Monthly Archives: July 2025
Jul 31, 2025 Goldburn MaynardTrusts & Estates
Adam Hofri-Winogradow & Mark Bennett,
Looking through Trusts, __
Osgoode Hall L. J. __ (forthcoming), available at
SSRN (Oct. 9, 2024).
The issue of whether trust beneficiaries should be treated differently from individuals who own their assets directly has been a central one in the trusts and estates world for centuries, and it shows no signs of disappearing. While it would be preferable to have a standard, across-the-board response to this matter, its intractable nature reveals a balancing of interests. The trust is a centuries-old fiduciary relationship that is not nefarious in and of itself. Much as they do with corporations, governments find themselves torn between respecting such voluntary arrangements according to their terms or setting them aside to prevent abuse. The purpose of look-through rules is to prevent trusts from undermining other policy goals, such as facilitating debt collection or restricting certain government benefits to individuals who demonstrate financial need.
In a forthcoming article, Professors Adam Hofri-Winogradow & Mark Bennett compare trust look-through approaches taken by five nations: the U.S. (and its states), Canada (and its provinces), England and Wales, Australia, and New Zealand. The authors’ focus is primarily on liability and means-testing avoidance by trust beneficiaries, which they argue is improper. To paint a picture of how weighty and emotion-provoking these issues can be in the real world, consider three examples featuring Gary, a hypothetical trust beneficiary of a $10 million trust set up by his mother Gwen before her death from a terminal illness. Gary’s father, as trustee, in entitled to make distributions to Gary in his sole discretion: Continue reading "Placing Limits on Trust Asset Protection"
Jul 30, 2025 Ann LiptonCorporate Law
Recent high-profile business implosions such as FTX and WeWork introduced the world to the notion of the business cult. In these firms, a charismatic founder created pressure-cooker working conditions where dissent was stifled and a grandiose business philosophy – such as the “We” in WeWork and the effective altruism of FTX – fueled employee devotion.
In her book, Little Bosses Everywhere: How the Pyramid Scheme Shaped America, New York magazine reporter Bridget Read excavates a much older, and much larger business cult: the cult of multilevel marketing. Multilevel marketing is a model whereby a network of independent “sellers” buy products from a manufacturer, for the ostensible purpose of reselling to end-users at a profit, but sellers also earn commissions based on the purchases of new sellers who they bring into the network. Beginning with its origins with the Nutrilite Company and tracing through to its modern form in companies like Mary Kay, Amway, and Herbalife, Read convincingly demonstrates that the model is, fundamentally, a pyramid scheme: sales to actual customers are negligible and rarely even tracked; profits accrue only to those very few members (in the vicinity of 1% or less) who have built a large “downline” of new recruits who kickback commissions when they make their own purchases. Continue reading "When Business is a Cult"
Jul 29, 2025 Robert HillmanContracts
Danielle D’Onfro & Cathy Hwang,
Tortious Interference Revisited, __
U. Penn. L. Rev. __ (forthcoming), available at
SSRN (Feb. 19, 2025).
Professors D’Onfro and Hwang’s new article, Tortious Interference Revisited, brings the reader almost up to date on the nature of tortious interference and, in doing so, adds to each of their impressive contributions to contract scholarship. I use the word “almost” in the title and the first sentence here advisedly because the final paragraph of their article calls “for more sophisticated empirical treatments” (P. 54) of the subject and announces their intention to investigate recent cases.
Still the reader can learn a lot about tortious interference with contract and with other business relationships and opportunities (as do D’Onfro and Hwang, I will refer to the subject matter, often treated as separate torts, singularly as “tortious inference”). Relying on cases and secondary literature, the article offers numerous insights into the nature of and issues engendered by tortious interference. Continue reading "Everything (Almost) You Wanted to Know About Tortious Interference"
Jul 28, 2025 Jaya Ramji-NogalesLexImmigration
What would a theory of migration that takes seriously the lived expertise of migrants and their families contribute to the scholarly conversation? Drawing from extensive qualitative interviews in Mexico with community members who journeyed to the United States to seek work and those they left behind, Prof. Ragini Shah has a compelling answer: a theory of migration as extraction. The thesis of her new book, Constructed Movements: Extraction and Resistance in Mexican Migrant Communities, builds on prior work on decolonizing migration and migrations as reparations, evolving those critiques into a comprehensive theory of migration.
This brilliant new work begins with the voices of migrants themselves, offering insightful quotes and a firsthand understanding of the journey to El Norte and its impact on individuals, families, and communities. One of the invaluable contributions that this qualitative work offers is a clear description of the emotional cost of migration as extraction. The interviews provide powerful insights into this profound price that families paid and continue to pay, and the ongoing impacts on migrant communities. Prof. Shah describes a vicious cycle of dispossession, dismemberment of family relations, and exploitation, as well as a story of agency on the part of migrants. Continue reading "Migration as Extraction"
Jul 25, 2025 Ilya SominConstitutional Law
In the Insular Cases of the early twentieth century, the Supreme Court ruled that much of the Constitution does not apply to America’s “unincorporated” overseas territories, such as Puerto Rico and other territories acquired as a result of the Spanish-American War of 1898. Thus, the federal government could rule the people there without being constrained by a variety of constitutional rights. Only “fundamental” rights were held to constrain the federal government’s powers over the inhabitants of these territories, while other constitutional constraints on federal power did not apply. In a 2022 concurring opinion, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch urged the Court to overrule these decisions. Prominent originalist legal scholar Michael Ramsey’s important new article explains why Gorsuch was right.
Ramsey compellingly demonstrates that the Insular Cases were wrongly decided, at least from an originalist standpoint. And his argument has potential implications that go beyond the status of people living in “unincorporated” territories. There have been various previous critiques of the Insular Cases. But Ramsey’s is the first systematic scholarly dismantling undertaken from an originalist perspective. Continue reading "Originalism and the Insular Cases"
Jul 24, 2025 Christopher WalkerAdministrative Law
In Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 524 (1978), the Supreme Court famously announced that “[a]gencies are free to grant additional procedural rights [beyond those required by the Administrative Procedure Act] in the exercise of their discretion, but reviewing courts are generally not free to impose them if the agencies have not chosen to grant them.” In an administrative law course, we focus somewhat myopically on the second half of the statement—that courts cannot impose more procedural requirements on federal agencies than Congress has commanded by statute. But the first part of the sentence is just as important. It is in Vermont Yankee’s “white space,” as Emily Bremer and Sharon Jacobs aptly call it, that so much of the action in administrative law takes place. This is the world of internal administrative law.
Historically, internal administrative law has often been neglected in the literature, with some exceptions such as Jerry Mashaw’s majestic Bureaucratic Justice. In recent years, however, we have seen more scholarly attention, which is chronicled in Gillian Metzger and Kevin Stack’s 2017 article Internal Administrative Law. I have contributed some to this literature, trying to operationalize internal administrative law and exploring how it can constrain and empower regulatory activities outside of courts. A recent addition to the literature is well worth a read and the subject of this review: Professor Stack’s article The Internal Law of Democracy is a spectacular exploration of how internal law works in state and local governments, in the context of election administration. There is so much to like (lots) about this article, and it is a must-read for scholars of administrative law, election law, and local government law as well as political science and public administration. Continue reading "Shifting Attention to Internal Administrative Law in the States"
Jul 23, 2025 Matt BodieWork Law
The Yale Law Journal Forum recently hosted a collection of essays under the rubric of “Reimagining and Empowering the Contemporary Workforce.” Two of these works deal specifically with the challenges for workers posed by the dramatically reoriented data landscape: Data Laws at Work by Veena Dubal, and AI and Captured Capital by Ifeoma Ajunwa. Both essays are essential reading for those interested in data protection and regulation within the workplace.
Professors Dubal and Ajunwa present a nice contrast in their approaches to empowering workers within the data revolution. Dubal follows a more traditional privacy-oriented approach, seeking to further restrict employer access to, and use of, employee data through narrow permissions and harsher penalties. Ajunwa, on the other hand, argues that worker data represents business capital, and she contends that employees should have long-term rights to the value generated from that data. These two avenues—inalienability restrictions and property rights—should both play bigger roles in our system of workplace data regulation, especially within the world of algorithms and artificial intelligence. Continue reading "Two Frameworks for Employee Data Empowerment"
Jul 22, 2025 Adam HirschTrusts & Estates
Professor Lawrence M. Friedman has had a remarkable career. Much of his work has focused on legal history, and he has served as president of the American Society for Legal History in recognition of his distinction in that field. He also helped to pioneer empirical legal studies as a subdiscipline of scholarship. And, most fortunately for those of us who work in wills-and-trusts, he has contributed to our area as well, with a stream of articles and one book, beginning in the early 1960s and continuing until today—no fewer than six decades of superb scholarship on inheritance law.
With this extended essay, Friedman returns to the expansive style of some of his early work in the field. His subject is the lengths to which people will go to leave an eternal mark upon the world. As Friedman concludes, it is a fanciful quest. Try as one might, no one can defy the laws of nature—and nothing lasts forever. Nevertheless, in a variety of ways explored in this essay, people keep on trying. Continue reading "Dead Hand Control"
Jul 21, 2025 Anita BernsteinTorts
Writers who study torts tend to engage with liability as a force or vector that imposes consequences on parties accused of injuring others. For most of us in this field, liability means accountability or reckoning. This occupational interest in what tort does in action, or can do when it’s enlisted, can obscure the impacts of shelters from accountability.
Removing Torts marks Betsy Grey’s return to a source of tort nonaccountability that Professor Grey knows backwards and forwards, the statutory kind. This refuge has ample company in the land of shelters. Fortuitousness, for example, also fends off reckoning: Prospective defendants get lucky when prospective plaintiffs don’t know what hit them, run out of time or money, fail to clear the intake criteria of a contingent-fee attorney, on and on. Judge-made immunities of the common law—especially the intrafamily and charitable kind—are more orderly, though they’ve dwindled into something of a quaint oddball relic. Continue reading "BEWARE OF SHELTER"
Jul 18, 2025 Jacob Noti-VictorTechnology Law
Benjamin Sobel,
A Real Account of Deep Fakes, available at
SSRN (May 16, 2024).
With the rapid advancement of photorealistic generative AI technology, the problem of sexually explicit deepfakes has grown more urgent than ever. Thanks to widely available AI systems, users can now easily create images that appear to depict real people engaging in sexual acts. Not only have Taylor Swift and other celebrities been targeted, but deepfakes are also now alarmingly prevalent in American schools.
The government has already started to address the problem. At least 26 states now penalize the creation or distribution of nonconsensual sexually explicit deepfake imagery. And the federal Take It Down Act, which creates criminal penalties and a takedown regime for both real and AI-generated nonconsensual intimate imagery (NCII), was recently signed into law by President Trump. But, as Ben Sobel argues in his excellent (and award winning) new article, A Real Account of Deep Fakes, many of these bans have been passed without first articulating the precise harms posed by sexually explicit deepfakes, leaving the statutes open to free expression challenges. Sobel’s article aims to fill this gap. Through painstaking comparisons between deepfake bans and other areas of law that regulate deception, abuse, privacy invasions, and obscenity, the article crystallizes the normative arguments for deepfake regulation and the First Amendment stakes. Continue reading "Deepfakes Deconstructed"
