�鶹ֱ��

Cindy Kanusher, Executive Director of the �鶹ֱ�� Women’s Justice Center, is featured in a Metro UK article examining the cultural impact of Making a Murderer—and the often-overlooked human cost of true crime storytelling. In the piece, Kanusher underscores the responsibility filmmakers and audiences share to center victims and survivors, particularly in cases involving gender-based violence, and to resist narratives that sensationalize trauma or erase lived experience. Her perspective highlights how true crime can do more than entertain—it can educate, foster empathy, and promote accountability—if it is framed responsibly.

In a Newsweek article examining the debate over the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, �鶹ֱ�� Haub Law Professor Bennett L. Gershman offered important legal context on the limits of retroactive justification in use-of-force cases. Professor Gershman emphasized that the new videos surfaced from an earlier encounter between Pretti and federal immigration agents “do nothing to exculpate or excuse the conduct of the federal agents” involved in the January 24 killing. His remarks highlight a core constitutional principle: the legality of lethal force turns on whether an imminent threat existed at the moment it was used—not on efforts to recast prior conduct after the fact.

In this article, Cindy Kanusher, Executive Director of the �鶹ֱ�� Women’s Justice Center, examines proposed New York legislation that would create a publicly searchable registry of persistent domestic violence offenders. As lawmakers consider whether such a database could enhance prevention and accountability, Kanusher offers a critical, survivor-centered perspective highlighting both the potential benefits and the serious limitations of registries, particularly given the widespread underreporting of domestic violence and the risk of unintended harm to survivors. Her comments underscore an essential point: tools aimed at accountability must be carefully designed, with survivor safety and privacy at the forefront.

�鶹ֱ�� isn’t just studying the world’s biggest challenges, we’re helping solve them. From global policy conversations in Davos to student-led action at the United Nations, �鶹ֱ�� is advancing the SDGs in real time.

The Elisabeth Haub School of Law at �鶹ֱ��’s Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Team earned a Top 4 Semifinalist finish at the , held January 15–16 at Tulane University Law School.

The Elisabeth Haub School of Law at �鶹ֱ�� is proud to announce that Samuel Carvalho has been selected to serve as the new �鶹ֱ�� Energy and Climate Center Graduate Fellow. This position is reserved for outstanding �鶹ֱ�� Haub Law students who demonstrate exceptional academic and research skills, as well as a strong commitment to climate change and energy law.

Professor Gershman also pens an op-ed in amNewYork examining the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti by federal immigration agents. Drawing on eyewitness accounts and video evidence, he challenges official narratives defending the use of deadly force and questions whether government responses adequately reflect constitutional protections and accountability standards. In a separate New York Law Journal piece, “A Diminished Constitution,” Gershman and co-author Theodore A. Keyes warn that escalating political rhetoric and post–January 6 actions are eroding democratic norms and weakening public trust in constitutional safeguards.

�鶹ֱ��’s environmental leadership is recognized nationally as  Haub Law Professor Achinthi Vithanage is named to the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Environmental Lawyers, honoring top legal minds advancing environmental and climate justice, The Green 500 reports.

In Newsweek, �鶹ֱ�� Haub Law Professor Bennett L. Gershman weighs in on whether ICE agents can be prosecuted for fatal shootings. Gershman explains that federal agents do not enjoy absolute immunity and could face state murder charges or federal civil rights violations, depending on the facts. “Police officers charged with crimes or civil rights violations never enjoy absolute immunity,” he said, underscoring the constitutional limits on law enforcement authority.