University of California Hastings College of the Law
UC Hastings Scholarship Repository (University of California, Hastings College of the Law)Not a member yet
18514 research outputs found
Sort by
Big Roadblock, Meet Big Data: Overcoming the Business Judgment Rule Using Directors’ Online Data
No full text
Default Is No Option: The Unconstitutionality of the Debt Limit Law
No full textThis article demonstrates conclusively the unconstitutionality of a widely feared default on the public debt due to the debt limit.
First, we find that Article I of the Constitution granted Congress no power, express or implied, to provide for a default by the United States. Under the principles of constitutional law established by the Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison (1803), any law outside the powers of Congress is void. Thus, the unconstitutionality of a default may be readily established pursuant to Article I, with additional support from the Tenth Amendment.
Furthermore, we find that the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments each protect, indisputably, a person’s right to payment in accordance with the terms of a lawfully authorized obligation of the United States, reinforcing a fundamental principle of the common law–that lawful debts are binding. Indeed, the Supreme Court has determined repeatedly, for nearly 150 years, that a default by the government violates the Constitution.
Thus, Congress must authorize all borrowing necessary to avert a default by the United States, regardless of the amount, as it has clearly done pursuant to 31 U.S.C. §§ 3102-3104, 3111. However, Congress has, at the same time, sought to limit the Treasury’s borrowing to a fixed amount, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3101(b), as amended (the law establishing the debt limit). In the absence of its change, suspension, or repeal by Congress, the debt limit law would, as a natural and foreseeable consequence of its unyielding ceiling on outstanding Treasury obligations, force a willful default by the United States whenever additional borrowing in excess of the debt limit is necessary to pay the public debt. Thus, we conclude, the debt limit law is repugnant to the Constitution, in clear violation of Article I, the Fifth Amendment, the Tenth Amendment, and the Fourteenth Amendment, or any one of them alone
Virtual Influencers, Real Liability: Strategies For Companies To Ensure Consumer Protection When Using Ai Influencers
No full text
An Examination of Race in Reproductive Oppression: Why Intersectional Abortion Stigma Disruption is Necessary to Achieve Reproductive Justice in 2024 and Beyond
No full textThis article examines the perpetuation of white supremacy in reproductive oppression throughout American history. The history of the reproductive rights movement, when applying a racialized lens, often looks contradictory in protections and restrictions implemented by the American government, at both the federal and state level. For example, contraception, while often thought to provide more access to family planning and personal autonomy, was historically implemented in a way that relied on racist and classist framings to prevent more black and brown children from being born. This paradigm has fluctuated throughout American history to now prevent black and brown women from receiving abortions as an attempt to stall upward social and economic mobility and maintain patriarchal power structures. Under either framing, a woman’s choice in reproduction is severely compromised. Therefore, the term “reproductive oppression” will serve as a guiding term to categorize any reproductive policy that takes a choice away from women. In this article, I examine the trends towards limiting reproductive freedoms both before and after the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision in 2022, focusing on the disproportionate impact of restrictive legislation on poor women of color. An examination of relevant practices and legislation show that nonwhite women suffer the greatest from laws restricting the right to bodily autonomy. With this reality in mind, this article encourages the application of a more intersectional approach in securing reproductive freedom moving past the Dobbs decision, recognizing that women of color must be considered and uplifted in political advocacy and action. This reporting provides an opportunity for all people to expand their understanding of how the fight for reproductive justice is interwoven with systemic racism and organize effectively to secure bodily autonomy. Disrupting abortion stigma at the micro, mesa, and macro levels through interpersonal relationships, incorporating intersectionality in research about women of color and reproduction, and organizing with advocacy groups who prioritize women of color’s health care solutions I suggest towards advocating for reproductive justice in 2024 and beyond
