Professor and constitutional law expert Jason Mazzone recently joined Jon Hansen on the WGN radio show Let’s Get Legal to break down how the Supreme Court makes decisions, how the emergency docket works, and how the court has decided national issues quickly and with limited briefings.
A first-of-its-kind pilot program in Utah developed by a health-technology startup company uses artificial intelligence to automatically renew certain prescriptions for patients with chronic conditions such as hypertension and diabetes. But according to a new paper co-written by a University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign expert in legal issues surrounding cutting-edge medical technology, autonomous AI-based drug prescribing raises important clinical and legal issues.
With AI rapidly being deployed in health care, a “move fast and break things” mentality has permeated the industry, raising complex questions about the role of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in regulating these technologies, says Sara Gerke, the Richard W. & Marie L. Corman Scholar at the College of Law.
“The big issue here is the relationship between state and federal law, which we’re seeing in Utah, where the state has become a testing ground for so-called AI sandboxes that companies can use to experiment,” said Gerke, also a professor at the European Union Center at Illinois. “The idea behind it is to test these AI medical tools before they are completely developed. But even that is legally questionable. The existence of mitigation agreements and waivers under state law doesn’t automatically render the use of unproven medical technology lawful at the federal level.”
The Illinois State Bar Association (ISBA) has named the University of Illinois College of Law Immigration Law Clinic as one of the recipients of the 2026 John E. Thies Excellence in Legal Education Award. The award recognizes law school programs that emphasize real world skills for law students. The clinic will be honored at the ISBA Member Appreciation and Recognition Reception on Thursday, May 14 at the Morton Arboretum.
According to the New York Sun, President Trump suggested during remarks at a private luncheon that the federal government may no longer support essential care programs and that states should instead rely on state-level funding to do so.
Professor and tax law expert Richard Kaplan says that the president’s remarks about Medicare, in particular, rest on a fundamental misunderstanding of how the program is financed.
“Medicare is almost entirely funded by the federal government through payroll taxes paid by almost all employees, the great majority of self-employed persons, and most employers; premiums paid by program enrollees; and general federal funds,” Kaplan said. “States have no role of any consequence.”
On Tuesday, April 28, 2026, Dane County Circuit Court Judge Rhonda Lanford ruled that the Wisconsin Department of Justice must release its list of approximately 16,000 law enforcement officers currently certified in the state. The judge rejected the DOJ’s arguments that releasing the list would identify undercover officers, subject officers to harassment, or put them in danger.
“When responding to records requests, there is a strong presumption of openness and liberal access to public records,” wrote the judge. “[T]he DOJ has not met its burden to show that this is an ‘exceptional case’ warranting nondisclosure.” The judge concluded that DOJ’s denial “was not the product of a genuine, case-by-case balancing analysis, but rather a habitual denial based on [its] past inability to garner compliance from local agencies.”
The suit was brought by The Badger Project and Invisible Institute. The media organizations are represented by the Wisconsin Transparency Project and the University of Illinois College of Law First Amendment Clinic.
The Badger Project is a nonpartisan journalism nonprofit that focuses on and investigates government, politics, and related matters in Wisconsin. Invisible Institute is a nonprofit public accountability journalism organization based in Chicago. Both organizations have litigated cases seeking police records and written extensively about law enforcement issues, particularly the problem of “wandering officers” who jump agencies to avoid discipline.
The Badger Project and Invisible Institute asked for officers’ names, birth years or ages, zip code, and work history. Most states release this information, but have not experienced any significant problems caused by making the information public. The request did not ask for home addresses.
Both organizations have reported on the lawsuit:
“Courts have ruled time and time again that speculative fears of harm do not justify withholding government records from the public,” said Tom Kamenick, president of the Wisconsin Transparency Project. “Government officials must do more than merely claim that, hypothetically, something bad might happen if the records are released. Rather, they must show that harm is likely to occur and is sufficiently serious to overcome the presumption of access to government records. DOJ could not do that here.”
“We are incredibly proud to have represented the Invisible Institute in this critical fight for accountability,” said Lena Shapiro, Director of the First Amendment Clinic. “Securing this victory took three years of sustained effort, with nine students and two fellows from the First Amendment Clinic pouring their energy into this matter to ensure that the public’s right to know prevailed over blanket government secrecy.”
The Clinic students handled discovery, including resolving disputes and taking depositions, and briefed the successful motion for summary judgment, which was ultimately argued in January by advanced student Gabriela De La Llana.For a copy of the complaint, contact the First Amendment Clinic at the University of Illinois College of Law at law-firstamend@illinois.edu.
Professor Heidi Hurd was recently a featured guest on the Just Theory podcast, where she spoke about morality and the concept of mercy. Funded by Newcastle University, the mission of the podcast is to change the face of legal theory and champion female-led scholarship in analytic legal philosophy and jurisprudence.
Professor Jacob Sherkow was a speaker at the recent CRISPRMED conference in Copenhagen, Denmark. He participated in a satellite meeting structured around the topic of Access, IP Landscape and FTO, and spoke specifically about “CRISPR Patent Licenses: Lessons from History.”
As consumer bankruptcy filings continue to rise, the role of arbitration has also increased. Because the Federal Arbitration Act and the US bankruptcy code can be at odds with each other and that tension has not yet been tested by the Supreme Court, experts expect that the matter will eventually make its way there.
Professor and bankruptcy expert Bob Lawless, who has written a paper on arbitration and bankruptcy, says that unless amended or repealed, courts should follow both statutes.
Speaking to Bloomberg, he said, “You’ve got to look and say, ‘For this matter in this arbitration agreement, is this subject to arbitration, and does the arbitral demand conflict with a command in the bankruptcy code?’”
In late March, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in Chiles v. Salazar, overturning a Colorado law that bans conversion therapy for minors because it violates First Amendment protections on free speech. The ruling is expected to impact similar laws in many other states, but according to Robin Fretwell Wilson, Utah’s law may survive any legal challenges. She consulted with the state legislature on the language of its 2023 law banning conversion therapy and says that their approach differs, allowing neutral speech and banning harmful conversion practices.
“I think it’s remarkable that Utah has found a way through what has just been a slog with the rest of the country,” Wilson said. “We don’t have to be divided about these things that are so deeply personal to us, like our identity or how we choose to love. People, you know, can find a way to protect everybody in the same law.”
Read more at ksl.com, fox13now.com, and deseret.com.
The Rickert Awards are the most prestigious awards conferred upon students at the University of Illinois College of Law and recognize excellence in student achievement. The Rickert Awards Program was established in the fall of 1976 and was named in memory of Joseph W. Rickert, a distinguished lawyer who practiced law in southern Illinois for many years. The Rickert gift paved the way for the College of Law to recognize outstanding third-year law students for their achievements. Congratulations to all of our 2026 honorees!
Excellence in Academic Achievement
Reilly Alridge
Kayla Beckley
Kendall Crispin
Emily Digman
Cole Edwards
Tanner Haynes
Daniel Morris
Ghazi Saoud
Elizabeth Walker
Excellence in Advocacy
Caroline Azem
Akanksha Balekai
Kelly Christensen
Sophia Downes
Ellie Jones
Ben Lee
Tyler Lewis
Jessie Randazzo
Excellence in Legal Writing
Jessica Bury
Sophia Downes
Willow Forster
Sieun Lee
Abby Milhiser
Brock Reeder
Avontay Ruff
Julia Sun
Excellence in Service
Lindsey Aden
Mounica Akula
Shaza Hussein
W Lander
Nurie Langlois
Abby Milhiser
Jess Nalupta
Alexandria Wilson