18265 research outputs found
Sort by
Desserts and Bar
No full texthttps://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/scholarcelebration2025/1023/thumbnail.jp
Pfeffer-Gillett and Students
No full texthttps://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/scholarcelebration2025/1024/thumbnail.jp
Fix, Evans, Johnson, and Johnston
No full texthttps://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/scholarcelebration2025/1042/thumbnail.jp
Powell Archives Display
No full texthttps://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/scholarcelebration2025/1058/thumbnail.jp
Faculty Publications Display
No full texthttps://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/scholarcelebration2025/1080/thumbnail.jp
Faculty Publications Display
No full texthttps://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/scholarcelebration2025/1084/thumbnail.jp
Faculty Cards, Brochures, Tumblers, and Powell Archives Display
No full texthttps://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/scholarcelebration2025/1091/thumbnail.jp
Faking It: A Proposed Solution to Counter Nonconsensual Pornographic Deepfakes
Full text link2024 Louise A. Halper Award Winner for Best Student Note.
Deepfakes have become popular due to their user-friendly nature and accessibility, allowing anyone to create one by installing deepfake software programs on their phones or laptops. Deepfake software programs allow creators to create hyper-realistic multimedia featuring anyone whose image they can find. Some industries have drawn positive uses from deepfakes; however, deepfakes also create harms that can have detrimental effects on people’s mental health, employment, and reputation. Women and children, including those without a large online presence, have become the target for nonconsensual pornographic deepfakes. Congress has yet to pass a federal bill that encourages online service providers to properly regulate its platform and prevent the spread of nonconsensual pornographic deepfakes. Due to the lack of federal law, some states have attempted to address the issue by imposing criminal and civil penalties. But current state laws do not go far enough in protecting women and children because they take a reactive approach in which the harms of the deepfakes have already taken place. This Note discusses federal bills and amendments as possible solutions, but further proposes that a public-private partnership with deepfake software program creators would bring the most effective solution.
A public–private partnership with deepfake software companies would serve as a preventative measure while also ensuring clear legal recourse for victims
Cross-Examination and the Right to (College) Education: An Analysis of the Substantive and Procedural Rights
Full text linkIf the marketplace of ideas provides the basis for our growth and self-determination as a society, college campuses are the factories in which those ideas are cultivated, tested, and manufactured. Equally important, they are often the chief mechanism by which individual students are given the tools to meaningfully participate in the political process, in civic and social institutions, and the ability to chart socially mobile and economically independent lives.
Yet federal courts have never recognized a student’s liberty interest in their education. Adopting a framework initially posited by Professor Matthew Shaw, this Note advocates that students retain a substantive due process property interest in a post-secondary education. Next, the Note addresses an equally compelling issue: once a student’s property interest in her education has been recognized, what procedural protection does a university owe her when adjudicating an allegation of some non-academic misconduct? The Note specifically argues in favor of an accused student’s limited right to cross-examination.
Applying existing theory and current caselaw, the solutions reconcile a student’s property interest under one single doctrinal framework and provide a uniform set of procedural rules universities should follow in determining whether the student’s interest in remaining in school should be forfeited. The Note provides both students and their universities with a more stable, more predictable procedure for vindicating individual student rights and protecting education institutions as a whole