Home

Volume 100, Issue 1

• Disapproval of Quick-Look Approval: Antitrust after NCAA v. Alston
  by Christopher R. Leslie
  Abstract In its most recent antitrust opinion, National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston (2021), the Supreme Court condemned the NCAA’s policy against compensating student athletes as a violation of the Sherman Act. Although perceived as a pro-plaintiff antitrust decision, the Court’s opinion is anything but. While granting a victory to the plaintiffs at hand, the Alston opinion surreptitiously created aContinue reading “Disapproval of Quick-Look Approval: Antitrust after NCAA v. Alston”
• Content Under Pressure
  by Randy J. Kozel
  Abstract The government generally may not punish speakers based on the content of their speech. Or so the story goes. While American courts frequently describe content neutrality as a foundation stone of expressive liberty, the results do not track the recitations. A systematic analysis of free speech jurisprudence reveals that content-based laws remain acceptable across a host of situations. TheContinue reading “Content Under Pressure”
• Dynamic Pricing Algorithms, Consumer Harm, and Regulatory Response
  by Alexander MacKay & Samuel Weinstein
  Abstract Pricing algorithms are rapidly transforming markets, from ride-sharing, to air travel, to online retail. Regulators and scholars have watched this development with a wary eye. Their focus so far has been on the potential for pricing algorithms to facilitate explicit and tacit collusion. This Article argues that the policy challenges pricing algorithms pose are far broader than collusive conduct.Continue reading “Dynamic Pricing Algorithms, Consumer Harm, and Regulatory Response”
• Litigating Authority for the FDA
  by C. Joseph Ross Daval
  Abstract The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), like most federal agencies, is a captive client. Its “lawyer,” the Department of Justice (DOJ), ultimately decides whether and when to sue. When FDA goes to court, a DOJ lawyer decides what arguments to make, and whether to appeal if they lose. But Congress could, and perhaps should, change this arrangement. In thisContinue reading “Litigating Authority for the FDA”
• The Paradox of Same-Sex Parentage Equality
  by Noy Naaman
  Abstract There is a general scholarly consensus that the law of parental determination should conform to the principles of equality. But the precise meaning of equality itself remains contested in the era of assisted reproductive technology. Increasingly, legal scholars argue that the commitment to equality requires the law to be untethered from its biology-centric focus and that the relational elementsContinue reading “The Paradox of Same-Sex Parentage Equality”