The harm requirement is one of the most fundamental tenets of negligence law: the tort is incomplete and there can be no legal redress without proof of actual damage. Mere exposure to risk, even when it is foreseeable and unreasonable, is not actionable. This Article dares to challenge this time-honored, deep-rooted, and highly impactful legal axiom.  […]

Judges play a critical role in one of the most important stages of a criminal case’s adjudication—sentencing. While there have been substantial limitations placed on the discretion judges can exercise in devising punishments, there are little to none on what judges say at such hearings when articulating their rationales for the sentences they impose on […]

 Mass incarceration has many evils. One of them is the length and apparent fixedness of many criminal sentences—a relatively new development in the history of American criminal adjudication. Sympathetic system actors, concerned about this problem, often complain that they lack the ability to revisit sentences that have outlived commonsense value. This complaint has prompted incarcerated people, […]

Through its recent Appointments Clause and administrative law jurisprudence, the Supreme Court has applied a formalistic view of the separation of powers that is rapidly remaking the administrative state. Specifically, the Court has spearheaded an important debate on what level of executive accountability is constitutionally required in agency adjudications. Still, despite these updates in constitutional […]