All in Administrative

Unbusting American Unions

CULSR Editors
Administrative, Policy

By: Max Fattal ‘25

Unions are good for workers, good for the country, and necessary to make the economy work for the middle and working class. At the same time, they’ve been completely eradicated out of many major U.S. sectors. Studies have shown that unions reduce income and wealth inequality for members and non-members alike. Therefore, it should be no surprise that as union membership has declined over the last 60s, income inequality has become substantially worse. This is no accident, and it's not for lack of support; unions are failing despite a rising approval rating well above 70%. It is a result of a concerted and consistent push against unionization on multiple fronts that has succeeded in preventing millions from joining unions and millions more from reaping the benefits. This paper attempts to examine why unionization has staggered through an examination of its laws. First, it looks at the history of union litigation and NLRB jurisprudence. Next, it examines contemporary union law, how its limitations allow for busting and how its enforcement fails to discourage violations. Finally, it examines solutions, both in reversions to past policies and through evolutions into new territory.


Testing Jackson’s Hypothesis

CULSR Editors
Constitutional, Administrative

By: Joaquin Suriel ‘25

I. Introduction

The purpose of this article is to give a brief introduction into the history and legal jurisprudence behind the landmark ruling in Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer. Special attention will be put on Justice Robert H. Jackson’s concurring opinion. Although a bit of a truism, his tripartite framework serves as an excellent lens to look through when assessing presidential power. His reasoning is clear and concise, and allows everyday citizens of the United States to engage in and formulate opinions about the judiciary, as his logic is straightforward. Special attention will be paid to George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations, as partisanship has grown and gridlock has become the norm under their tenures. Several cases will be examined in which the president took a broad reading of his powers established in Article II, and how Justice Jackson’s framework can be applied to illuminate judicial reasoning as it pertains to the scope of presidential power.

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea: Who Should Adjudicate Polymetallic Nodule Mining Disputes?

CULSR Editors
Administrative, Technology

By: Maral Asik ‘24

I. Introduction

Earth’s resources are rapidly depleting, and as a result humans are forced to look in increasingly remote places to access the resources necessary to maintain current consumption levels. As countries use more of their resources, they begin to look into the gold-mine of untapped resources located in international territory. When environmental damage occurs within a country, the intragovernmental judicial process typically decides what the consequences are. It is less certain, however, who holds states and corporations responsible for environmental harms caused in international territory, meaning the trans-boundary waters where no country has jurisdiction. This question is crucial for understanding the controversial issue of mining polymetallic nodules: a precious resource found primarily in international waters.