The False Evidence Ploy: A Coercive, Not Just Deceptive, Police Tactic

Why would people confess to a crime they did not commit? It may seem hard to imagine that an innocent person would confess but as this Note will show, false confessions are a real and serious issue. One cause of false confessions is the False Evidence Ploy - a police interrogation tactic where police falsely tell a suspect they have some sort of incriminating evidence against them. This Note argues that the Ploy is psychological coercion, as it may cause innocent suspects to believe they actually committed the crime and then confess. N.Y. Bill S324A presented a solution, banning the police from lying about evidence, regardless of the suspect’s age or mental capacity. This Note contends that the bill should be reintroduced and other states should follow suit to protect the integrity of the criminal justice system

“Forced Worship Stinks in God’s Nostrils”: The Inquisition, Sepharad, and the American Experiment

In December 1791, the Bill of Rights, comprising the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution, enshrined fundamental protections for individual freedoms, with the First Amendment guaranteeing liberty of conscience. This milestone, however, was the culmination of centuries of struggle. The arrival of Iberian Jews, including conversos, in North America played a pivotal role in shaping the course of American history. The Founders referenced the Inquisition in their letters and debates, particularly in discussions on legal protections for criminal suspects and the broader issue of religious liberty. Founding assurances of religious freedom to Jews and Christians stand in stark contrast to the Inquisition, which persisted well into the early 19th century. Furthermore, several prominent Jewish leaders along the Eastern Seaboard (in cities such as New York, Newport, Philadelphia, and Savannah) had directly fled the Inquisition (or their parents had) and they had met or corresponded with the Framers. Ultimately, the Founding Fathers\u27 deep repugnance toward the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisitions, alongside a Jewish presence in early America, contributed to consecrating the ideal of religious freedom in the early Republic. This extraordinary legacy continues into the 21st century

A Holistic Treatment Team for Autism: The Professional Education Benefits of a Medical-Legal Partnership for Autism Involving Students from Graduate Programs in Law, Applied Behavior Analysis, and Occupational Therapy

This article will outline the distinct special education and related service needs of children with autism and describe a new model for a medical-legal partnership tailored to address those needs and educate the professionals who work with children with autism. We will share results supporting the use of this model from a series of Interprofessional Education (“IPE”) case studies and consultations the authors conducted through interdisciplinary coursework shared among several graduate schools within Touro University. Part I explains the legal and client-centered framework within which the medical-legal partnership operates. Part II identifies the advantages of Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) and occupational therapy (OT) for the complex interrelated symptoms that are associated with autism, and the importance of client-centered legal advocacy for obtaining appropriate services for youth with autism. Part III contextualizes medical-legal partnerships within the broader landscape of interprofessional education. Part IV introduces a pioneering medical legal partnership at Touro University aimed at enhancing the training of professionals and delivering more impactful legal services to children with autism. This initiative integrates expert consultants from ABA and OT into the special education legal representation provided by a law school clinic to children and youth with autism. Part V presents empirical findings illustrating the educational benefits of this model for students pursuing careers in OT, ABA, and law, along with suggestions for refining the pedagogical approach to better serve professional students. This article also shares some of the early beneficial outcomes of the partnership for the law clinic’s clients with autism

Variable Standards: How Many Uninjured Class Members Are Acceptable?

Purchasers of canned tuna filed a class action against tuna producers after a price-fixing scheme raised prices above competitive levels. To be certified, a class must include only members who have suffered an injury, in this case by paying a higher price than they would have in the absence of price-fixing, but it was difficult to identify which plaintiffs were uninjured and should be excluded. Dueling statistical models failed to resolve this uncertainty, with one model suggesting up to one in every three class members was not injured at all. The Ninth Circuit nonetheless allowed this class to be certified, splitting with other circuits which apply a de minimis rule. This demonstrates a shocking gap in judges’ statistical understanding. This Note argues that, given the recognized difficulty judges have applying statistical evidence, a de minimis rule, though inelegant, is the most reasonable solution

Protect Transgender Kids: What Is “Protection” in Light of Bans on Gender-Affirming Care?

This Note examines the growing legal and constitutional conflict surrounding state laws that ban or restrict gender-affirming care for transgender minors. At the heart of the issue lies the clash between state authority and the constitutionally protected rights of parents under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Drawing on medical consensus that affirms the necessity and efficacy of gender-affirming care, the Note argues that these laws not only endanger the well-being of transgender youth but also infringe on parents\u27 fundamental rights to direct their children’s medical treatment. The analysis highlights how some states mischaracterize gender-affirming care as a form of child abuse to justify discriminatory legislation under the pretense of child protection. Ultimately, this Note contends that such laws violate constitutional guarantees by unlawfully interfering with parental decision-making and perpetuating harm against transgender youth under a false mantle of state interest

Enhancing the Uniform Partition of Heirs Property Act: The Need for Broader Use and Essential Modifications

The Uniform Partition of Heirs Property Act (“UPHPA”) seeks to address complex and inequitable conflicts that arise when partitioning heirs property. This Note explores the legislative history of the UPHPA, along with the legal and societal significance of the UPHPA, which provides mechanisms to prevent forced sales of family-owned property. Through a comparative analysis of states that have adopted their versions of the UPHPA, this Note considers the law’s potential to protect family land, reduce the risk of displacement, and promote longterm economic stability for communities, especially those in rural and minority populations. While recommending that all states should adopt the UPHPA, this Note also considers the shortcomings of the statute, including the act’s interaction with existing property laws, attorney’s fees that arise, and its failure to proportionately benefit certain minority groups. Additionally, this Note discusses the intersection of the UPHPA with issues concerning racial inequality, particularly the disproportionate impact that partition laws may have on African American farmers, who have historically faced challenges in retaining land passed down through generations. This Note argues that the UPHPA ameliorates this dispossession yet acknowledges the limitations of the UPHPA concerning economic and social disparities. While the UPHPA offers a promising solution for reforming heirs property disputes, its effectiveness will depend on its broader adoption by states, as well as its capacity to address the historical and systemic inequities that underlie heirs property issues

Book Banning: The Post-Pico Epidemic upon Nationwide Academic Curricula

This Note explores the growing wave of book bans across the United States, highlighting the increasing role of state legislators in advancing policies that restrict access to literature in public schools. While historically driven by private individuals or local challenges, contemporary bans are now often state-sanctioned, with states like Texas, Florida, Missouri, Utah, and South Carolina leading the movement. These actions not only suppress specific titles but also target entire genres, disproportionately affecting books dealing with race, gender, and LGBTQ+ identities. Drawing on sources such as the PEN America Index of School Book Bans, the Note analyzes the historical context of censorship efforts and their legal implications. It critically examines the Supreme Court\u27s efforts to set constitutional limits on content-based restrictions in schools, and the ways in which lower courts and school districts have circumvented those guidelines. Ultimately, the Note argues that this resurgence in censorship undermines educational integrity and First Amendment protections, leaving lasting damage to public education and free expression nationwide

Unboxing the Box: A Deep Dive into Solitary Confinement and When It May Violate the First And Eighth Amendments

Solitary confinement has been a practice used for those who are incarcerated in our criminal justice system for hundreds of years. Our nation, as well as our society have evolved and continue to evolve over the course of hundreds of years. However, the use of solitary confinement has not. Even with all of the research and literature surrounding the monstrosities that come about from solitary confinement, it is still used in most of our jails and prisons to this day. The Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The proposition that solitary confinement does not and cannot violate the Eighth Amendment is the subject of a decades-old circuit split that, as of right now, unfortunately shows no signs of being resolved. Courts have identified several factors to be considered when determining the answer to this question - including the length of the confinement, its impact on the individual’s mental and physical health, and its necessity. At least five circuits have held that solitary confinement can violate the Eighth Amendment: the Third, Fourth, Seventh, Eleventh, and Second. However, the Sixth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits have found that solitary confinement does not violate the Eighth Amendment