46622 research outputs found
Sort by
Old Farms, New Crop: Agriculture\u27s Historical Influence in Colorado Water Law and its Leadership into a Water Scarce Future
Get PDFThe Risks and Potential Impacts of a Colorado River Compact Curtailment on Colorado River In-Basin and Transmountain Water Rights Within Colorado
Get PDFTwenty-plus years of drought and overuse in the Colorado River system have dramatically changed the outlook for water users in the system\u27s Lower and Upper Basins. At the time of this Article\u27s writing, the United States Bureau of Reclamation was simultaneously working on two related, but separate, environmental review processes related to the management of the Colorado River and its major storage reservoirs. The river system was granted a short reprieve in the form of a long overdue and aboveaverage snowpack in the winter of 2022-2023, but all signs point to continued risk presented by an imbalance in the system caused by climate change and overuse. This Article explores many (though not all) of the legal, political, and policy questions facing the system. Among the questions that bear on the risk of a potential Colorado River Compact ( 1922 Compact or Compact ) curtailment are: (1) whether the consumptive use of tributaries within the Lower Basin count toward that basin\u27s Colorado River Compact Article III(a) and III(b) allocation; (2) whether the term surplus in the Compact\u27s Article I1I(c) Mexican Treaty provisions applies to System water in excess of 16 million acre-feet ( MAF ), or to the volumes allocated to each basin on an individual basis; (3) whether the Upper Basin\u27s Article III(d) non-depletion obligation is effectively excused if the flow at Lee Ferry falls below the ten-year running average requirement due to the impacts of climate change (instead of increased Upper Basin consumptive uses); and (4) whether the State of Colorado should pursue parallel strategies to prepare for an uncertain future or focus on addressing the current system inequities through litigation. Without assuming a definitive answer to these hotly contested issues, the Article explores the potential impacts in the event that curtailment of water users within Colorado became necessary to ensure continued compliance with the Colorado River Compact. The views expressed are the author\u27s alone and do not represent the position of the State of Colorado or any other entity
Reflections on the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Under Delaware Law: The Case of Sandbagging
Get PDF
Can Climate Change Constitute A Taking? The Endangered Species Act And Greenhouse Gas Regulation
Get PDFA First Amendment Failure: Surrendering to Science Misinformation for Bioengineered Foods
Get PDFGovernment-compelled commercial disclosures are not unfamiliar to consumers. Common labels include nutrition facts and ingredient information. The National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard, which took full force at the start of 2022, is of a different nature. The new law requires all manufacturers, all importers, and certain retailers of bioengineered foods to disclose on the food’s packaging that it has been produced with bioengineering technology. Even so, a large swath of the public is ignorant of “bioengineering’s” true meaning and bioengineering technology’s true quality. The politically charged and fact-lacking debate on bioengineered foods renders this standard an impermissible coercion of speech in violation of the First Amendment. If stricter regulation of potentially harmful food products is truly desired, a more appropriate target for compelled disclosure is pesticide use. Using science communication principles and factual information on the outcomes of bioengineered foods as a backdrop, this Note argues against the labeling of bioengineered foods and for alternative pesticide disclosures
Adoption as Substitute for Abortion?
Get PDFIn Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Justice Samuel Alito relied on adoption as part of the justification for holding that abortion is not constitutionally protected. First, he said, “[s]tates have increasingly adopted ‘safe haven’ laws, which generally allow women to drop off babies anonymously.” Second, “a woman who puts her newborn up for adoption today has little reason to fear that the baby will not find a suitable home.” Using adoption as an adequate substitute for abortion is a long-standing strategy for the antiabortion movement, but it is often embraced by pro-choice advocates as well. This position is supportable only if the realities of adoption are ignored in favor of mythologized notions of adoption as morally superior to abortion. This piece explores the ambiguities in adoption, considering the issues of racism, patriarchy, and poverty that drive children into the adoption system. It also discusses the history and philosophy literature that link adoption and abortion, and how those who favor access to abortion have ceded the morality issue to those who are antiabortion. The piece also examines the psychosocial literature about birth parents and adoptees that reveals the experiences of these members of the adoption triad, and uncovers the false premise that adoption compares favorably to abortion because it causes no harm. Overall, this piece critiques the ways in which adoption is sanitized to erase issues of gender, race, and class, so as to present adoption as superior to abortion and thus justify ending abortion acces
