Founded in 1927, Temple Law Review is a student-edited, quarterly journal dedicated to providing a forum for the expression of new legal thought and scholarly commentary on important developments, trends, and issues in the law.
This Article argues that using restorative justice to address campus sexual assault would allow universities to leverage their strengths and avoid some of the pitfalls inherent in employing a quasi–criminal justice system that they are ill-suited to manage.
This Article, building on results from an evaluation of a federal reentry court program, highlights the value of reentry programs that minimize intrusive criminal justice system involvement and maximize the provision of services to support a productive life outside prison.
This Article critiques the policing paradigm (which hides racial punishment within the dark mass of law) and argues that the legal fiction of reasonable suspicion, as developed by Terry v. Ohio, should be discredited and declared unconstitutional.
This Note evaluates the circuit split created by the Sixth Circuit in United States v. Lichtenberger and argues that the Supreme Court should uphold the Sixth Circuit’s narrow interpretation of the private search exception to the privacy protections provided by the Fourth Amendment.
This Article addresses the question of how to balance society’s aspiration for inclusion against its practical need for exclusion and suggests compromises between inclusion and exclusion that may help make inclusive communities a reality.
This Article challenges the conventional wisdom that insurance policies are standardized contracts, argues that insurance policies do not actually qualify as contracts under the doctrinal and theoretical bases of contract formation, and advocates for a reform of insurance law.
This Comment argues that § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and its implementing regulations are broader and more ambiguous than other administrative laws and regulations that carry criminal penalties.
This Comment aims to provide a roadmap of the key steps a U.S. court would take if it were to analyze the domestic application of the right to be forgotten, a law which allows citizens of the European Union to petition search engines to remove reputation-damaging links. The Comment recommends that a U.S. court should not enforce Europe’s right to be forgotten, if and when a court faces this decision.
This Note examines the impact of Tincher v. Omega Flex on evidentiary issues in Pennsylvania defective design products liability litigation, specifically the admission of industry standards and practices evidence to prove or defend against strict liability claims.
The reflexive nature of the argument that the criminality of an act can reside in the definition of it—an argument that this Article terms “reflexive violence”—creates a self-reinforcing regime. This Article demonstrates that the creation of reflexive violence as a justification, and the use of it as a logical device in theories of criminality, is both typical of cyberlaw and dangerous for the future of the First Amendment.