By Douglas Kouffie

The practice of immigration law is undergoing a significant transformation thanks to the rise of technology. Artificial intelligence (AI) plays an increasingly important role in the legal profession, and immigration law is no exception. From chatbots that can answer common immigration-related questions to AI-powered systems that can review and analyze vast amounts of legal documents, the potential uses of AI in immigration law are numerous. In this article, we'll explore the benefits and drawbacks of AI in immigration law, as well as some ethical considerations for immigration attorneys.

By, Hannah Saturley

In Massachusetts, law students at Northeastern University School of Law (NUSL) are exploring how obtaining data, specifically through public records requests (PRRs), can be used to dismantle the “Cradle to Prison” (C2P) pipeline. The C2P pipeline refers to the web of systems that, from birth and even earlier, channel youth—disproportionately low-income youth of color—into future incarceration. Reliable and publicly accessible data is vital to create juvenile justice policy to dismantle this pipeline. Yet, unfortunately, existing data related to how individuals enter the C2P pipeline and what factors might influence entry is often incomplete or inaccurate.

By Julia N. Brown

True crime listeners and legal professionals alike are all-too-familiar with the case of Adnan Syed. The story goes something like this: On an otherwise-typical school day in 1999, a seventeen-year-old high school student from Baltimore, Maryland, disappeared after class. Her name was Hae Min Lee, and her disappearance ultimately resulted in a tense investigation, multiple trials, and the wrongful conviction of Syed, her ex-boyfriend. After a fraught investigation, two trials, and a series of procedural mishaps, Syed was found guilty of Lee’s murder and sentenced to life in prison plus thirty years.

In 2014, however, Syed’s story took a turn. Over a decade after his conviction, Baltimore-based lawyer Rabia Chaudry contacted a journalist named Sarah Koenig and asked her to look into Syed’s case. When Koenig later opened the case file and started reading, she unknowingly embarked on a journey that would reveal the many injustices of his case and kick-start a nationwide true crime obsession.

By Sheng Gao, LL.B., and Megan Lombardi, J.D

In May 2022, the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) released its first draft of the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) Regulations. Among other clarifications and definitions, the draft provided a new definition of the term “disproportionate effort” that has attracted considerable attention in the privacy community.

In the field of data privacy, the disproportionate effort exemption seeks to strike a balance between efficient use of company resources and the fulfillment of consumer needs. It is focused on protecting consumer interests, as the threshold for claiming disproportionate effort is dependent on benefits to consumers rather than to businesses. As the CPPA stated in its Initial Statement of Reasons, providing a clear definition for this principle would not only “clarif[y] when a business, service provider, or contractor can use this exception, [but also] prevent[] them from abusing this exception by claiming that everything requires ‘disproportionate effort’ on their part.”

By Lea Halberstein

On May 2, 2022, many Americans’ fears were realized when Politico published a leaked Supreme Court decision which would overturn the landmark case Roe v. Wade, thereby rescinding the federal constitutional right to abortion. The nation was thrown into turmoil as thousands across the country marched and protested to condemn the Supreme Court’s leaked Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization opinion. Many understood the repercussions of the leaked Alito draft: the legitimacy of the Supreme Court would be undermined by overturning a nearly 50-year-old precedent; the lack of a national abortion law would return many states to centuries-old, draconian abortion bans; millions of people across the country would no longer have access to basic medical care; other constitutionally-guaranteed rights such as same-sex marriage and contraception could be threatened.

By Francis C. Won, Merafe Gedewon, and Genevievre T. Miller

On May 2, 2022, Politico published a draft of Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, a decision that would overturn Roe v. Wade. In many ways, this draft confirmed what felt inevitable following former President Donald Trump’s sweeping installation of conservative judges at every judicial level. Perhaps most foreboding were the appointments of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Setting aside the troubling personal shortcomings of these individuals, the politics on display during their installation lacked even a baseline level of decorum and were instead defined by ruthless self-interest. June 24, 2022 marked the official release of the opinion reversing a landmark decision that protected people’s rights to bodily autonomy.