Online Journal — Columbia Undergraduate Law Review

Information Privacy and Data Security Laws: An Ineffective Regulatory Framework

As a result, although current federal regulations on data security strive to protect consumer privacy, they do not actually tackle the fundamental problem of unjustified, mass data collection itself; instead they debate the issue of nondisclosure, which companies can easily bypass without changing their harmful data collection practices. The responsibility to regulate the collection and use of personal information thus falls on individual states and various independent agencies, which, when not established under a standardized rule, form a patchwork system of incongruent laws that often overlap and contradict one another, thereby leading to a highly inefficient regulatory framework for consumer privacy protection.

Cheryl WangOctober 31, 2017Comment

Funding Churches after Hurricane Harvey: A First Amendment Analysis

The allocating of public funds towards an institution of a single denomination results in a complex relationship between the government and private places of worship. Yet when disaster strikes, and these places of worship save all members of the community, it is difficult to provide justification for withholding public funds.

Zain AtharOctober 31, 2017Comment

Uncertain Precedents: An Analysis of Stem Cell Regulation

Because of the ethically-charged trade off between the life-saving potential of human embryonic stem cells and the destruction of the embryo they entail, courts have had to rule on and regulate the research, funding, patenting, and the acquisition of embryonic stem cells – but in a landscape of constant technological advancements, many of the above spheres of legislation still have unanswered questions.

Sophia AhmedOctober 31, 2017Comment

Taking a Knee for First Amendment Rights: Free Speech Precedent for NFL Players

On one hand, some argue that these protests demonstrate a lack of respect for the nation; whereas the other side argues that these demonstrations are, in fact, centered around the nation’s greatest values. However, in analyzing the legal history of symbolic speech in the U.S., it is evident that Trump’s requests to fire NFL players are unlawful and not justified by past legal precedent or federal statutes.

Tanya ReynaOctober 31, 2017Comment

Feature: The Evolution of First Amendment Jurisprudence in a Post-Fact World

For free speech enthusiasts, 2017 may be the new 1984: though lacking in two-way TVs or an official slogan advocating “ignorance is strength,” the federal government has preyed upon an information-rich, attention-scarce nation to degrade the value of true information. By flooding information channels with violent opinions and normalizing the use of “alternative facts,” the current administration, magnified by the tactics of social media companies and tech firms, illuminates novel twenty-first century speech obstacles that the First Amendment may not be ready to tackle.

Sreya PinnamaneniOctober 31, 2017Comment

Matal v. Tam: Evolving Standards of Government Speech in the Music Industry

The historical and contemporary meaning of the name listed in the band’s application is a clear violation of the relevant statute, as the word “slants” wrongly disparages and discriminates against Asian populations. The Constitution, however, considers issues of hate and disparagement to be largely secondary to expansive freedoms of speech and expression. The issue of the case exceeds statutory application; the disparagement clause’s tension with First Amendment’s speech protections frames the legal issue.

Max NeumanOctober 31, 2017Comment

Protecting Your DNA: The Unraveling of Privacy in Genetic Testing

When one saliva sample can reveal anything from a customer’s hair color to their risk of Alzheimer’s, it is understandable that each individual would want to protect this information. GINA’s broad jurisdiction in the workplace and in health insurance as well as constitutional rights to privacy provide such security; but holes in GINA’s jurisdiction and a lack of court precedent also remind us that genetic privacy is not guaranteed.

Sophia AhmedAugust 24, 2017privacy, GINA, DNA, 9th circuit, supreme courtComment

U.S. Mass Surveillance: Striking the Balance Between Security and Liberty

Over a year before the Snowden leak, Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s concurrence in United States v. Jones raised light on issues of government surveillance that came with the public disclosure of the NSA programs. Sotomayor warned that the digital age should reconsider whether “an individual has no reasonable expectation of privacy in information voluntarily disclosed to third parties.”

Tanya ReynaAugust 24, 2017mass surveillance, privacy, 2nd circuit, ACLUComment

On Amazon's Entry into the Grocery Business - A Legal Analysis

The logic behind this decisive stance by the Court can be applied to Amazon and its intended purchase of Whole Foods. There is no doubt that in a few years time, Amazon will strategize and use its position in the physical grocery business to severely undercut rivals – especially those in the upscale food business. But even if Amazon decides to sell groceries below-cost, that would not constitute clear proof that it is creating an uncompetitive market for groceries. In an industry whose margins are already razor-thin, Amazon could claim that prices would only improve for consumers.

Zain AtharAugust 15, 2017amazon, antitrust, supreme courtComment