3722 research outputs found
Sort by
In Defense of the Texas Statutory Easement
Get PDFMore than half the states, including Texas, have adopted a little-known statutory procedure by which a landlocked property owner may ask the government to exercise eminent domain to gain an easement over a neighbor’s property. Texas’s version, the rarely cited Texas Transportation Code section § 251.053, raises as many questions as it answers. This Article dissects section § 251.053, discusses the arguments for and against statutory easements, and argues in favor of statutory easements, particularly in Texas
Overloading the 1% “Circuit Breaker”: The Indiana Tax Court Constitutionally Expands Curtilage
Get PDFIn its 2024 decision, Sawlani v. Lake County Assessor, the Indiana Tax Court reviewed the constitutionality of the Indiana General Assembly’s statutory limit of the constitutionally prescribed 1% tax cap to only one acre of land—curtilage—surrounding the taxpayer’s principal place of residence. The Tax Court held the legislature’s limitation unconstitutional, finding no verbiage in the relevant constitutional provision that justified limiting the tax cap to just one acre. This Article critically examines the Court’s decision in Sawlani, arguing that the ruling represents a significant departure from established judicial principles and legislative intent, undermining the legislature’s authority and introducing uncertainty into Indiana’s property tax system. In rejecting the General Assembly’s clear and explicit definition of curtilage, the Court favored an ad hoc, case-by-case approach that conflicts with foundational principles of uniformity, predictability, and fairness in tax law. This Article also explores how this approach disregards the careful balance that must be struck between protecting homeowners from excessive taxation and ensuring the government can collect sufficient revenue to fund essential public services. Additionally, it delves into the Tax Court’s historical tendency to disregard legislative statutes and administrative regulations, substituting them with the court’s subjective views on how Indiana’s tax scheme should function. This pattern of judicial overreach is critically analyzed, emphasizing the risks it poses to the separation of powers and the integrity of Indiana’s tax system. Furthermore, this Article discusses how the Tax Court’s decision in Sawlani inadvertently nullifies the 1% tax cap entirely until the legislature enacts new operationalizing legislation, the nullification further encroaching on the legislature’s exclusive role in policymaking
April 2025 Poetry Month Display Photo 13
No full text2nd part of the poem Alabama contained in the book of poetry Felon by Reginald Dwayne Betts on display April 2026https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/poetry-month-2025-photos/1016/thumbnail.jp
April 2025 Poetry Month Display Photo 04
No full textPhoto, on display April 2025, of Kristen David Adams, her edited anthology Law and Poetry: Promises from the Preamble, and the context card describing her brief bio.https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/poetry-month-2025-photos/1007/thumbnail.jp
Consumer (Mis)Understanding of Dietary Supplement Labels
Get PDF“Helps lower cholesterol levels” and “helps promote healthy cholesterol levels.” Both of these claims are found on pharmacy products. And to ordinary consumers, the message is the same: take this pill and improve your cholesterol. Nevertheless, Congress has placed these statements in two very different regulatory categories. The former is classified as a disease claim, and the latter as a structure/function claim. Whereas products making disease claims require years of clinical trials and analyses before regulatory approval can be granted, products making structure/function claims do not even require governmental review before they can be sold to consumers. This bifurcated regulatory system and the concomitant lack of oversight regarding structure/function claims has encouraged dietary supplement manufacturers to produce thousands of products that mislead consumers. This Article investigates this phenomenon and proposes a change to the regulation of dietary supplement claims. Specifically, we contend that the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) should regulate claims that mean the same thing in the same manne
A New Parlor is Open: Microfeminisms are Needed in Law School to Combat Gender Bias
No full textA recent viral trend on TikTok has spotlighted women attorneys who are leveraging microfeminisms to uplift other women and challenge entrenched gender norms within the workplace. The hashtag #microfeminism has garnered over a billion views, underscoring a growing interest in this nuanced form of advocacy. Microfeminism encompasses the subtle, everyday actions individuals—regardless of gender—take to promote gender equity and disrupt traditional expectations, both personally and professionally. In contrast to broader feminist movements that often seek systemic reform, microfeminism focuses on the interpersonal and individual level, recognizing the transformative potential of seemingly small gestures. This Article aims to initiate a critical discussion on the persistent underrepresentation of women’s voices in law school classroom dialogue, despite their numerical majority, and explores how using microfeminisms can be employed to address this disparity
Causation’s Due Process Dimensions
No full textFor decades, courts have grappled with the tension between compensating victims of mass harms and maintaining fairness to defendants when causation is difficult to prove. This Article argues that the Supreme Court’s due process jurisprudence provides a relevant framework for navigating this tension. We contend that the Court over the last three decades has established a consistent Fourteenth Amendment due process approach in punitive damages and personal jurisdiction cases, which is rooted in antecedents tracing to the nineteenth century and relies on a nexus of interests that balances individual rights, state interests, and federalism concerns. This framework, we argue, has significant implications for evaluating the constitutionality of state tort doctrines like market-share liability and innovator liability, which challenge traditional notions of causation. Our analysis reveals that these doctrines may be vulnerable in some applications to constitutional challenge under the Court’s modern due process approach. We trace the evolution of the Court’s jurisprudence, demonstrating how it emphasizes the relationship between a plaintiff’s harm, a defendant’s conduct, and the forum state’s interest. Applying this framework to market-share and innovator liability, we suggest that tort causation itself may have constitutional dimensions. This finding has far-reaching implications for mass tort litigation and could reshape how courts approach cases involving multiple actors and attenuated chains of causation. By bridging the gap between due process jurisprudence and tort law, this Article offers a new perspective on longstanding debates about liability in complex cases and provides a roadmap for courts navigating these challenging waters
Discerning Interstate Groundwater Law: An Evaluation of Federal Common Law and Its Impacts on Groundwater Management
No full textThe Supreme Court has demonstrated a superficial understanding of ground water over the last century in interstate water disputes. In cases that indirectly affect groundwater, it has ignored the complexities of the resource and its connection with surface water. All but one Supreme Court case that mentions groundwater centers around surface water, leading to the inadequate consideration of groundwater. This has led to the development of a unique federal common law for how federal courts are to resolve interstate water disputes that affect groundwater. While the Court has applied the law consistently, gaps exist. Given the growing reliance on cross-border aquifers, this law deserves evaluation and requires discernment to determine its effects on future disputes. This Comment aims to address Supreme Court cases concerning interstate groundwater, the federal groundwater common law that has emerged, and the options states and the Supreme Court can take to prevent and clarify disputes