By Ritha Igout
Ritha Igout is a freshman studying International Relations and History in the College of Arts and Sciences interested in going to law school.  
​
The relationship between the U.S. judiciary and executive has been marked by centuries of precarious protests over power. As the first nation to address Montesquieu’s concerns and successfully establish a large republic, the U.S. is often seen as a model of federalism. Much of this success stems from the separation of powers, a balance carefully curated by the quasi-sanctified Constitution. Although effective, the Constitution leaves many areas open to interpretation. These gray areas have fanned the flames of political debate for centuries, with one of the most persistent battles being the tug-of-war between the judiciary and the executive. With recent executive orders and Supreme Court decisions raising this issue to the surface once more, the question of power–and how much each branch should have–becomes more salient than ever. ​

​By Hannah Steinberg

In our materialistic yet increasingly individualized society, fashion is a large form of expression and aspect of life. Even more so, fashion is a symbol of status. Luxury brands have their origins in European craftsmanship, with houses like Hermès (1837) and Louis Vuitton (1854) beginning as specialized artisans before evolving into global icons of wealth and exclusivity. Over the 20th and 21st centuries, luxury expanded beyond fashion into automobiles, jewelry, and experiences, driven by heritage, celebrity influence, and strategic marketing. The increasing role of the media has further persuaded many into aspiring to own designer items, whether it be for the monetary or fashionable personal statement it provides. Luxury items are known for being exclusive and one of a kind. 

By Hannah Steinberg
​
In our visually expressive world, logos, symbols, and designs are often the governing force in an identification of a person, brand, or place. These trademarks often function as the key to success for companies and individuals as it allows for an increase in profitability and fame. The laws of intellectual property govern the protection and regulation of such trademarks, primarily using the Lanham Act, established by Congress in 1946.

By Khlood Awan

Native American communities have long been marginalized by U.S. legislation. The Indian Removal Act of 1830, signed into law by Andrew Jackson, forcibly displaced thousands of Native Americans from their homes and sacred lands, leading to immense suffering and loss of life. [1] This removal led to the erasure of Native American cultural identity among many tribes, as much of their identity is connected to the land Indigenous communities reside on through deeply rooted spiritual and ancestral ties. The Dawes Act of 1887 compounded this suffering by allowing the Federal Government to divide tribal lands and sell portions of it to non-Native Americans. Although the Act was eventually repealed, the fragmentation of Native lands remains an enduring issue. The devastating impacts of the Indian Removal Act and the Dawes Act continue to have negative effects on the Indigenous communities. Since the 18th century, Native American tribes have waged ongoing legal battles to reclaim unrestricted access to their ancestral territories. While some tribes have secured access to reservations, they continue to face significant challenges and systemic inequities.

Written by Henessis Umacata

The opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions of the designated authors and do not reflect the opinions or views of the Penn Undergraduate Law Journal, our staff, or our clients.

How can one’s name be used to violate individual constitutional rights?

Since 2003, the United States has implemented a “No Fly” list policy which indefinitely bans U.S citizens and residents from flying to and from particular destinations. While it was originally created to prevent potentially threatening individuals from boarding commercial flights, the guidelines have received scrutiny for allowing discriminatory offenses.

Written by Nicole Patel

The American Dream—once a catalyst of hope, illuminating the path for possibility— has now become increasingly elusive for individuals, especially those ensnared by an inequitable justice system. And while the essence of the dream has not changed, its definition has. Individuals still believe in the core idea of achieving success and prosperity, but the way individuals experience it is different because of inequalities that have formed wedges. The shifting nature of the U.S—particularly the emphasis on a punishment system— has pushed the nation to obtain the highest incarceration rate of any independent democracy [1]. In a world where empathy has been replaced by a motivation to punish rather than reform, the very foundation of the American Dream seems to crumble under the weight of systemic inequality.

Written by Ella Jewell

Laws all have the same end: Enforce justice and support a well-run society. However, in the field of international and comparative law, we find that sets of laws come in hierarchy: the United States takes precedence, western European countries’ are a close second, and laws in developed Asian nations are sub-par. This article stands to detail the history of this view- which is called legal orientalism- and critique it, as well as explain why it is harmful and what the western world can learn from Asian legal systems.