The Georgetown Law Journal

The Georgetown Law Journal is thrilled to announce the launch of our Supreme Court Coverage Program, an exciting new initiative under GLJ Online bringing fresh, student-driven perspectives to some of the most consequential legal issues of our time. Leveraging our location in the heart of Washington, D.C., our student authors will attend U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments in person—an opportunity unique to Georgetown Law. This firsthand experience allows them to craft insightful, real-time analysis of high-profile cases, going beyond conventional legal commentary to provide nuanced, in-depth perspectives on the Court’s most pressing decisions. Through this program, we aim to bridge the gap between academic scholarship and legal journalism, offering timely, thought-provoking essays that contribute meaningfully to the broader national conversation on Supreme Court jurisprudence. As the only law school in the country currently able to offer its students direct access to these arguments, Georgetown Law is uniquely positioned to provide Supreme Court coverage. Check out our first publication on Facebook, Inc. v. Amalgamated Bank, written by Richard Coyne, at bit.ly/glj-SCOTUS! Special thanks to Volume 113 Senior Online Editor Anna Reid and the GLJ Online team for their vision and hard work.

We are so thrilled to announce the Volume 114 Editors of The Georgetown Law Journal!

The second issue of Volume 113 is now available online! Read on for a preview and check the Issue out at https://lnkd.in/eaM35Hzu. There are well-established exemptions from copyright liability that have historically protected libraries’ lending of physical works but have not adequately protected public libraries in the age of digital lending. Therefore, Professor Guy Rub argues in his Article, Reimagining Digital Libraries, that a new multifaceted approach is needed to protect the public good that libraries serve while simultaneously incentivizing publishers to produce new works. Professor Mary Ellen O'Connell's Article, What Remains of Law Against War, explicates the “Western International Rule-Based Order” and how it has undermined the U.S. in pursuit of its foreign policy goals and weakened fundamental international law norms. The Article then makes several proposals for how the “norm death” resulting from the Western International Rule-Based Order can be combatted and even reversed. In Equitable Thriving: A Lifecourse Approach to Maternal and Child Health Justice, Professor Yael Cannon builds on the theory of Lifecourse Health Development in maternal and child health research, a public health theory that proposes principles for preventing health harms throughout one’s lifespan and across generations—as opposed to only addressing health outcomes once problems have arisen. Cannon advances a new theory, “Equitable Thriving,” which offers an additional focus on how law reform across sectors can prevent racial health disparities. As the title of Garett Eldred's Note suggests, Fashion, Fear, and The First: Why Neoteric Shiesty Mask Bans Are Unconstitutional, Eldred presents a First Amendment analysis arguing for the unconstitutionality of shiesty mask bans, which disproportionately criminalize Black men and other vulnerable groups. In doing so, he aims to protect individual agency and freedom by enforcing the right to convey the message: “I wish to remain anonymous.”

We are proud to announce the newly selected Volume 114 Managing Editors, Trent Dowell and Galen Green! Trent and Galen have demonstrated exceptional technical skills and dedication to the Journal. Congratulations, Trent and Galen!

We are delighted to introduce Volume 114’s Editor-in-Chief, Amritha Ramalingam! Amritha—a proud double Hoya—brings resilience, compassion, and impressive leadership to the role. We are confident The Georgetown Law Journal will continue to thrive under her leadership. Congratulations, Amritha!

In this compelling piece,?Professor Prince coins the term “benefits washing” to describe the widespread practice of employers omitting details, deflecting attention, or manipulating information about benefits like 401(k) plans, abortion-related travel reimbursements, and remote work. By examining real-world examples and the ethical concerns these tactics raise, Professor Prince highlights the significant harm this deception causes. The Essay also explores the limited legal recourse available to victims and the need for greater transparency in corporate disclosure of benefit plans. The Essay dives into examples of benefits washing by major employers, explores its ethical and legal implications, and discusses how these practices harm a range of stakeholders. This analysis is critical for understanding the intersection of employee rights, corporate accountability, and the “S” pillar of ESG. Read the full Essay in?GLJ Online at bit.ly/gljo-113-benefits!

We are so thrilled to share that the first issue of Volume 113 is up on our website! Check it out at https://lnkd.in/eTeaY6jM.

‘Compassionless Plea Bargaining,’ by Professor Julian A. Cook, III, explores a recent controversy where a number of federal prosecutors required defendants to sign plea agreements waiving compassionate release rights in plea deals during COVID-19, a practice halted by Attorney General Garland due to fairness concerns. This Article also?proposes important reforms to the federal plea hearing system, urging a more thorough examination of plea voluntariness and defendant comprehension. Read it on our Online platform at https://lnkd.in/eDQKcPzs!

Incredibly appreciative and excited to have my Note, "Election Website Tampering: Relevant Criminal Laws and Enhancing Deterrence" published by The Georgetown Law Journal and very thankful to GLJ Online staff for all of their support in getting this out there!

Imagine the chaos if a simple hack caused thousands of votes to disappear or appear overnight, flipping a key state’s results and fueling doubts about the election’s legitimacy. As Zach Rosenfeld highlights, even if actual votes aren’t affected, tampering with unofficial election results can have a disastrous impact on public trust and democracy. This Note examines relevant federal laws, including the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Defending the Integrity of Voting Systems Act, and advocates for more robust sentencing guidelines to deter future attacks. Read the full Note on our Online platform to learn more about these critical protections at https://lnkd.in/dGmvk5tm.