Our Online Journal features original pieces written and edited by our Online staff at Columbia. They are not representative of any views held by the Columbia Undergraduate Law Review Editorial Board.
Rosenbach v. Six Flags Entertainment Corp. (2019), reached the Illinois Supreme Court on appeal. Importantly, the court was not deliberating on the constitutionality of the law itself, but instead on questions over the correct implementation of the law. Nonetheless, Rosenbach sets a precedent in biometric privacy law that could be a deciding factor in a related biometric privacy case likely to be brought before the Supreme Court.
Read MoreWhile businesses cite costs of accessibility and legal fees as reasons to not ensure their sites’ ADA compliance, it is crucial to consider lawmakers’ intentions when evaluating relevant cases. In order to achieve the ADA’s initial intent to ensure full inclusion of Americans with disabilities, especially in the age of technological advances, local and federal courts must rule that the ADA does indeed apply to business websites, particularly when they are providing a service available to the general public.
Read MoreGiven the increasing magnitude of the U.S.-China relationship, it is worth examining the implications of these rulings, as well as the Court’s asserted interest in diplomacy, against the backdrop of the ongoing U.S.-China trade war. A closer look at this diplomatic breakdown suggests that whether the ATS retains its remaining strength or not, the federal government ought to be prudent in weakening legal means to enforce corporate accountability, especially when consequential bilateral relations are at stake.
Read MoreGiven Facebook’s apparent immunity to the detrimental effects of scandals that would significantly impact companies in less heterogeneous markets, it therefore is no surprise that the government is investigating whether Facebook has engaged in illegal methods of consolidating market power. Should the government find fault in Facebook’s actions, one potential option is to force Facebook to spin off its subsidiaries by acting through the courts.
Read MoreWith Senate Bill 1437, California narrowed its felony murder rule: a legal doctrine, originating from English common law, which holds defendants criminally liable for a murder—even if they did not kill nor intend to kill—if they participated in the underlying felony. Compared to other nations that practice common law, the United States is the only modern country that uses the felony murder rule. Yet this rule seemingly violates the 8th amendment of the US Constitution, especially when used to sentence the death penalty.
Read MoreWorkplace protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity are inconsistent through the U.S., and two critical issues are now in front of the Supreme Court. Based on the Court’s past interpretations of Title VII, and on the inherent role of sex in discrimination based on sexual orientation and transgender identity, the Supreme Court should find that Title VII prohibits discrimination based on sexuality and discrimination based on transgender identities.
Read MoreWhile honor killings are deeply rooted in private matters within society, mostly involving the family, only the legal system has the force and legitimacy required to carry out the prosecution of these crimes. In order to justly prosecute these murders, the Jordanian legal system must change its discriminatory legal codes and increase penalties for honor killings while raising public awareness of the violations of both Islamic law and natural rights these cases commit.
Read MoreIn its original application, disparate impact is a “theory of liability” that prevents the use of “facially neutral employment practices,” or policies without a clear intention to discriminate, that adversely affect a protected employment class such as one based on race, gender, or religion. The recent development is particularly concerning because the disparate impact standard is not only integral in proving cases of employment discrimination, but it is also essential in combatting discrimination in areas ranging from education to housing.
Read MoreThe United States fails to engage with international law and justice in many regards, with a major example being the nation’s abstention from the International Criminal Court (ICC). While choosing to not be a member of the ICC isn’t a violation of international law, by remaining out of the ICC, the U.S. greatly undermines its effectiveness and makes the enforcement powers of this international body extremely weak.
Read More
