Skip to content

HARD LUXURY: MATERIAL ADVERSE EFFECT IN THE LVMH AND TIFFANY MERGER

By: Rachel Wynn, Business Law Clinic Student Director & Emily Buchholz, Executive Director of the Corporate Institute Since the COVID-19 pandemic, material adverse effect claims have increased in Delaware courts. A material adverse effect (“MAE”) is a change in circumstances that is reasonably expected to significantly diminish the value of a company. MAE clauses are…

Continue Reading

MEANINGFUL BUT NOT PERFECT REVIEW: IMPLIED PRECLUSION OF FEDERAL JURISDICTION AND AXON ENTERPRISE, INC. V. FTC

By: Jason Gutierrez, Vol. 106 Staff Member I. BACKGROUND, DOCTRINE, AND AXON’S ARGUMENT May a party arguing that the structure of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) violates the constitution bypass the FTC’s administrative review process and bring suit in federal court? Last summer, Axon Enterprise, Inc. presented this question to the United States Supreme Court…

Continue Reading

COPPER-NICKEL MINING AND THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES’ DUAL MANDATE: HOW TO ENSURE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES IN THE INDUSTRY CAN BE ALLEVIATED

By: Ben Gleekel, Vol. 106 Staff Member Northeast Minnesota may soon host an industrialized corridor of copper-nickel mining operations. The region is the home of the Duluth Complex—a geological formation containing an estimated 4.4 billion tons of copper, nickel, and other precious metals,[1] making it one of the largest untapped copper deposits in the world.[2]…

Continue Reading

A $9 BILLION SURPLUS, YET “KIDS CAN’T READ”: MINNESOTA TEACHER STRIKES MAY VIOLATE STUDENTS’ RIGHTS UNDER THE STATE CONSTITUTION AND THE LEGISLATURE HAS A DUTY TO FIX IT

By: Joshua Gutzmann, Volume 106 Staff Member  After almost a full week of no school for over 31,000 students,[1] because teachers are on strike in Minneapolis,[2] the Minneapolis Federation of Teachers President declared that they were “ready to go for as long as it takes.”[3] The strikes—authorized by a vote of over 97% in favor[4]—are…

Continue Reading

REMEDYING DECADES OF DISPARITIES IN DRUG SENTENCING: HOW CONCEPCION v. UNITED STATES OPENS THE DOOR FOR BROADER RELIEF IN FIRST STEP ACT RESENTENCING PROCEEDINGS

By: Rhianna Torgerud, Volume 106 Staff Member From 1986 to 2010, one gram of crack cocaine was treated as equivalent to 100 grams of powder cocaine when setting federal statutory minimum and maximum sentences.[1] This 100-to-1 sentencing disparity was widely criticized as discriminatory against African Americans, and other minorities, who are more likely to be…

Continue Reading

WAR POWERS UNDER ATTACK

By: Jesse Noltimier, Volume 106 Staff Member On March 29, 2022, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Torres v. Texas Department of Public Safety.[1] The Court will decide whether a veteran can sue the state of Texas, his former employer, for discrimination. Beyond this employment discrimination claim, Torres raises important questions concerning Congress’…

Continue Reading

THE SUPREME COURT DILUTES MINORITY VOTER RIGHTS: THE FATE OF THE VOTER RIGHTS ACT FOLLOWING MERRILL V. MILLIGAN

By: Justin Oakland, Volume 106 Staff Member Following the 2020 census, a Republican-majority Alabama state legislature voted to redraw congressional districts to functionally dilute the voting power of Black residents.[1] Despite Black voters making up 26.8 percent of Alabama’s population, the redrawn districts only grant Black voters one district of significant representation with the remaining…

Continue Reading