Articles for category: AAA General

The Finish Line of Caster Semenya’s Judicial Marathon

Caster Semenya was wronged, and Switzerland – due to the inaction of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (SFSC) – was held responsible by the Grand Chamber (GC) of the ECtHR. This conclusion to a long judicial marathon is an important vindication for an athlete who saw her career destroyed by a process that violated her right to a fair hearing. The case will be remembered as a significant landmark that will affect the field of transnational sports law and governance for years to come.

Laboratories of Authoritarianism

In Mahmoud v. Taylor, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the 1st Amendment Free Exercise Clause to grant conservative religious parents a constitutional right to remove their children from any classroom where a teacher includes LGBTQAI+ people in the curriculum. In effect, the Court has allowed public schools to discourage mutual tolerance, parents to opt out of Equal Protection, and fringe legal strategists to continue to use children’s constitutional rights as a test case for authoritarianism. In doing so, the erosion of children’s rights becomes the foundation upon which other rights are eroded.

Vet Bills and the EU Charter

Over the past decade, concerns about rising veterinary costs and their impact on animal welfare have sparked growing debate across Europe and North America. In the EU, veterinary pricing is largely unregulated, leading to significant variation in costs and transparency across Member States – prompting scrutiny from competition authorities in countries like the UK, the Netherlands, and Sweden. If Charter rights, particularly Article 37 on sustainability, are to carry real weight in relation to animals, the current state of the veterinary market in Europe warrants closer examination.

Reforming the GDPR

After a surge of new digital legislation over the past two years, the European Commission appears to have no intention of easing its pace in reshaping Europe’s regulatory landscape. This includes proposals to reform the GDPR. Regulatory reforms should, however, focus on strengthening enforcement and fixing the structural problems of the GDPR, rather than merely simplifying and deregulating it.

A Differentiated Path Forward

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ (IACtHR) Advisory Opinion OC-32/25 on the “Climate Emergency and Human Rights” represents a transformative moment in international legal doctrine on climate-induced displacement and shows why the IACtHR’s conclusions constitute not merely an incremental development, but a fundamental reorientation of the human rights law approach to one of the most pressing challenges of our time.

Silencing Children’s Rights

The U.S. Supreme Court decided Mahmoud v. Taylor on June 27, 2025. In doing so, it dramatically expanded parental rights over students and education without concern for the rights of children or consideration of pedagogy and curriculum. Instead of addressing the plurality of views around sexual orientation and gender, the Court indirectly, but unsubtly, installs a traditional values framework that imposes norms of heterosexuality, religious fundamentalism and parental micromanagement of curriculum.

Judicial Acquiescence to Presidential Immigration

Mahmoud Khalil, Kilmar Ábrego García, and Rumeysa Ozturk are just a few of the people against whom the second Trump Administration has openly engaged in alarming forms of immigration enforcement. There is an underappreciated way in which the Supreme Court has defanged the judiciary’s systemic ability to confront the executive branch’s illegal immigration behavior: It has failed to draw on U.S. administrative law. In doing so, it has diminished a vital structural judicial check on presidential power – one that lower courts, and even a future Supreme Court, may find increasingly difficult to deploy.

Von der Leyen Faces the Vote

On July 10, 2025, the European Parliament votes on a motion of censure against Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and her entire College of Commissioners. The pending vote against von der Leyen provides a compelling case study for examining the evolving role of the censure motion as both a legal instrument of accountability and a political tool for inter-institutional dialogue. While the motion's immediate prospects for success remain minimal, its deployment illuminates fundamental questions about democratic legitimacy, institutional loyalty, and the constitutional evolution of EU governance structures towards a post-Lisbon parliamentary democracy’s logic.

A Blueprint for Rights-Based Climate Action

On July 3, 2025, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) issued Advisory Opinion No. 32—the most important and progressive document yet released by an international court on the climate crisis. The IACtHR’s findings are as comprehensive as they are groundbreaking, spanning areas from procedural requirements for mitigation measures to the protection of environmental defenders. This post launches a blog symposium on the advisory opinion and discusses ten key takeaways, chosen to illustrate the opinion’s legal and practical significance.

The Liberal Litigation Trap

The progressive legal movement faces a harsh reality: its reliance on federal courts has become a strategic liability in an era of conservative judicial dominance. Rather than continue on its current path or abandon impact litigation entirely, liberal cause lawyers should embrace “resistance through restraint” – tactically starving conservative appellate courts of cases while redirecting their energy toward democratic organizing, state-level advocacy, and defensive litigation.