bepress Legal Repository
Not a member yet
645042 research outputs found
Sort by
The Implications of ChatGPT For Legal Services and Society
No full textOn November 30, 2022, OpenAI released a chatbot called ChatGPT.1 To demonstrate the chatbot’s sophistication and its potential implications, both for legal services and society more generally, most of this paper was generated in about an hour through prompts within ChatGPT. Only this abstract, the preface, the outline headers, the footnotes, the epilogue, and the prompts were written by a person. ChatGPT generated the rest of the text with no human editing. To be clear, the responses generated by ChatGPT were imperfect and at times problematic, and the use of an AI tool for law-related services raises a host of regulatory and ethical issues. At the same time, ChatGPT highlights the promise of artificial intelligence, including its ability to affect our lives in both modest and more profound ways. ChatGPT suggests an imminent reimagination of how we access and create information, obtain legal and other services, and prepare people for their careers. We also will soon face new questions about the role of knowledge workers in society, the attribution of work (e.g., determining when people’s written work is their own), and the potential misuse of and excessive reliance on the information produced by these kinds of tools.
The disruptions from AI’s rapid development are no longer in the distant future. They have arrived, and this document offers a small taste of what lies ahead
Applying to International Clerkships
No full textWednesday, November 13, 2024 | 12:30 PM | Eck Hall of Law, Room 2171
Want to learn more about international clerkships? Join the International Human Rights Society, International Law Society, and International Graduate Programs for an info session this Wednesday, Nov. 13, at 12:30pm in Eck 2171. Chick-Fil-A will be served.
Sponsors: International Graduate Programs International Human Rights Society International Law Societyhttps://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndls_posters/1958/thumbnail.jp
The Seventh Amendment Right to Jury Trial in the Administrative State: Recognizing the Dangers of the Constitutional Moment
No full textOne prominent constitutional scholar has sought to legitimize this constitutional transformation through resort to a strange and controversial analytical model he describes as the “constitutional moment.” In this Article, we plan to establish two important points: (1) there exists no principled mode of analysis of the Seventh Amendment right to jury trial that justifies the Court’s categorical dichotomy between Article III and non–Article III forums for purposes of the right’s applicability, and (2) while the theory of the “constitutional moment” would in fact justify the Court’s insulation of the administrative state from Seventh Amendment applicability, reliance on such a theory as a basis for concluding that New Deal measures are somehow insulated from serious constitutional challenges is as dangerous and misguided as any constitutional analytical mode in our nation’s history. It must therefore be explicitly and categorically rejected by both scholars and jurists. We conclude, however, that while the Court has not expressly relied on the constitutional-moment theory of constitutional analysis, its vague and unsupported exclusion of the Seventh Amendment right from administrative adjudication amounts to implicit reliance on just such a theory. It is only by open rejection of the dangerous functionalism inherent in the view that the New Deal legally altered our constitutional framework that we can recognize the intellectually flawed rationale for the Court’s failure to acknowledge the Seventh Amendment’s relevance to administrative adjudication. The Supreme Court may well be in the process of reconsidering its approach to the applicability of the Seventh Amendment to administrative adjudication. In Jarkesy v. SEC, the Fifth Circuit court of appeals surprisingly departed from the traditional judicial acceptance of the categorical exclusion of the Seventh Amendment from the non–Article III adjudicatory process. That court held that, at least in certain situations, the Seventh Amendment does in fact require the option of a jury trial. The Supreme Court granted certiorari and heard oral argument this past fall. Now that the Supreme Court has affirmed the Fifth Circuit’s conclusion, we are likely to see a dramatic alteration in controlling constitutional doctrine. In this Article, we provide a cogent defense of the Fifth Circuit’s conclusion—a defense that court itself failed to provide.
This Article is divided into two major Parts. Part I provides a description and analysis of the development of Seventh Amendment caselaw. The Part also explores how the public rights doctrine has been interwoven as its own unique Seventh Amendment pathway.
The second Part explains and critiques Professor Bruce Ackerman’s theory of the constitutional moment, which we deem to lie at the heart of the modern Supreme Court’s rejection of the Seventh Amendment’s applicability to the administrative adjudicatory process
The Role of Accountability in Preserving Judicial Independence: Examining the Ethical Infrastructure of the Federal Judicial Workplace
No full text
When Your Life Depends on It: Understanding and Preparing for the Credible Fear Interview
No full textSome Quick Thoughts on the Oklahoma Charter School Case
No full text(Excerpt)
I know that everyone\u27s following SCOTUS in this final week of the term, but I\u27d like to offer some quick thoughts about an important church-and-state decision a couple of days ago in Oklahoma. In Drummond v. Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled 6-2 that the state had violated state and federal law by contracting with a Catholic school to operate a charter school. Although I favor educational pluralism and am open to persuasion, under current SCOTUS religion clause jurisprudence, the Oklahoma court probably got this one right
Cardozo Law News Brief: November 1, 2024
No full textFeatured Faculty: Matthew Wansley Luis C. Calderon Gomez Jessica Roth Emmanuel H. Arnaud Rebekah Diller Young Ran (Christine) Kim Alexander Reinert Gabor Rona Michel Rosenfeld Anthony Sebok Edward Zelinsky
Campus News: Associate Dean of Graduate, International & Online Programs Val Myteberi Speaks to LLM Guide About How LL.M. Programs Are Focusing on Experiential Learnin