The Creighton Law Review is a legal journal published by the students of the Creighton University School of Law.
Founded in 1967, the Creighton Law Review published its first edition in the spring of 1968. As then Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote in that first issue, the purpose of a Law Review is to provide a "forum in which able minds subject existing legal principles to critical analysis within the context of changing conditions and in which imaginative alternatives to today's solutions are aired and tested through vigorous informal debate."
Most significantly, the journal serves both practical and academic functions. The journal publishes pieces that provide practitioners with informative, well-drafted research. It also creates a forum for scholarly debate and presents an opportunity for students to participate in that debate. As such, this forum is highly structured and demands disciplined, self-critical writing in order to perform these two functions.
The mission of the Creighton Law Review is to inform, educate, and serve the legal community, emphasizing the legal issues impacting Nebraska and the Eighth Circuit, and to provide a forum dedicated to the development of academic, research, analytical, and scholarly writing skills among law students.
The Creighton Law Review is published in four annual editions. Each edition is dedicated to specific themes.
(Creighton University School of Law, 2023-06) Barbour, Alex M.
It has been established throughout the last century of American jurisprudence that lower federal courts (i.e., federal courts other than the United States Supreme Court) do not have the authority to review final state court decisions. This notion is the fundamental principle behind the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. The Rooker-Feldman doctrine follows closely in the footsteps of 28 U.S.C. § 1331, which provides that lower federal courts only possess original jurisdiction. Thus, Rooker-Feldman echoes the doctrine of res judicata by preventing dissatisfied litigants from bringing resolved state court issues a second time in federal court. Additionally, the jurisdiction granted to lower federal courts will not change unless § 1331 is amended by an act of Congress. As a result, if a party wishes to appeal an order from a state court of last resort, they must do so in the United States Supreme Court. Since its inception, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine has seldom been raised before the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, the doctrine has been at the center of a recent split among the federal appellate courts, which arose out of the Sixth Circuit’s decision in RLR Investments, LLC v. City of Pigeon Forge, Tennessee. In this case, the Sixth Circuit applied Rooker-Feldman to prevent relitigation of an interlocutory state court order.9 The Sixth Circuit is currently the only federal court of appeals to endorse this view.
(Creighton University School of Law, 2023-06) Schmidt, Taylor A.
For forty-nine years abortion was considered a protected right in the United States. This right was previously deemed a privacy interest found within the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Since the beginning, this right has been controversial across political party lines. Many states began passing statutes outlawing abortion despite their unenforceability due to the Constitutional protections provided by Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. In 2021, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was granted certiorari by the United States Supreme Court which signaled the possibility for change regarding the right to abortion.8 The Supreme Court ultimately overruled its prior case law, returning the right to determine abortion protections to the states. In the wake of these decisions, some states implemented laws against abortion, including pre-existing “trigger laws” and subsequent laws. The vast majority of state laws limiting abortion overlooked an important area: in vitro fertilization (“IVF”). This lack of protection for IVF therapy has led to incompatible judicial rulings regarding the status of an embryo.
(Creighton University School of Law, 2023-06) Vargas, Lauren Micek; McClelland, Elizabeth; Eynon-Kokrda, Elizabeth
In July of 2022, Title IX turned 50 years old. The Education Amendments Act (to the Civil Rights Act) of 1972 was an omnibus spending bill that addressed a multitude of issues. It included direct federal student aid, desegregation and busing, funding for indigenous children, and prohibition of sex discrimination in Title IX of the Act. Title IX’s purpose is to ensure that public funds (collected in the form of taxation from all citizens) are not utilized in ways that encourage, subsidize, permit, or result in prohibited discrimination against some people. In short, Title IX states no person shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. While commonly thought of as an “equity in sports” law due to its impact on equalizing athletic opportunities for women, Title IX carries particular weight in its regulatory requirement that public schools respond promptly to complaints of sex discrimination and thereafter prevent it. Since 1997, Title IX guidance has noted that treating people differently on the basis of sex includes sexual harassment, and thus protects students from sexual harassment in educational programs or activities. It is this area of Title IX, and its interrelationship with special education laws in our elementary and secondary schools, that is the focus of this article.
(Creighton University School of Law, 2023-06) Miller, Benita
Pregnant and parenting teens have a right to stay in school to complete their education. Embedded in the federal Title IX Education Amendments is the guarantee that discrimination based on pregnant and parenting status is prohibited if a school is receiving public funds. Title IX regulations expressly state that schools “shall not discriminate against any student, or exclude any student from its education program or activity, including any class or extracurricular activity, on the basis of such student’s pregnancy, childbirth, false pregnancy, termination of pregnancy, or recovery therefrom. . . .
(Creighton University School of Law, 2023-06) McGuire, Patricia
Sometime in the winter of 1972, the basketball team from Trinity College in Washington, D.C. made the short journey to the University of Maryland in College Park, about six miles away. Trinity, one of the oldest Catholic women’s colleges in America, did not have a regular gymnasium; instead, the basketball team practiced underneath the campus chapel in a cramped space with low ceilings and a concrete floor interspersed with pillars; to be out of bounds, a player had to put one foot against the wall. “Aim for the third tile,” was the coach’s direction to players practicing foul shots.