With the SAVE Act before Congress, the Washington Post explored marriage-related name changes in America, finding that the feminist movement of the 1970s preceded a decline in women who followed traditional norms.”The way I would think about the mid-1980s is that law and culture traveled together,” says Prof. Craig Green. “By that time, a larger number of women- in many states – wanted to keep the ir unmarried names. Feminism, sex equality and ideas about modern progress made married- name defaults from the past seem outdated.”

Dean Rebouché explains the evolution of the abortion abolitionist movement on WGMRadio’s Legal Face -Off.

The $2.78 billion settlement between the NCAA and college athletes seeking compensation has hit another roadblock – which the judge overseeing the case lays squarely at the feet of NCAA member schools. Prof. Ken Jacobsen agrees. “There was an easy fix – grandfather in existing players on current rosters for a year or two. They refused,” he said. Noting that even Judge Wilken suggested grandfathering as a solution at the approval hearing and in Wednesday’s order, Jacobsen called the lawyers defending the roster limits “incredibly arrogant.”

A Montgomery County man claiming self-defense has been acquitted of homicide after 10 months in jail. Prof. Jules Epstein questions the DA’s charging decision in the case. “If self-defense is a gray area in a case, it may be reasonable to bring some criminal charges,” Epstein said. “But calling it first-degree murder? Putting a person at risk of life in jail? Making it harder to get bail? All of those seem to be wrong decisions.”

Interest in dual citizenship is rising among Americans concerned with political instability. But, says Prof. Peter Spiro, dual citizenship wasn’t always so coveted. As recently as the late 20th century, it was considered an act of treason.”Since the end of the Cold War, we’ve witnessed close to an 180-degree shift in attitude,” Spiro said.

A federal judge in DC must decide whether EEOC commissioner Jocelyn Samuels was wrongly fired by President Trump. Prof. Jane Manners argues that in omitting removal criteria when it created the EEOC via Title VIl, Congress intended for the commissioners to have absolute protection.”To me, this is a tragedy, that this understanding has been lost, because you’ve got these agencies where independence is of critical importance, and this argument is not even being made that the statute means absolute independence, absolute unremovability,” she said.

Emboldened Anti-Abortion Faction Wants Women Who Have Abortions To Face Criminal Charges A fringe group calling for women who have abortions to be prosecuted is gaining influence. “With the reversal of Roe v. Wade, now states can pass the most severe abortion bans, which has galvanized the anti-abortion movement as a whole, including this part of it,” said Dean Rachel Rebouche. “Certainly the fall of Roe has brought abortion abolitionists one step closer to what they want – banning abortion nationwide.”

Trump is Trying to Cut the Public Out of Federal Rulemaking President Trump issued three executive orders that, if upheld, will restrict public input into government rules and increase executive power to make them unilaterally despite SCOTUS’s decision to the contrary in Loper Bright. Prof. Craig Green warns that “he is trying to use Loper Bright as a mask or as a chess piece to try to push deregulatory policies” and “any judicial safeguards or backstops might not occur for a year, a year and a half- long after the politics have moved on to something else.”

Inside Philly’s hidden foster care system, where parents ‘voluntarily’ give up their children Philadelphia’s Dept of Human Services often removes children from their families under so-called “voluntary safety plans.” Prof. Sarah Katz warns they are anything but voluntary. “Legally, these voluntary safety plans are a much greater concern, because they can go on indefinitely, the parents are often not made aware of their rights, and the government takes as much control of the child as they would if they had them in their custody. It’s essentially a total denial of parental rights.”

This Supreme Court Case Is About More Than “Defunding” Planned The Supreme Court recently heard arguments about whether Medicaid beneficiaries can sue South Carolina over the state’s decision to exclude Planned Parenthood from coverage for political reasons. Dean Rebouche explains what’s at stake for The Nation.