[{"pubDate":"Wed, 12 Feb 2025 10:44:36 +0100","titre":"Dead Infants and Taking the Fifth","url":"https://www.cornelllawreview.org/2025/02/11/dead-infants-and-taking-the-fifth/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=dead-infants-and-taking-the-fifth","id":1908568,"description":"This Essay offers tribute to Professor Colb’s teachings and insights expressed in her writings on the Court’s Miranda and Self-Incrimination Clause rulings. Since the start of the twenty-first century, Professor Colb wrote many blogs on the Court’s Miranda doctrine. Miranda v. Arizona famously held that persons under arrest must be warned of their right","source":"Cornell Law Review"},{"source":"Cornell Law Review","id":1588335,"description":"This Note argues that courts should give more weight to climate change when assessing the reasonable investment-backed expectations that define the owner’s property interest. First, the owner’s expectations should be viewed dynamically, evolving over time, because government regulations—climate and disaster controls in particular—must also respond to changing circumstances. Currently, expectations are fixed at the","pubDate":"Tue, 24 Sep 2024 10:21:03 +0200","url":"https://www.cornelllawreview.org/2024/09/23/takings-and-homeowners-expectations-in-times-of-rapid-climate-change/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=takings-and-homeowners-expectations-in-times-of-rapid-climate-change","titre":"Takings and Homeowners’ Expectations in Times of Rapid Climate Change"},{"pubDate":"Mon, 24 Jun 2024 18:08:30 +0200","titre":"A Common Law for the Age of Amici: How the Party-Presentation Principle Can Help Identify Binding Precedent","url":"https://www.cornelllawreview.org/2024/05/01/a-common-law-for-the-age-of-amici-how-the-party-presentation-principle-can-help-identify-binding-precedent/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=a-common-law-for-the-age-of-amici-how-the-party-presentation-principle-can-help-identify-binding-precedent","source":"Cornell Law Review","id":1414542,"description":"Two recent Supreme Court cases suggest an additional dimension for the traditional test that distinguishes dicta from holding. In the first, United States v. Sineneng-Smith, the Ninth Circuit reversed a criminal conviction based on arguments made by amici appointed by that court. The Supreme Court then reversed 9-0, holding that the Ninth Circuit'''s handling"},{"titre":"One-Offs","url":"https://www.cornelllawreview.org/2024/02/23/one-offs/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=one-offs","pubDate":"Mon, 24 Jun 2024 18:08:28 +0200","description":"This Article examines the phenomenon of ''œone-offs'': court opinions that are rarely cited by the court that issued them and do not explicitly generate further doctrinal development. At first glance, one might think that such opinions are problematic outputs from an apex court such as the U.S. Supreme Court, whose primary tasks are the","id":1414535,"source":"Cornell Law Review"}]