• 

  From Smoot-Hawley to the Synthetic Opioid Crisis: The United States Postal Service as a Conduit for International Fentanyl Shipments [Note]

  Sklar, Lily (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2025)

  Over the last decade, the United States postal system has become an unwitting conduit for the international trafficking of deadly synthetic fentanyl and its precursors. This form of fentanyl trafficking has been made possible by an illicit pipeline that runs through China, Mexico, and the United States postal system. This Note will explore how the synthetic fentanyl pipeline emerged from a confluence of U.S. trade policy loopholes, the rapid expansion of Chinese e-commerce, and troubled counternarcotics diplomacy with China and Mexico. This Note will then discuss how attempts by the U.S. government to interrupt the fentanyl pipeline have so far proven inadequate and, at times, capricious. Finally, this Note will advocate for comprehensive and transparent policy solutions to fortify the U.S. customs sector against international narcotics trafficking.
• 

  Filling the A.I. Gap: How Domestic and International Law Fails to Protect Artificial Intelligence Whistleblowers [Note]

  Kiefer, Alivia (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2025)

  As artificial intelligence (A.I.) development accelerates beyond the reach of current regulatory frameworks, whistleblowers in the A.I. sector, particularly those employed by privately held firms, face a dangerous legal void. This Note identifies a critical regulatory shortfall, termed the “A.I. Gap,” where employees seeking to expose unsafe but not explicitly illegal A.I. practices are left unprotected under both U.S. and EU law. Through a detailed analysis of high-profile whistleblower cases, including the 2024 “Right to Warn” letter and disclosures by former OpenAI and Microsoft employees, the Note demonstrates how existing laws, such as the Dodd-Frank Act, the False Claims Act, and the EU Whistleblower Directive, fail to protect individuals who raise concerns about speculative or ethical A.I. risks. The Note also examines how non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) are strategically used to suppress internal dissent and limit legal recourse. Ultimately, this Note proposes a multi-step reform framework to protect AI whistleblowers across internal, governmental, and post-disclosure stages, emphasizing the need for confidential, responsive, and independent reporting channels; statutory redefinition of whistleblowing to include risk-related concerns; and robust anti-retaliation safeguards. Without these reforms, the public remains vulnerable to unaccountable A.I. development practices and the individuals best positioned to expose them remain silenced.
• 

  Reconceptualizing Plastic Pollution Regulation in Nigeria, the U.S., and the U.K. from a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Perspective [Article]

  Nwafor, Ndubuisi Augustine (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2025)

  Plastic pollution is an escalating crisis, yet Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) remains largely voluntary in certain countries. In Nigeria, weak regulations and a lack of corporate accountability worsen the problem. While the United States and the United Kingdom have stronger sustainability initiatives, CSR in these countries is still not explicitly legally mandated, resulting in inconsistent corporate efforts. Despite growing advocacy for stricter environmental policies, businesses are not legally required to take responsibility for plastic waste. This article explores how CSR can go beyond voluntary commitments to become a structured, enforceable approach to addressing plastic pollution. By comparing CSR models in Nigeria, the United States, and the U.K., the article assesses best practices that could help Nigeria develop stronger corporate sustainability policies. Ultimately, it advocates for a clear CSR framework that holds businesses accountable and ensures they actively contribute to reducing plastic waste and safeguarding the environment.
• 

  Balancing Innovation and Integrity: Australia's AI Ethics and Trust Regulation in Global Context [Article]

  Rahim, Mia Mahmudur; Chakraborty, Subrata (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2025)

  As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly embedded in society, ensuring its ethical use and public trust is a global imperative. This paper critically examines Australia’s approach to regulating AI ethics and trust, comparing it with frameworks in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union. While these jurisdictions adopt varied strategies—ranging from risk-based and sector-specific to principle-driven models—Australia relies primarily on voluntary standards, such as the AI Ethics Principles and the Voluntary AI Safety Standard. Despite their intent, these frameworks lack enforceability, leading to inconsistent adoption and limited accountability. The paper highlights key ethical challenges, including privacy breaches, algorithmic bias, and the absence of legal safeguards in high-risk AI applications. It argues that Australia’s current regulatory landscape is insufficient to address the rapid evolution of AI technologies. To bridge this gap, the authors propose a meta-regulation approach—one that integrates legal oversight with organizational self-regulation, fostering both innovation and ethical responsibility. This model offers a flexible yet accountable framework for embedding ethical principles into AI development and deployment. The paper concludes by emphasizing the need for Australia to adopt a more robust, enforceable, and adaptive regulatory strategy to ensure trustworthy AI.
• 

  Editorial Foreword

  Diamond, Evan (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2025)

View more