An Examination of the Plain View Doctrine
The rule of law and due process are considered fundamental pillars of American society, being applied to all forms, including civil, appellate, and procedural law. Traditionally, when one envisions these topics in relation to another, they observe them through the lens of criminal justice or the action of seeking justice and rectifying a violation of the law. Numerous amendments in the Bill of Rights deal directly with the criminal justice process and protecting the rights of citizens who may be potentially tried for a crime. One such prescription of rights is found in the Fourth Amendment, which protects “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” A warrant is the mechanism through which searches are determined to be legal and rightful. The Fourth Amendment describes warrants stating, “no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” If a warrant is required to collect evidence, then what is an officer expected to do when evidence is in their clear sightline, or right in front of them? One of the exceptions to this warrant rule is what is called the “plain view doctrine”. Throughout this text, this doctrine, its definition, implementation, and connection to modern debate will be explored. This doctrine is crucial to ensuring an effective and efficient criminal justice system
The War of State Power and Parents’ Rights in Homeschooling
With few or no homeschooling regulations in many states, experts have identified multiple potential harms to the children who participate in this alternative educational form. The potential injury to both the education and physical well-being of homeschooled students that the current regulations allow is unacceptable. The issue is in attempting to determine where to draw the line between the power of the state and parents’ rights. This is a topic under much debate and will likely continue to be for some time. Regardless, this absence of regulations is harmful to the education of millions of people, and its perpetuation is unjust.
Building Worlds, Making Pennies: How Federal Labor Laws Fail to Protect Roblox Developers
As of June 2025, Roblox Corporation’s size exceeded the likes of well-known game companies such as Take-Two Interactive and Square Enix, creators of Grand Theft Auto and Final Fantasy, respectively. Roblox's size can be attributed to the recent surge in popularity since the pandemic, with users of all demographics spending hours in the game. The popular gaming hub advertised itself as made for kids, by kids, and that remains partly true today. While adults make up the majority of profitable Roblox developers, many children still create games and cosmetics. The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA), otherwise known as the federal labor law, prohibits employees under sixteen from working in hazardous conditions. Should this law prohibit Roblox’s enterprise?
Debate Breakdown: Perspectives on Term Limits for the U.S. Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of the United States represents the judicial branch of government. For decades legislators and members of Congress have attempted to institute term limits for justices of the Court. This article will provide an overview of current standing and debate on the issue and explore the reasons for change as well as what negative impacts such a shift in policy could create for the nation's highest judicial body.
The Silent Concert: The Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum Heist, 35 Years Later
The walls within the estate of Théophile Thoré existed as the second-to-last publicly known location of a particular set of two paintings inside a painting created by Johannes Vermeer. Eccentric heiress named Isabella Stewart Gardner acquired this unique work at a 19th-century auction, she then took the piece to her eponymous museum in Boston, Massachusetts, where it remained unmanipulated until a fateful heist on March 18th, 1990.
Once Upon a Copyright: How a Mouse Became a Monopoly
Once upon a time, a mouse was born. Not in a forest or a fairytale, but aboard a steamboat - whistling his way into history. In 1928, Mickey Mouse was just a cartoon: two dots for eyes, a high-pitched laugh, and oddly lovable charm. He wasn’t yet a corporate mascot, legal case study, or a billion-dollar brand. But he would become all three.
Behind the Wheel and Behind Bars: Understanding Nevada’s DUI Laws
In Nevada, one drink can change your life. A casual night out can quickly spiral into a legal nightmare if you’re caught driving under the influence, but what’s more disturbing is how often impaired drivers avoid consequences entirely because the law, as it stands, isn’t strong enough.
Those Above the Law: Rethinking Qualified Immunity
In 2004, Officer Brosseau shot Kenneth Haugen in the back while he was fleeing from the scene of the crime. The defense argued qualified immunity, claiming Officer Brosseau was entitled to it. Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that protects government officials from being personally sued for monetary damages in civil court, even if it violates a person’s constitutional rights.
The Legality of AI Training on Copyrighted Written Works
“Imagine a future where the very books, articles, and works of art we cherish could be leveraged by algorithms to create new forms of expression — without the permission of the authors. The rising use of AI to train on copyrighted literature has sparked intense debate about ownership, creativity, and the boundaries of intellectual property.” This was a hook written entirely by Artificial Intelligence (AI), and it might have been difficult to discern. In the world we live in, it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish human-made writing and art from AI.