This Article discusses how the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois has responded to the virus, with a particular emphasis on jury trials. I close by offering some reflections on how the pandemic might change the ways that courts will operate in the future.
This Comment analyzes how courts have applied Anderson-Burdick to pandemic-related ballot access cases. It focuses on one troubling pattern in COVID-19 ballot access litigation: cases in which courts applying Anderson-Burdick fault plain-tiffs for not being reasonably diligent in collecting signatures prior to or during a shelter-in-place order.
This Comment evaluates the extent to which the CARES Act Modifications sustainably balance individual privacy expectations with strong public interests in obtaining SUD records and integrated care. Moreover, it suggests avenues to fill gaps in protection for individuals with SUD after their information has been disclosed.
The pandemic has brought into sharp focus the mismatch between traditional rules that govern valid will executions, on the one hand, and contemporary restrictions, practices, and preferences, on the other. This essay enters the scholarly debate about the necessity of remote witnessing in a variety of situations, including a public health crisis.
As we know all too well, the COVID-19 pandemic caught the world off-guard. The virus continues to accumulate a staggering list of victims, but the direct threat to public health also carried with it shock waves that rocked the global economy.
In the spring of 2020, as the COVID-19 pandemic shut down economies around the world, pressure arose for governments to respond to the growing threat of pandemic-related market distress. In addition to responding to the direct public health emergency, governments were expected to stabilize markets—both financial and economic—and provide relief to those harmed by the pandemic’s market effects.
That interstate travel within the United States is largely so uncontroversial reflects a simple fact: the right to travel “occupies a position fundamental to the concept of our Federal Union.” Yet in the aftermath of the COVID-19 outbreak, multiple states have restricted interstate travel.
The economic dislocation associated with the COVID-19 pandemic might have been reduced if pandemic insurance were widespread. Yet, outside of the All England Club, host of the Wimbledon Tennis Tournament, virtually no one held pandemic insurance.
No COVID-19 stimulus provision captured public attention quite like the multiple rounds of no-strings-attached cash payments. The first round of checks, authorized by Congress in March 2020, was such a political winner that President Trump insisted on including a personal letter in the mailing; the second, passed in December 2020, may have swung control of the Senate; and the third was the centerpiece of President Biden’s legislative agenda in early 2021.
