In this post, 3L staffer Lexy Gross writes about the U.S. Department of the Interior’s latest project that could result in the ovariectomies of thousands of the west’s wild mares, due to recent amendments made to the Interior Appropriations bill.
Heirs' property ownership is increasingly unstable and fragmented. In this blog, 3L Senior Staffer Ben Bertram argues for the implementation of the Uniform Partition of Heirs' Property Act to protect family-owned farms and ancestral land from forced sales and speculative exploitation. Bertram contends that the procedural adjustments required by the UPHPA are outweighed by the preservation of rural land ownership.
In this blog, 2L staffer Aaron Withers examines Kentucky’s emerging shift from a coal-based economy to advanced nuclear and critical-mineral projects on retired mine sites. He argues that this transition is welcome only if implemented through a community-centered legal framework with strict siting requirements, enforceable local-benefit obligations, and long-term accountability to prevent repeating past harms.
In this blog, 2L staffer Alexander Bowman tackles the issue of whether new equine inspection laws for racehorses should be extended to apply to show horses as well. Bowman discusses the new inspection laws and analyzes the benefits of them. Next, he discusses the potentially injurious effects on show horses without these inspection laws. Bowman recommends that these laws should be applied to show horses in a uniform manner through the creation of a similar independent agency like the KHRGC.
The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) remains outdated in excluding invertebrates such as hermit crabs and shrimp, despite mounting scientific evidence of their sentience. To address this gap, 2L staffer Calvin Scott Bailey believes Congress should amend the AWA or direct the USDA to develop welfare standards for decapod crustaceans, aligning U.S. animal welfare law with contemporary science and global reforms.
In this blog, 2L staffer Emma Carlo explains how the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently attempting to rescind newly implemented drinking water regulations regarding chemicals known as PFAs. Carlo argues that this deregulation action is indicative of corporate favoritism and proves that water utility companies and the EPA believe the $800 million implementation cost is too expensive to protect the public and the environment. Carlo explains that EPA is acting contrary to its intended purpose, as this deregulation will allow continued exposure to these chemicals for more than 70 million people, despite the high likelihood of adverse health effects from low exposure to PFAS.
