CUNY Law Review’s Spring 2025 Symposium

Please see program posted below:

LR-Program

How To Be a Law Student While the World Is Burning

By: Lillian Perez

Last semester, one of our blog staff editors, Lillian Perez, set out to discover what CUNY Law students think about being law students in this day and age.

Continue reading

CUNY Law Review Symposium 2025

Register here

Equal Application Theory: A Revamped 1880’s Legal Theory Being Used To Attack Trans Rights

Jared M. Trujillo

In 2005 as a high school senior in Chicago, I found myself locked in a debate with my government teacher about gay marriage. He smugly declared “It’s not discrimination! Illinois’ marriage ban prohibits gay and straight people alike from marrying someone of the same sex.” I stared at him in disbelief with a dropped jaw and furrowed brow, as I thought I was doomed to fail the AP exam with the man who made that argument as my teacher. He mistook this look as defeat. Little did I know his “equal application theory” argument had a long pedigree stretching back to Pace v. Alabama in 1883, where the Supreme Court upheld an anti-miscegenation law because it equally punished Black and white participants. 

Continue reading

The New, New Colossus: An Annotated Version of ‘The New Colossus’ by Emma Lazarus

Nora Phillips and Salimah Khoja

Volume 28.1 (download PDF)

The purpose of this annotation is to raise awareness of the extreme restrictions in U.S. immigration law via a poetic outlet. It explores the juxtaposition of the promises of America with the reality under U.S. immigration laws. It delineates the various categories of “undesirables” that the United States aims to exclude and remove. Finally, it aims to begin to demystify U.S. immigration laws to show the extreme restrictions placed on immigrants.

Nora_Phillips_Salimah_Khoja_The_New_New_Colossus_28_CUNY_L._Rev._01_2024

In Search of Solid Gound: Constitutional Standing In Challenges to Corporate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (“DEI”) Programs

Ally Coll

Volume 27.2 (download PDF)

Abstract

This term, in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, the Supreme Court invalidated Harvard and the University of North Carolina’s (“UNC”) race-conscious admissions programs as unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In a significant departure from past precedent, the Court concluded that Harvard and UNC’s programs “cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause.” In anticipation of and in the wake of this decision, individuals and organizations who oppose similar workplace diversity programs brought lawsuits challenging the legality of various corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) programs under a range of federal civil rights statutes. Lower courts considering these claims have thus far largely declined to adjudicate them on the merits, instead dismissing them for lack of Article III standing. While much attention has been placed on the implications of the Court’s substantive reasoning in Students for Fair Admissions for corporate DEI programs, this Article argues that the Court’s standing analysis this term, both in the affirmative action case and in other key decisions, is equally important to the outcome of pending challenges to such initiatives.

Continue reading

The Opportunity Presented By the End of Race-Conscious Admissions in Higher Education

Mohamed Akram Faizer

Volume 27.2 (download PDF)

Abstract

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to invalidate race-based admissions will problematically make it more difficult for underrepresented minorities’ to gain admission to elite colleges and universities. However, it offers an opportunity to finally address racial inequality in access to preschool and K-12 education, by removing the political cover that allowed elite credentialing to perpetuate social advantage and ignore distributional justice. To create a more inclusive admissions process, cultural competence experts should collaborate with civil society to develop policies that consider all perspectives. This approach, inspired by administrative law’s notice-and-comment framework, can help institutions prioritize factors like resilience over regressive metrics tied to socioeconomic status. In the long term, this shift could encourage elite schools to engage with marginalized communities to address the racial opportunity gap from the ground up. It might also challenge the country’s excessive focus on hyper-elite credentials as a pathway to success, and recognize that there are many highly capable students and graduates from less selective schools that merit consideration for prestigious jobs. This change could promote socioeconomic mobility and foster a more inclusive and equitable society.

Continue reading

Between a River and a Wall: An Impossible Choice for Migrants Living Under Operation Lone Star and S.B. 4

Salimah Khoja & Paulina Leyva Hernandez

Volume 27.2 (download PDF)

Abstract

In 2023 the Texas legislature passed Senate Bill 4 (“S.B. 4”), which empowers state and local law enforcement agencies to engage in immigration enforcement by arresting and deporting migrants who are suspected of crossing the southern border. Anti-immigrant state laws like Texas’s S.B. 4 and Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070 (“S.B. 1070”) were created to test the limits of state power and limit the reach of federal immigration enforcement within the states. Legal challenges to state laws like S.B. 4 and S.B. 1070 demonstrate the ongoing tension between federal and state governments related to authority over immigration matters, even though immigration has been within the federal government’s purview since the early days of the United States, as recognized by the judiciary for more than a century. This Note focuses on the immigration preemption doctrine and argues that the Supreme Court should declare S.B. 4 unconstitutional, while protecting states’ ability to continue creating humane, immigrant-inclusive policies without impermissibly disrupting the fabric of federal immigration enforcement actions.

Continue reading

Telehealth in Reproductive Health Care: A New Frontier in the Fight for Abortion Access

Katie Corwin

Volume 27.2 (download PDF)

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic played a crucial role in establishing the use of telehealth in all aspects of health care with one huge exception: abortion. Conservative politicians often do not categorize abortion as health care, leading to a stark contrast in the treatment of reproductive health care, particularly in terms of telehealth availability. This Comment examines state laws relating to telehealth abortion, how lawmakers restrict access to abortion by attacking telehealth abortion, and the resulting legal uncertainty for patients and practitioners. The central argument of this Comment is that legally protecting and expanding telehealth is imperative for increasing access to reproductive health care and abortion as well as improving public health.

Continue reading

The Professionalized Violence of Prosecutorial Power and Misconduct

Bina Ahmad

Volume 27.2 (download PDF)

Abstract

The U.S. legal system is a colonizer’s system constructed to uphold power and protect the powerful. For radical lawyers, it is the language of power we need to speak and understand to protect ourselves and our communities from this violence. As law enforcement actors, prosecutors are arguably the most powerful actors in our criminal legal system, able to ruin people’s lives at will and with absolute immunity to protect them from any accountability for any misconduct. Even with professional attorney ethics rules and state bar grievance committees tasked with holding attorneys to these ethics rules, prosecutors are still rarely disciplined. This note argues that in addition to small-scale abolitionist reforms such as abolishing absolute immunity, we must go beyond this and shrink prosecutorial power, and make not only prosecutorial misconduct but the entire legal system accessible, transparent and open to the public.

Continue reading