LARC Cardoso Law (Yeshida Univ)
Not a member yet
9951 research outputs found
Sort by
Navigating the Complex Landscape of Surrogacy: What Mediators Need to Know
No full textJoin legal experts Rebecca L. Mendel, Esq. and Denise E. Seidelman, Esq.—key drafters of New York’s Child Parent Security Act (CPSA)—for a thought-provoking CLE program examining how the CPSA revolutionized reproductive rights by legalizing compensated surrogacy. This session will delve into the law’s far-reaching impact on parental rights, ethical decision-making in assisted reproductive technology (ART), and the mediator’s role in navigating surrogacy agreements and related disputes.https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/event-invitations-2025/1023/thumbnail.jp
Bar Exam Primer Workshop for 3Ls
No full textLearn more about the contents of the bar exam and the requirements you need to complete to become an attorney in New York.https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/flyers-2025-2026/1008/thumbnail.jp
2025 Lemkin Award Ceremony
No full textPlease join the Institute for the Study of Genocide and the Cardozo Law Institute in Holocaust and Human Rights for the biennial Lemkin Award Ceremony, honoring Raphael Lemkin, the originator of the term genocide and leading advocate of the UN Genocide Convention. The award recognizes the best non-fiction work focusing on genocide, crimes against humanity, and other gross human rights violations, as well as strategies for prevention. This year’s award winner is Elyse Semerdjian, for her work, Remnants: Embodied Archives of the Armenian Genocide.https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/event-invitations-2025/1033/thumbnail.jp
Dismantling Hate: The Power of Dialogue
No full textJoin us for an inspiring conversation with three extraordinary individuals who have turned painful histories into catalysts for change: Tamara Meyer – daughter of German Jewish Holocaust survivors who now builds dialogue and healing across generational trauma Arno Michaelis – former leader in the White nationalist movement, who now works to prevent radicalization and promote compassion Daryl Davis – Black musician and racial justice advocate known for fostering friendships with members of the Ku Klux Klan, confronting hate with curiosityhttps://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/event-invitations-2025/1034/thumbnail.jp
Protection of Male and Female Sexed Children from Genital Cutting: Making Sense of Recent Legal Developments
No full textThe article critically examines the disparate legal treatment of female genital cutting (FGC) and male genital cutting (MGC), arguing for a more consistent approach that recognizes both practices as violations of bodily integrity. It highlights the ethical and legal inconsistencies in how these practices are viewed and regulated, advocating for a unified legal framework that prioritizes consent and the rights of the individual
Hospitals Pay the Price: Sex Abuse Cover-Ups Accountable Under New York Adult Survivors Act
No full textThe note argues that hospitals often fail to address sexual abuse, prioritizing their reputations over patient safety, and that the New York Adult Survivors Act (NYASA) provides a critical but insufficient avenue for accountability. While the NYASA allows survivors to sue abusers and enabling institutions, its one-year lookback window excludes many victims, emphasizing the need for expansion to ensure justice and institutional reform
The Violence of Bright Lines
Full text linkThe U.S. Supreme Court interprets the Eighth Amendment to prohibit members of certain groups from serving extreme punishments, such as the death penalty and life without parole. For example, the Court has long banned death sentences for people with intellectual disability and for those who were under eighteen years old at the time of their crime. More recently, in Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama, the Court extended this reasoning to sentences of life without parole for those under eighteen—prohibiting the sentence altogether for nonhomicide crimes and barring its mandatory imposition for homicides.
Many scholars and advocates have applauded these decisions as necessary to constrain judges and juries from imposing such punishments on members of vulnerable, less culpable groups. They have argued that, for the members of these groups, traditional aims of punishment, such as deterrence and retribution, are less applicable. Although we agree with this underlying logic, we write to raise questions about the potential costs of these “categorical bars,” which draw bright lines to separate those who are constitutionally deserving of mercy and redemption from those who are not. We have found that, although the Court may have sought to make extreme punishment less arbitrary, such stark demarcation often contributes to arbitrariness by tying punishment more to birth date than to culpability. These bright lines favor blunt administrability at the cost of nuanced, individualized sentencing determinations.
In drawing these conclusions, we rely not only on research but on lived experience. One of us, Terrell (“Rell”) Woolfolk, was sentenced to life without parole for a crime committed as a young man in his twenties. Following Graham and Miller, Rell was initially buoyed by the Court’s recognition that brain development impacted both crime and culpability. However, he grew disenchanted with the decision to draw a hard line at eighteen—an age not supported by the very same neuroscience that the Court’s opinion appeared to rest on. Rell saw firsthand how the Court’s jurisprudence resulted in arbitrary outcomes: relief bestowed on people who had committed intentional murder at age seventeen but denied from those only a few months older, whose killings were unintentional. The other of us, Kathryn Miller, experienced the Graham and Miller decisions from a more privileged position. As a criminal defense attorney, she attempted to seek relief for qualifying individuals. Although she interviewed potential clients at the same facility at which Rell was incarcerated, their paths never crossed because Rell’s age categorically barred him from consideration as a potential client.
Through a critical inventory of Eighth Amendment jurisprudence, scholarship, and experience, we argue for state solutions to this constitutional myopia. States should blur the lines associated with sentencing relief. Rather than focus on a person’s age, they should create individualized sentencing opportunities for anyone facing sentences of death by incarceration whose stories exhibit the characteristics underlying the reasoning of Graham and Miller. Individuals who can demonstrate that they possessed the immaturity, impulsivity, or vulnerability that the Court recognized reduces culpability, along with the changeability that demonstrates their redemption, should qualify for sentencing relief
Cardozo Law News Brief: January 17, 2025
No full textHighlights from the January 17, 2025 Cardozo Law News Brief include:
Professor Saurabh Vishnubhakat spoke to Law360, USA Today, The Verge, Politico, and ABC News about legal challenges surrounding the U.S. TikTok ban.
Professor David Rudenstine published an op-ed in The Hill urging the Supreme Court to adopt a formal code of ethics.
Professor Matthew Wansley was quoted in The Washington Post on privacy concerns related to Elon Musk\u27s involvement in a Cybertruck explosion investigation.
Assistant Professor Emmanuel Hiram Arnaud’s article “Colonizing by Contract” was published in the Columbia Law Review.https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/news-brief-2025/1012/thumbnail.jp