LARC Cardoso Law (Yeshida Univ)
Not a member yet
9951 research outputs found
Sort by
Revisiting Reasonable Cybersecurity
Get PDFProspective theories of cybersecurity liability have traveled over some well-worn paths over the past three decades, resulting in some successes, but also in at least as many cul-de-sacs and dead ends. Part of this problem can be found in the difficulty and complexity of the subject itself. Courts, legislators, and regulators all face comprehension difficulties when they attempt to fit our existing legal system around cybersecurity, often resulting in half-measures and generalized solutions that are challenging to apply to the widely different technical details behind each case. And in the background, we have a general reluctance to create legal regimes that might unnecessarily hinder the technology industry.
The resulting legal landscape for cybersecurity is an incoherent and ineffectual mess. But as our political, military, economic, infrastructural, and social systems continue to increase their dependency on potentially insecure software and hardware, our timidity and indecision around cybersecurity liability incurs greater real-world harms. Because of our muddled and incomplete cybersecurity legal frameworks, the associated costs are not necessarily borne by the appropriate or most culpable parties. The gaps in our current legal and regulatory frameworks make it next to impossible to consistently and reliably apportion damages or apply incentives and reduce cybersecurity policies to a series of wish lists.
This Article means to advance the cybersecurity liability conversation by taking another look at what are considered “reasonable” cybersecurity practices informed by current accepted frameworks, regulatory decisions, case law, policy goals, and other lessons learned. The Article will rely heavily on common law standards of reasonableness, but will also look to standards used within other legal theories and policy frameworks. This Article borrows useful components of reasonableness from an array of sources to derive a test to assess the reasonableness of cybersecurity-related actions and choices. This test is meant to provide a flexible standard that is technically grounded, empirically precise, yet accessible enough for courts and lawmakers to fairly apply to cybersecurity cases that are sure to present new challenges as our technologies continue to evolve
NYC’s Sanctuary Law Helps Defeat Crime
No full textNew York City’s immigration sanctuary laws are under attack. President Trump, and more recently Mayor Adams, claim that the city’s refusal to participate in federal deportations undermines public safety. Lost in the public debate, however, is the reality of how these laws were specifically crafted to help the NYPD fight crime
The Immigration Subpoena Power
Get PDFFor over a century, the federal government has wielded the immigration subpoena power in darkness, forcing private individuals, subfederal governments, and others to help it detain and deport. This vast administrative power has remained opaque even to those who receive these subpoenas and invisible to those it affects most. Indeed, the very people targeted by these subpoenas often don’t know they exist, much less how they facilitate arrest and deportation. For these reasons—and more—this power has escaped the legal battles raging over other immigration enforcement tactics and the scrutiny of journalists, scholars, and courts. Thus, as state- and locality-held information has become central to immigration enforcement, this power raises urgent questions about when, how, and with what constraints the federal government uses it more broadly.
This Article provides the first comprehensive account of the immigration subpoena power. Drawing upon previously undisclosed agency records and an original dataset reflecting thousands of subpoenas issued nationwide, this Article shows how Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deploys a power created to facilitate racial exclusion at the border to reach deep into our communities and people’s lives. It demonstrates how ICE uses subpoenas to pierce state and local sanctuary laws and force subfederal governments—and others—to become unwilling partners in arrests, detention, and removal. And it exposes a range of other unlawful practices.
These findings shed vital light on the immigration subpoena regime. They help resolve important constitutional questions, illuminate new constraints, and offer lessons that transcend the immigration realm
In Congress, a Welcome, But Flawed, Step to Stop Trump’s Transfers to Torture
Get PDFSenate Democrats are demanding the Trump administration provide information on its transfers to torture in El Salvador, including actions it has taken in response to court orders. On May 1, U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and Alex Padilla (D-CA), introduced legislation outlining the questions they want answers to. Representative Joaquin Castro (D-TX) is leading companion legislation in the House
Unemployment Action Center General Body Meeting
No full textThe Unemployment Action Center ( UAC ) is a student run non-profit organization that provides free legal representation for claimants seeking unemployment benefits.https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/flyers-2025-2026/1004/thumbnail.jp
Presentation of the Jacob Burns Center Award for Professional Courage to: Liv Oyer
No full textMs. Oyer will be joined in conversation with Professor Jessica Roth, Co-Director of the Jacob Burns Center for Ethics in the practice of Law.https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/flyers-2025-2026/1003/thumbnail.jp
Cardozo Law News Brief: November 14, 2025
No full textHighlights from the November 14, 2025 Cardozo Law News Brief include:
Chief Judge Rowan D. Wilson of the New York Court of Appeals was announced as the keynote speaker for Cardozo’s 48th Commencement at Lincoln Center.
Professor Rebecca Ingber was quoted in The Washington Post and The Christian Science Monitor about the legality of recent U.S. military strikes in the Caribbean.
Faculty news includes:
Sarah Chu, of the Perlmutter Center for Legal Justice, delivered the closing plenary at Interpol’s 21st International Forensic Science Managers’ Symposium.
Professor Wilfred Codrington III spoke at symposia hosted by Northwestern University Law Review and Minnesota Law Review on state constitutional rights and the Voting Rights Act.
Professor Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum received the Elizabeth Hurlock Beckman Award for her impact on student-led community benefit.
University Professor Michel Rosenfeld’s book A Pluralist Theory of Constitutional Justice was featured on Oxford Law Pro
The Next Frontier of Environmental Advocacy
No full textThe Center for Rights and Justice invites you to hear from three experts on environmental litigation and policy in a panel discussion moderated by Professor Alex Reinert. The discussion will be far-ranging, touching on domestic and international litigation, environmental policy, and climate justice. Wilson Dunlavey, a partner at the leading class action firm in the country, represents government entities, consumers, small businesses, workers, fishers, and residents in complex litigation against fossil fuel companies, automobile manufacturers, and other polluters. Raya Salter is the Founder and Executive Director of the Energy Justice Law & Policy Center and is an attorney, consultant, educator and clean energy law and policy expert with a focus on energy and climate justice. Dr. Maria Antonia Tigre is the Director of Global Climate Litigation at Columbia University\u27s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law and is a leading expert in the field of climate change law and climate litigation.https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/event-invitations-2025/1040/thumbnail.jp