UPDATE: The proposed tax on billionaires’ “unrealized” asset gains was not ultimately included in a $1.5 billion Chicago area transit bailout measure approved by Illinois state lawmakers and advanced to

Although much remains unsettled, three questions in particular stand out as both urgent and deeply confusing: Legally, nuclear regulation and licensing must now be "efficient." What does "efficient" mean, and what happens if the NRC fails to be efficient? The NRC has developed both deterministic and probabilistic safety-centric methods, including probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) under risk-informed, performance-based (RIPB) regulation.

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for ONE PEOPLE to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another..." "Whenever a

In early November, Professor Michael LeRoy was part of a group that filed an amicus brief with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on behalf of women athletes in the case of NCAA v. House. LeRoy and his co-authors argue that a recent settlement in federal…

ABLJ Roundtable “Debt’s Grip, Risk and Consumer Bankruptcy (2025)” October 15, 2025, 1:00 p.m. ET. Moderators: Judge Christopher Bradley and…

Judges who decline to perform weddings based on their religious beliefs won't be violating state rules on judicial impartiality, the Texas Supreme Court said in a comment added to the state judicial conduct code Friday.

UC Davis Law professor Vikram David Amar and Illinois Law professor Jason Mazzone discuss the Supreme Court case Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections, which addresses whether a candidate has Article III standing to challenge state laws on ballot counting. Professors Amar and Mazzone argue that a candidate likely has standing to challenge election regulations because they have an inherent interest in the clarity of election rules, even if they cannot prove the regulation would change the election's outcome, and they emphasize that resolving these issues is crucial for electoral legitimacy.

Illinois Law professor Lesley M. Wexler addresses Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s proposed rollback of military regulations on hazing, bullying, and toxic leadership, arguing that these changes are part of a broader agenda to recenter military culture around a rigid and potentially abusive interpretation of the “warrior ethos.” Professor Wexler warns that weakening existing protections risks encouraging cruelty, diminishing accountability, and harming both service members and civilians, and urges that any review be evidence-based, carefully defined, and mindful of the moral and operational consequences of reintroducing hazing practices.

UC Davis Law professor Vikram David Amar and Illinois Law professor Jason Mazzone examine whether the Supreme Court case Little v. Hecox, which challenges Idaho’s law restricting women’s sports teams to biological females, has become moot after plaintiff Lindsay Hecox withdrew from sports participation and sought to dismiss her case with prejudice. Professors Amar and Mazzone argue that despite defendants’ claims of litigation gamesmanship, the Court should find the case moot and vacate the lower court’s decision under the Munsingwear doctrine, because Article III’s case-or-controversy requirement cannot be overridden by concerns about strategic behavior when vacatur adequately addresses the risk of an unreviewable precedent remaining in effect.

From tariffs to transgender athletes, the nation's highest court has a docket full of hot-button issues, writes University of Illinois law Professor Jason Mazzone.

This is "NCBJ: The James H.M. Sprayregen Professor of Law Challenges James H.M. Sprayregen on the Latest Hot Topics" by NCBJ Team on Vimeo, the home for…

When President Donald Trump resurrected the Department of War, the former and once again name for the Department of Defense, it was more than a simple name change. It was an intentional rebranding of the department, meant to convey a message to the public and those who serve in the armed forces.