lawreview.law.eduThe Catholic University Law Review at Catholic Law in Washington, DC | CUA

the site: Search Catholic.edu Home Site Map Search Information For... Students Faculty and Staff Admitted Students Information Employers Students Faculty and Staff Admitted Students Information Employers Explore Programs Center for Law and the Human Person Center for Religious Liberty (CRL) Comparative and International Law Institute (CILI) Compliance, Investigations, and Corporate Responsibility Program (CICR) Law and Public Policy Program (LPP) Law and Technology Institute (LTI) Project on Constitutional Originalism and the Catholic Intellectual Tradition (CIT) Securities Law Program (SLP) Columbus School of Law Menu Request Information Visit Campus Apply Scholarly Writing Consumer Information (ABA Required Disclosures) Expert Faculty News and EventsAbout Catholic Law Academics Admissions Students Alumni Support Catholic Law Request Information » Visit Campus » Apply Online » Scholarly Writing Consumer Information (ABA Required Disclosures) Expert Faculty News and Events Catholic.edu Home Site Map Schools Students Faculty and Staff Admitted Students Information Employers Search About Catholic Law About Catholic Law Overview Consumer Information (ABA Required Disclosures) Accolades Catholic Law Advantage Mission Statement Law School Building and Campus Faculty and Staff Law Library Scholarly Writing at Catholic Law Board of Visitors Notable Alumni Directions and Contact Information Academics Academics Overview Academic Rules Academic Calendars and Schedules Bar Exam Catalog Announcements Degree Programs at Catholic Law Certificates Program | Catholic Law Career Pathways and Course Planning Centers Clinics and Legal Externships First Amendment Initiatives Office of Academic Affairs Registrar Summer Abroad Programs Upcoming Conferences and Moot Court Competitions Admissions Admissions Overview Apply to Catholic Law Admitted Students Information Financial Aid at Catholic Law Scholarships Admissions Juris Doctor (J.D.) Master of Laws (LL.M.) Master of Legal Studies (M.L.S.) Transfer Students Visiting Students Schedule a Tour Students Students Overview Journals and Moot Court Pro Bono Lecture Series Mentor Programs Financial Aid Law Library Office of Career and Professional Development Office of Student Life and Special Events Offices and Student Services Student Organizations Resources for Current Students Alumni Alumni Overview Alumni Events Alumni News Alumni Resources Alumni Leadership Support Catholic Law Support Catholic Law Overview Donate Now Student Financial Relief Fund Students Scholarship Funds Other Funds and Programs Other Ways to Give Volunteer The Catholic University Law Review Journals and Moot Court The Catholic University Law Review Additional NavigationMembership Submissions Symposiums Archive Volume 73, Issue 2 Spring 2024 ARTICLE Personal Data and Vaccination Hesitancy: COVID-19’s Lessons for Public Health Federalism Charles D. Curran During the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, the federal government adopted a more centralized approach to the collection of public health data. Although the states previously had controlled the storage of vaccination information, the federal government’s Operation Warp Speed plan required the reporting of recipients’ personal information on the grounds that it was needed to monitor the safety of novel vaccines and ensure correct administration of their multi- dose regimens. Over the course of the pandemic response, this more centralized federal approach to data collection added a new dimension to pre-existing vaccination hesitancy. Requirements that recipients furnish individual information deterred vaccination among undocumented immigrants already fearful about the Trump Administration’s data-driven immigration enforcement policies—even as undocumented essential workers faced enhanced risks of COVID-19 exposure. Disputes with some states over the federal government’s proposed terms of governance for individual vaccination information compounded delays in the reporting of necessary public health information. Moreover, as the pandemic response evolved, the Biden Administration was obliged to counter apprehension among the broader public that federally-stored information might be used to enforce vaccination mandates or adoption of digital vaccination passports." Notwithstanding calls for greater federal authority to directly gather data in future epidemics, I argue that the goal of achieving broad public vaccination uptake will be better served by preserving and improving a federalist approach that generally leaves the states to control the collection and storage of individually identifiable vaccination information. I contend that the lessons of COVID-19 suggest that more robust governance and technological controls for federal access to state public health data—coupled with improved transparency about the limits of federal data use—can both ameliorate public hesitancy and improve inter-governmental exchange.” ARTICLE The Anitdote of Free Speech: Censorship During the Pandemic Christopher Keleher Free speech in America stands at a precipice. The nation must decide if the First Amendment protects controversial, unconventional, and unpopular speech, or only that which is mainstream, fashionable, and government- approved. This debate is one of many legal battles brought to the fore during Covid-19. But the fallout of the free speech question will transcend Covid-19. During the pandemic, the federal government took unprecedented steps to pressure private entities to push messages it approved and squelch those it did not. The Supreme Court will soon grapple with the issue of censorship during the pandemic. This article examines this litigation, along with the speech restrictions enacted by social media platforms at the behest of federal officials. It does so through a historical lens as it applies to free speech and prior restraint. Tracing this lineage is vital to understanding the importance of the right to think freely in the Covid era and how to apply historical concepts of free speech to contemporary challenges. I conclude the solution to the problem of misinformation is more speech, not suppression. Unconventional speech thus warrants constitutional protection. The First Amendment is designed to preserve an uninhibited marketplace of ideas where truth will ultimately prevail. That process is difficult, time consuming, and not without error. However, it is the most prudent alternative to reliance on the government intrusion of prior restraint and viewpoint discrimination. COMMENT Administrative Law Judges and the Erosion of the Administrative State: Why Jarkesy May be the Straw That Breaks the Camel’s Back Nick D’Addio The Trump-era unitary executive movement sought to expand presidential power and shrink the influence of the administrative state through deregulation. This movement ripples into the present moment, as Trump’s overhaul of the federal judiciary installed a comprehensive system to delegitimize administrative agency action— a system that is certain to endure. The independence and role of administrative law judges (ALJs) has proven a key target of the movement. Most recently, in the 2022 case of Jarkesy v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Fifth Circuit held that the dual-tiered for-cause removal protections of SEC ALJs violated the Take Care Clause of Article II of the Constitution. This Comment argues that the Constitution sets out a functional inquiry for evaluating the removability of officials in the Take Care Clause, as opposed to the categorical inquiry erroneously adopted by the Fifth Circuit. If upheld by the Supreme Court, Jarkesy and the curtailment of ALJ independence will have a profound impact on not only the SEC, but all agencies, and the very fate of the administrative state. COMMENT A Look Back in Time: Analyzing the Success and Value of the 2014 Amendments to Rule 2a-7 and Reporting on Form N-CRin Light of the March 2020 Market Events Jocelyn Near Money market funds...