University of Colorado Law Review

Two distinct public health crises shook the United States from 1954 to 2023: nicotine addiction from tobacco products, and opioid addiction starting with Purdue Pharmaceutical’s OxyContin. These crises resulted in millions of deaths and immense costs to the country as a whole. The nicotine crisis ended in a national settlement against four major tobacco manufacturers, which yielded hundreds of millions of dollars for those harmed by these products. The owners of Purdue, however, opted for bankruptcy instead of settlement, keeping the majority of the money Continue reading →

Introduction The U.S. Constitution plainly assigns to the Senate the profound duties of rendering critical advice and consent related to all specific federal judicial nominees whom the President selects.[1] The dynamic roles of senators who directly represent jurisdictions where vacant posts materialize have perennially been crucial to appropriately discharging these essential responsibilities. Senators identify excellent candidates—individuals who possess diversity in terms of ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, independence, experience, and ideology, as well as the character and measured judicial temperament to be exceptional jurists—assemble complete applications, Continue reading →

Introduction In 2022 the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) issued its “Content Scope Outlines” for public comment,[1] soliciting input on “significant oversights.”[2] The outlines were designed to inform the public “of the scope of the topics to be assessed in the eight Foundational Concepts and Principles (FCP) and the scope of the lawyering tasks to be assessed in the seven Foundational Skills (FS) on the next generation of the bar exam.”[3] One of the eight FCP was “Civil Procedure,” including constitutional protections and proceedings Continue reading →

PDF: Anuj C. Desai,[1] Is Title VII an “Anti-Discrimination” Law? Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is commonly referred to as an “anti-discrimination” statute. At its core, we are told, it prohibits something called “discrimination.” But does it? Startlingly, the answer is no—not really. Instead, Title VII prohibits certain acts done for certain reasons. True, the reasons are precisely what everyone has long understood them to be—”because of . . . race, color, religion, sex, or national origin . . . .”[2] But the law’s prohibited acts do not Continue reading →

This article argues that legal education needs to get its act together by getting organized. Unlike the rest of the university, law schools are over a century behind in recognizing the need for the greater organization that departments can provide. Specialization, which did not exist many years ago, has become so universal that some members of any faculty either cannot understand or care about, much less govern wisely, what goes on around them. Ignorance is compounded by non-professional agendas driven by ideologies and interdisciplinary interests. Continue reading →

On October 1, 2019, Missouri began the execution of death row inmate Russell Bucklew.[1] Those present for the execution reported seeing Mr. Bucklew strapped to a gurney, the IV inserted, and a white sheet up to his chest.[2] The elevated gurney was the only sign that Missouri had attempted to accommodate his cavernous hemangioma, a rare condition resulting in the growth of blood-filled tumors in his head, neck, and throat.[3] His face, notable for the sizeable blackish-purple tumor protruding from his upper lip, was turned Continue reading →

Ingrid Eagly,[1] Address to Colorado Law School on Monday, February 22, 2021 at 5:00-6:30 p.m.   The topic of today’s lecture, which was selected in Breanna Boss’s memory, is access to justice for immigrants. We gather here today at the start of a new presidential administration, but following four years that have significantly threatened access to justice for immigrants. Under President Donald Trump, a series of executive orders fundamentally restructured the immigration system and made all undocumented immigrants a priority for deportation.[2] Meanwhile, growing backlogs Continue reading →

Since the founding, Americans have sought a perfectly calibrated government that vigorously protects, but never violates, citizens’ individual rights.[2] To accomplish this, government must balance orderly security and individual liberty. This liberty-or-security dilemma is significant to the study of the United States Constitution. Since at least the 1960s, the Supreme Court has repeatedly confronted this dilemma in the context of police use-of-force cases.[3] In these cases, the Supreme Court routinely grants summary judgment to police officers based on qualified immunity, thereby denying relief to aggrieved Continue reading →

During the spring of 2020, the COVID-19 crisis began to unfold in the U.S. Legal scholars exploring the impact of the pandemic on people with disabilities focused much of their attention on triage protocols. These scholars debated the legality and ethics of using patient disability as a basis for rationing ventilators in the face of then-looming ventilator shortages at hospitals.[2] At least initially, stay-at-home orders across the country were successful in “flattening the curve” and reducing the demand for ventilators.[3] However, the pandemic’s widespread disruption Continue reading →

On October 22, 2019, Justice Elena Kagan sat down with Professor Suzette Malveaux, director of the Byron White Center for the Study of Constitutional Law, for the Eighth Annual John Paul Stevens Lecture. (Text of the full lecture can be found here.) What made Justice Kagan’s visit to Colorado Law particularly special was the opportunity for her to honor her predecessor on the bench—the namesake of the lecture series—only three months after the country lost him at the age of ninety-nine. In 2011, Justice John Continue reading →