Qualified Immunity: When Clearly Established Law is “as Clear as Mud”

Kaleb Byars is a Juris Doctor Candidate at the University of Tennessee (Class of 2021) and Editor-in-Chief of the Tennessee Law Review. 

Introduction

The phrase “as clear as mud” is an age-old idiom used to describe an inexplicable phenomenon, such as a legal principle that defies logic and reason. This article identifies one such legal principle that exists in the realm of qualified immunity. More specifically, “it is about as clear as mud” why the federal courts consider persuasive authority when determining whether law is “clearly established” under the doctrine of qualified immunity.

Continue reading “Qualified Immunity: When Clearly Established Law is “as Clear as Mud””

The Immigration Judiciary’s Need for Independence: Breaking Free from the Shackles of the Attorney General and the Powers of the Executive Branch

Daniel Buteyn is an online editor for Volume 47 of the Mitchell Hamline Law Review and a student at Mitchell Hamline. Daniel’s article is a portion of his full-length paper available in Issue 4 of Volume 46.


Introduction

President Donald Trump’s strict immigration policies beg the need to evaluate the country’s immigration judiciary proceedings. How exactly do immigration courts function compared to civil or criminal court procedures? In short, the immigration courts are controlled by the Executive Branch of the United States government.

Continue reading “The Immigration Judiciary’s Need for Independence: Breaking Free from the Shackles of the Attorney General and the Powers of the Executive Branch”

Meet Ellie Orrick, Volume 47’s Editor-in-Chief

Background

Q: What did you do before coming to law school?

Before coming to law school, I attended the University of Minnesota–Twin Cities. In 2015, I received my Bachelor of Science in Environmental Science, Policy and Management and was fortunate to find a job after graduation as an Environmental Technician

Continue reading “Meet Ellie Orrick, Volume 47’s Editor-in-Chief”

Outgoing Editor-in-Chief Amber Fitzgerald Reflects on Volume 46

As Volume 46 of the Mitchell Hamline Law Review concludes, the online editors of the law review asked Amber Fitzgerald to talk about her background, thoughts on Volume 46’s accomplishments, and the future of the law review.

Continue reading “Outgoing Editor-in-Chief Amber Fitzgerald Reflects on Volume 46”