Editor-in-Chief NYU Moot Court Board – Page 12

Immigration and the Second Amendment: Why Undocumented Immigrants Are Entitled to the Fundamental Right to Possess Firearms

On October 22, 2018

by Kathy Buckalew*

Do undocumented immigrants have Second Amendment rights? Can they be categorically banned from possessing firearms? In this Contribution, Kathy Buckalew (’19) examines the constitutionality of a categorical ban on possession of firearms and ammunition by undocumented immigrants. The Contribution argues that undocumented immigrants living in the United States have the same individual right to keep and bear arms for purposes of self-defense as do United States citizens. Therefore, undocumented immigrants cannot be categorically prohibited from possessing firearms absent an affirmative showing by the government that such a prohibition is substantially related to the achievement of an important government interest.

No Tiny Exceptions: The Copyright Collision Between Safe Harbors and Sound Recordings

By Editor-in-Chief NYU Moot Court Board

On October 8, 2018

In Contributions

by Ari Lipsitz*

How should courts address the contradiction between the preemption rules for pre-1972 recordings in the Copyright Act and the safe harbors in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act? In this Contribution, Ari Lipsitz (’18) analyzes the statutory conflict between these provisions and examines how courts have dealt with issues under these statutes. Ultimately, this Contribution discusses the potential effects of the Second Circuit’s decision in Capitol Records v. Vimeo and proposes legislative reform and judicial interpretations to protect internet policy and copyright law.

“Reliable, Specific, and Objective”: The Scope of Judicial Review of Documentary Evidence in Asylum Decisions

By Editor-in-Chief NYU Moot Court Board

On October 1, 2018

In Contributions

by Deirdre Dlugoleski*

Under what standard should courts of appeals review decisions of the Board of Immigration Appeals regarding supporting documentation in asylum cases? In this Contribution, Deirdre Dlugoleski (’19) explains the role of supporting documentation entered into evidence in asylum cases by the applicant, the government, and the Immigration Judge and the standard for admission. The Contribution argues that the scope of substantial evidence review of supporting documentation should be broad, and that courts play an important role in holding the BIA accountable for basing its decisions on reliable information.

Enter your email Address

Exploring New Approaches to Unsettled Legal Questions

Author: Editor-in-Chief NYU Moot Court Board

Immigration and the Second Amendment: Why Undocumented Immigrants Are Entitled to the Fundamental Right to Possess Firearms

No Tiny Exceptions: The Copyright Collision Between Safe Harbors and Sound Recordings

“Reliable, Specific, and Objective”: The Scope of Judicial Review of Documentary Evidence in Asylum Decisions