7300 research outputs found
Sort by
Solving Professors\u27 Dilemmas about Prohibiting or Promoting Student AI Use
No full textFaculty face difficult dilemmas as law students increasingly use generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT. Should faculty prohibit student use of AI in course work, allow it within limits, or actively encourage it to build professional skills? Because students already use AI tools, faculty must respond. Doing nothing can undermine core educational goals.
This article offers practical strategies for addressing these dilemmas. These strategies are designed to promote learning, uphold academic integrity, and prepare students for an evolving legal profession. This article outlines two broad approaches: restricting unauthorized AI use and promoting responsible, supervised use. It provides concrete suggestions for both approaches as well as a middle path permitting some uses and prohibiting others. In addition, some faculty may treat AI literacy as an important learning objective in its own right.
This article includes model policies, a certification form, grading rubrics, and assignment ideas to help faculty clarify goals and manage student AI use. It offers techniques to help students use AI tools effectively and responsibly. Rather than treating AI solely as a threat to legal education, this article presents it as an opportunity to clarify core values, rethink teaching methods, and better prepare students for a profession reshaped by emerging technologies
The Eviction Crisis is Rampaging: Time to Implement Diversion Programs
Full text linkMore than 7.6 million renters face the threat of eviction annually.1 In early February 2023, Ivy Hany was at risk of being part of this statistic again.2 Years ago, when Ivy was 19, she and her siblings were forced out of their home into a homeless shelter.3 Now, at 53, she was terrified of becoming homeless again.4 Ivy owed her landlord $2,184.75; she would be evicted if she did not pay.5 Fortunately, Ivy had the option of mediatio
Assessing the Tax Communications of E-Commerce Vendors, Part I
No full textThis article reports research results from a study analyzing the tax communication practices of top e-commerce retailers and marketplaces. The research found a spectrum of tax communication practices. Notably, many (but not all) e-commerce businesses that did not collect sales tax did still inform customers about potential use tax obligations, though the transparency of this information varied
Discovery, Injury, and Diligence: Reconciling Subjective and Objective Copyright Limitations Standards Post-Warner Chappell
No full textThis Article examines the evolving interpretation of the Copyright Act\u27s statute of limitations in light of RADesign, Inc. v. Michael Grecco Productions, Inc., a case pending before the Supreme Court. Following the Court\u27s decision in Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy (2024), which left open the question of whether copyright claims can be based on infringement occurring more than three years prior, the circuit courts remain split on whether the three-year statute of limitations runs from the time of infringement (the injury rule ) or from when the copyright holder discovers the infringement (the discovery rule ). Through analysis of the Grecco case, which involves photographs allegedly infringed in 2017 but discovered in 2021, this Article explores the tension between objective and subjective standards for determining reasonable diligence in discovering infringement. We propose a framework that considers the nature of copyrighted works, technological capabilities, and industry practices, while examining the potential role of proportionality in evaluating reasonable discovery efforts. The Article draws parallels to property law concepts like adverse possession and inquiry notice to argue for a balanced approach that protects creators\u27 rights while maintaining legal certainty. This analysis is particularly timely given the challenges digital creators face in monitoring vast online spaces for infringement and the Supreme Court\u27s opportunity to resolve the circuit split on this fundamental issue of copyright law
Technology and Me and You: Getting Comfortable with AI
No full textThis short essay reflects on the author’s surprising dive into artificial intelligence (AI) despite his longstanding caution about adopting new technology. As a self-described tech-wary curmudgeon who avoids unnecessary upgrades and stays off social media, the author explores how AI – specifically, a custom-built RPS (Real Practice Systems) Negotiation and Mediation Coach – nonetheless has proved to be unexpectedly valuable.
Drawing from personal experience, the essay suggests how people can become comfortable using AI, suggesting how they can overcome hesitation and use AI productively. Rather than treating AI as a black box or magic solution, it emphasizes the importance of human control, iterative prompting, and critical judgment in generating useful results.
The insights in this essay are widely applicable to academics, practitioners, students, and others integrating AI in their work
When AI Comes to the Table: How Tech Tools Will Change ADR
No full textArtificial intelligence (AI) is quickly reshaping the landscape of dispute resolution. This article explores how an expanding range of AI tools will influence negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and related processes. These tools will serve a wide array of users and contexts, reflect differing practice philosophies, and raise important questions about fairness, transparency, and values. Drawing on theory, practice, and real-world examples, the article identifies seven categories of emerging tools – from dispute prevention and practitioner preparation to education and platform integration. It highlights the importance of ethical design, user awareness, and professional responsibility, arguing that AI should support – not replace – human judgment. Dispute resolution professionals have an opportunity and obligation to help shape the future of AI in their field, ensuring it reflects wisdom as well as intelligence. The article concludes with a case study of RPS Coach, a transparent AI-informed system that exemplifies values-based design
Supreme Court LGBTQ Orthodoxy
No full textThis Article argues that the Supreme Court has relied on two simplifying assumptions in First Amendment exemption cases involving LGBTQ issues. The first assumption is that the government’s interest in addressing and remedying discrimination is irrelevant to the matter at hand. The second assumption is that state officials, in enforcing sexual orientation antidiscrimination laws against individuals who object to them on religious or moral grounds, seek to force the dissenters to speak in ways they do not want to speak. As the Article explains, the Court has abided by neither simplifying assumption in exemption cases involving the application of race or sex antidiscrimination laws. In explaining why the Court has treated sexual orientation exemption cases differently than race or sex ones, the Article points to two categories of statements repeatedly made by several justices in recent years that closely overlap with conservative positions on LGBTQ equality. The first set of statements reflects the conservative view that those who oppose same-sex marriage, unlike those who oppose racial equality, are decent and fair-minded individuals who are neither prejudiced nor bigoted. The second set reflects the conservative position that the pursuit of LGBTQ equality is a zero-sum game because equality gains for sexual minorities inevitably restrict the First Amendment rights of those who oppose that equality