Public access to court proceedings is a constitutional dictate and yet, since Sept. 11, 2001, the executive branch has pushed for secrecy to shroud the courtroom in the name of national security. Too often, courts have acquiesced despite the fact that access plays a crucial role in checking inter-branch conflicts, providing the electorate the information it needs to function and guaranteeing a fair trial and policing executive abuses.
Matthew L. Schafer attempts to reset the discussion on the right of access by taking an interest-based approach informed by the role that access plays throughout the Constitution. He proposes that access is not simply meant to ensure that all parties act properly or that all witnesses tell the truth. Rather, access is meant to ensure that our constitutional system works as intended by advancing the interests the Founders thought important.
Caitlin Dunham writes that military readiness is a key component to achieving the US Department of Defense’s mission of protecting the security of our country. Support for the troops is conveyed in advertisements and professional sports, and by politicians and citizens across the country. However, the role of the military spouse is not often thought of being crucial to military readiness. Yet, a military spouse can strongly impact readiness through service member retention.
A military spouse’s outlook regarding the military is closely linked with a current service member’s likelihood to stay in the military. The more positive the military spouse views his or her time as a part of a military family, the more likely the service member is to stay in the military. A military spouse is more likely to have positive views of the military if he or she is afforded sufficient educational and professional opportunities.
While an important part of US innovation and culture, bankruptcy proceedings have nonetheless become a unique avenue through which foreign adversaries are able to acquire sensitive US national security technologies and intellectual property. Through a detailed analysis of the current gaps in federal regulations governing foreign investment and bankruptcy proceedings in the US, Camille Stewart provides the reader an in-depth look into exactly how foreign companies have been able to circumvent these US foreign investment regulations.
In raising awareness to an issue that could ultimately leave the United States vulnerable to destructive cyberattacks, Stewart argues that training and equipping bankruptcy judges to identify potential national security concerns in bankruptcy cases will help mitigate the exfiltration of national security-related information and technology.