SMU Law Review Forum

  • JALC

    The SMU Law Review Forum is the online counterpart to SMU Law Review, the flagship journal at SMU Dedman School of Law. The Forum specializes in short-form, timely articles that are reviewed and published on an ongoing basis and with an accelerated schedule. 

    The SMU Law Review Forum started seventy-two years after SMU Law Review’s first publication in 1947 and serves as a new format for authors to engage in timely debate on important legal issues. As SMU Law Review’s online counterpart, the Forum provides another platform for professors, practitioners, judges, legal scholars, and students to explore the implications of recent legal decisions, events, and trends. The Forum strives to publish contemporary scholarship and elevate the work of diverse individuals whose identities, viewpoints, and ideas have often been underrepresented in the legal field. 

    All editing is done by student members of the board of editors and the staff of the SMU Law Review Association. The Association also publishes the SMU Law Review, the Journal of Air Law and Commerce, and the SMU Annual Texas Survey.

Recent Articles and Comments in Volume 77 (2024)

The President’s Criminal Immunity

By Amandeep S. Grewal – This Article addresses a monumental question that the Supreme Court will soon decide: does the President enjoy criminal immunity for her official acts? This Article argues that she does. The potential criminal immunity for official acts has drawn exceptionally sharp critiques. Some scholars believe that the immunity is nonsensical, absurd, or downright offensive. Judge Florence Pan of the D.C. Circuit even posited that criminal immunity would allow the President to murder her political enemies with SEAL Team Six. This Article shows that the critics are profoundly mistaken. Criminal immunity for a president’s official acts finds a strong foothold in Supreme Court jurisprudence. As important, criminal immunity for official acts applies more narrowly than the critics believe. Immunity would allow a president to fearlessly exercise her constitutional prerogatives but would not allow her to bribe, steal, or murder.[...]


Remote Court Hearings (Past, Present, and Future): Arizona’s Next Steps for a New World to Enhance Access to Justice

By Samuel A. Thumma & Marcus W. Reinkensmeyer – In this article, the Arizona Supreme Court COVID-19 Continuity of Court Operations During a Public Health Emergency Workgroup (“Plan B Workgroup”) provides an update from its prior efforts, building on the Post-pandemic Recommendations: COVID-19 Continuity of Court Operations During a Public Health Emergency Workgroup, 75 SMU LAW REVIEW FORUM 1 (2022). This article focuses on the Plan B Workgroup’s February 2022 Recommended Remote and In-Person Hearings in the Arizona State Courts in the Post-Pandemic World and developments after those Recommendations.  [...]


Donald Trump and the Collapse of Checks and Balances

By David M. Driesen – This Essay analyzes Donald Trump’s erosion of checks and balances during his presidency and how President Trump will likely seek to complete their collapse if he regains power. Its First Part shows that congressional willingness to check presidential abuses of power declined during Trump’s presidency and will likely get much weaker in a second term. It also shows that President Trump figured out how to evade checks and balances from Congress in his first term and examines his plans to further usurp congressional powers. [...]


Equality, Morality, & Religious Liberty

By Mitchell F. Crusto – On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court ruled that the use of a specific race-conscious “tool” in the admission decisions of public and private colleges to achieve diversity is unconstitutional. However, in his nuanced opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts seemed to renew the Court’s commitment to the anti-discrimination vision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its progeny. Furthermore, the Court’s decision provided the possibility of an exception for its stated restriction, that is, for military service academies. Nonetheless, the Court’s ban on a race-conscious tool is expected to have a substantial, negative effect on the application and enrollment of students who are African-Americans, their pathways to graduate and professional schools, and their employment opportunities, resulting in what I coin as a “Black brain drain.” [...]

Read more from current issue

Contact

Journal Coordinator
Lisa Ponce
ponce@smu.edu

President
Mikey Sanders
mikey@smu.edu

Forum Executive Editor
Bradley Kucera
bkucera@smu.edu
smulraforum@smu.edu

Forum Assistant Executive Editor
Madelyn Gerrald
mgerrald@smu.edu

Submissions

Submission Instructions

Related links 

Journal of Air Law and Commerce

SMU Annual Texas Survey

SMU Law Review

Current Masthead

Write-on Information