The Amber Guyger case treads familiar ground regarding the legitimacy of "Stand Your Ground" laws invoking proportionality, necessity, and self-defense. How do events like this challenge traditional justifications?
A criminal record is an enormous obstacle to obtaining employment or housing. The strategy we choose for addressing this problem says a lot about our attitude toward the prospects of rehabilitation.
Are fines an appropriate punishment when the wealthy attempt to purchase social, political, and economic advantage at others' expense?
Our forensic methods aren't as objective as we assume, and the role prejudice is allowed to play undermines the legitimacy of our criminal justice system.
What is the moral and legal value of contractual promises of non-disclosure? Is it ever ethical to break our word?
The Supreme Court has refused to protect physician-assisted suicide at the federal level, but the number of states with aid-in-dying legislation is growing. What are the legal principles and moral values at play?
Should it be revealed that our actions are not as autonomous as we assume them to be, how might this impact our conception of punishment and desert?
The divergence between the concepts of justice and fairness can easily be seen in prosecutors' different explanations of their relationship to the law.
Nationalist rhetoric and policies are gaining traction, emboldening others to follow suit, and undermining our collective commitment to human rights.
How should we balance concerns for legal flexibility and political representation against the enshrinement of minority rights?