Principle Over Pedigree: United States v. Rahimi, Post-Ratification History, and the Case for Justice Barrett’s Approach
Joel Myers, J.D. Candidate, University of Nebraska College of Law, 2026
The Court’s evolving Second Amendment jurisprudence offers fertile ground for the Court’s originalists to elucidate their perception of constitutional interpretation. In Rahimi, Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Amy Coney Barrett penned concurring opinions weighing the utility and function of historical evidence post-dating the ratification of the Second Amendment. This Note considers those opinions and advocates for Justice Barrett’s approach: post-ratification history is useful to explicate the meaning of the Constitution’s text.
Touchdown: Upholding Precedent for Proper Venue in United States v. Lozoya
Mikayla Gross, J.D. Candidate, University of Nebraska College of Law, 2026
“The friendly skies are not always so friendly.” This Note supports the Ninth Circuit’s en banc opinion in United States v. Lozoya, which determined that the landing district is the proper venue for prosecuting in-flight crime. The Ninth Circuit’s en banc ruling overturned the requirement to prosecute in-flight crimes in flyover districts, which created practical and evidentiary burdens for the prosecution and defense. The establishment of the landing district as the proper venue for in-flight crime prosecution promotes practical adjudication, justice for victims, constitutionally sound trials for defendants, uniformity for inflight prosecution, and encompasses Congress’s intent when enacting 18 U.S.C. § 3237(a).
Toward a General Legislative Presumption of Probation in Nebraska
Velma Lockman, Joint J.D./History M.A. Candidate, University of Nebraska College of Law
In 2015, the Nebraska Legislature passed L.B. 605, which created a presumption of probation for Class IV felonies alongside other measures aimed at reducing prison overcrowding. In the interest of reducing prison overcrowding, reducing racial disparities in sentencing, and minimizing the individual injustice of excessive imprisonment, the Nebraska Legislature should extend the presumption of probation both to lesser misdemeanors and to higher classes of felonies that do not require imprisonment.
On Sovereignty, Outer Space, and Taxation
Erika I. Scuderi, University of Florida Levin College of Law
This Article offers a comprehensive framework for States’ taxing powers in outer space. The discussion ultimately centers on Article VIII of the Outer Space Treaty, on which basis the present Article proposes the “Tax Jurisdiction by Registration Principle,” arguing that the act of registering a space object provides a legal basis for taxing income derived from its use.
Sticky Science in Court
H.A. Spitzer, University of Chicago Center for Health and Social Science
This paper applies network analysis to an original dataset containing all sources related to Parental Alienation Syndrome (“PAS”)—a controversial theory introduced into child custody litigation in the 1980s. By analyzing judicial opinions, peer-reviewed science, law reviews, and self-published materials relevant to the topic, the study traces how PAS entered the court system and continued to influence legal outcomes long after it was rejected by the scientific community.
Robot Wingman: Using AI to Assess Employment Termination
Henry H. Perritt Jr., Chicago-Kent College of Law, Illinois Institute of Technology
This Article presents the results of an experiment in which a transcript of a hypothetical client interview involving potential disability discrimination, retaliation, and wrongful termination claims was submitted to each AI system.
Carson v. Makin: Ending the Status-Use Distinction and Building a Foundation for the Emergence of Catholic Charter Schools
Tyler Lyon, J.D., University of Nebraska College of Law, May 2025
This Note argues that Carson has opened the door to the possibility of religious charter schools and evaluates this issue through the case of St. Isidore of Seville, which, in the aftermath of Carson, has made an attempt to become the nation's first Catholic charter school.
Let Them All Grow: Protecting Nebraska's Intersex Youth from Medical Intervention
Jori Peters, J.D. with distinction, University of Nebraska College of Law, May 2025
This Note argues that the Let Them Grow Act violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it exempts intersex children, those born with ambiguous sex characteristics, from protections against unnecessary, irreversible, and nonconsensual medical procedures, while it protects those born with clearly male and female sex characteristics.
Zigzagging Outer Space: The Legal Complexities of MegaConstellations
Alex S. Li, #TheSpaceBar®
The rapid rise of satellite mega-constellations is reshaping the “spacescape” of Low Earth Orbits (LEO). This Article explores the unprecedented challenges introduced by these vast networks and proposes a comprehensive governance framework to ensure their sustainable operations.
The Self-Erasure of the EEOC in Bostock v. Clayton County
Nicholas B. Mauer, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
This Article explores the EEOC’s part in the backstory of Bostock, theorizing what the EEOC could and should have done differently to justify consideration of its views. Interpreting Title VII, the EEOC used the “traditional tools of statutory construction” statutory text and judicial precedent. This Article argues that the EEOC should have also used methods of interpretation that capitalized on its unique capacities and role as an administrative agency, different from the capacities and role of federal courts. This Article also analyzes why the EEOC’s interpretations of Title VII received little public opposition from conservative members of Congress. While the EEOC did publicize its actions, this Article suggests ways that the EEOC could have further increased public attention to and deliberation about its interpretations. This Article concludes that an agency seeking to make the case that it deserves consideration of and deference to its interpretations of statutes should take actions and use methods of interpretation that emphasize the agency’s differences from courts. In short, agencies should act like agencies, not courts.