analytics, tele- and virtual health care delivery, and new models of delivery, such as accountable care organizations (ACOs), retail clinics, and medical-legal partnerships (MLPs), have entered and changed the healthcare market. More dramatic innovations and market disruptions are likely in the years to come . . .
By Jessica Mantel and Leah Fowler
We are pleased to present this symposium featuring commentary from participants in the Center for Health Policy and Law’s annual conference, Promises and Perils of Emerging Health Innovations, held on April 11-12, 2019 at Northeastern University School of Law. As a note, additional detailed analyses of issues discussed during the conference will be published in the 2021 Winter Issue of the Northeastern University Law Review. @NUSLHealth @nulawreview. . .
By Michael Conklin
In her new book The Chief: The Life and Turbulent Times of Chief Justice John Roberts, Joan Biskupic provides insight into the personal and professional life of the seventeenth Chief Justice. Joan Biskupic, The Chief: The Life and Turbulent Times of Chief Justice John Roberts (2019). The intriguing format of the book does so in a very interesting way—instead of simply reporting significant events in the life of John Roberts, it guides the reader on a chronological journey through Roberts’s life with concurrent landmark Supreme Court cases providing a backdrop along the way . . .