Articles
HISTORICAL WEAPONS RESTRICTIONS ON MINORS
Robert J. Spitzer
Since the Supreme Court’s ruling in 2022 that recast the basis for judging the constitutionality of contemporary gun laws according to the existence of historical analogs, all manner of laws have been subject to court challenge, including those that restrict gun access to those under the age of twenty-one. To date, federal courts have split on this question. Given this new, history-based standard for judging the constitutionality of current weapons laws, this Article examines the historical record pertaining to how the age of majority was defined in our past and how that pertains to the history of laws that restricted minors’ access to firearms and other weapons. This Article offers the most extensive assessment of state laws and local ordinances from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to be found to date. In addition, it includes a new and extensive excavation of a wide range of college and university codes in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries that limited or barred students from having weapons during that time period, the nature and extent to which has not been identified or reported before. All of this information supports the conclusion that the broadly accepted age of majority during this time period was twenty-one.
FASHION’S GREENWASHING PROBLEM AND HOW TO BETTER PROTECT CONSUMERS
Edward Bank
Nowhere is it truer that consumers are shifting to buy sustainably made products than in the fashion industry. Luxury brands illuminate runways with supposed ethically sourced garments and mainstream lines disseminate styles tagged with an ode to reduced carbon emissions. But fashion’s commitment to sustainability runs into friction with industry practices for shorter, more frequent launch cycles that produce garments for fewer wears and more purchases. This is the model for “fast fashion” which has propelled the fashion industry deeper as one of the most polluting markets in the global economy.
To satisfy consumers with rapidly changing preferences but also aspire to make environmentally conscious purchases, fashion companies frequently find themselves marketing their garments as sustainable when they are not as environmentally friendly as the consumer believes. This conniving marketing ruse is known as “greenwashing.” By doing this, companies can convey empty promises to better the environment while consumers purchase their products under the false impression that they are contributing to an eco-friendly objective.
This Comment will study the fashion industry’s practice of greenwashing. Part II explores the dynamics of the fashion industry to understand its vulnerability to greenwashing. Part III investigates forms and cases of greenwashing in fashion. And Part IV explains how the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) can revise its Guidance for Environmental Marketing Claims (the “Green Guides”) to curb deceptive advertising. This Comment emphasizes that the FTC should allocate heavy consideration to the fashion industry when revising the Green Guides given its size and complexity, environmental impact, and consumer demand for sustainable products.
Reparations for Black Americans has become a recent hot topic within American social discourse. Some deny the pertinence of reparations due to the attenuation between slavery and would-be modern day recipients. However, proponents of reparations argue that in order to adequately address the impacts of slavery, which has disproportionately affected Black American life, providing reparations is more than justifiable. This Comment, functioning as an advocacy piece grounded in the argument for reparations, seeks to accomplish two things: (1) create the case for Black reparations through a dignity wrongs analysis and (2) test the feasibility of theories to institute reparations through a state case study in a geographic region typically left untouched from slavery discourse but with interesting ties to it.
BE LIKE ANDUJAR: WHY THE NEW JERSEY SUPREME COURT GOT IT RIGHT
Ronald Wielenta
On May 31, 2017, a Black male from Newark, referred to as F.G., entered the Essex County Courthouse to serve as a juror. He expressed eagerness to participate, emphasizing his belief in the fairness of the criminal justice system and the importance of diverse perspectives. However, after extensive voir dire questioning, the prosecution attempted to strike him for cause, citing his background and use of certain lingo. The trial judge rejected the motion, finding F.G. fair and impartial. Shortly thereafter, the prosecution conducted a background check, leading to F.G.’s arrest and removal before peremptory challenges. This avoided any Batson review into potential race-based motives. In State v. Andujar, the New Jersey Supreme Court established safeguards to prevent implicit bias from influencing pre-Batson background checks. This Comment argues that other jurisdictions should adopt Andujar’s standard to combat prosecutorial abuse, protect the rights of defendants and jurors, and prevent racial bias in jury selection.
Comments are closed