Beach Undergraduate Law Review

Volume 1

Spring 2026

Browse our Notes

SANCTUARY OR SUBORDINATION: FEDERAL IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT AND THE EROSION OF STATE AUTONOMY IN CALIFORNIA

Alex Miller
Abstract: Federalism is not merely a structural element of our Constitution; it is a promise. Divided and limited power promises to protect our liberty. When James Madison first proposed the need to establish a system of dual sovereignty, he did so from a place of deep distrust of centralized power . Indeed, the federal government was never meant to operate unfettered, and states were afforded the power to act as both partners and resisters to the federal government . Thus, states can represent constituents’ values while protecting individuals from the overreaching grasp of the federal government.
Today, however, this supposed balance of power is becoming increasingly imbalanced. California is a prime example of such tension, where aggressive federal immigration policy–particularly by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)–has turned abstract constitutional theory into lived reality. Sanctuary laws meant to preserve state sovereignty now find themselves in opposition to a federal policy that, in recent years, has become more localized, more strategic, and arguably more coercive . This note argues that such policies, specifically concerning courthouse arrests and operations in jurisdictions deemed “sanctuary cities,” reflect the dissolution of federalism itself, both as to state sovereignty and individual constitutional rights.
CONVICTION BY TRADITION: FORENSIC CERTAINTY AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL RISKS OF FRAGMENTED FEDERALISM

Jennifer A. Pruitt
Abstract: Modern forensic testimony often presents subjective pattern-comparison methods as definitive scientific proof, despite abundant evidence that many such techniques lack empirical validation, reproducible testing, or established error rates. This Note argues that the continued admission of unvalidated forensic disciplines, combined with fragmented state admissibility standards, undermines due process and confrontation rights by allowing evidentiary reliability to vary across jurisdictions. Through analysis of Supreme Court precedent, forensic scholarship, and federalism concerns, this Note claims that constitutional protections require more than procedural formality; they require meaningful reliability safeguards. Ultimately, this Note argues that the absence of a uniform constitutional reliability mandate permits unequal enforcement of fundamental rights and contributes to wrongful convictions.
FEDERALISM OR NATIONALISM—WHICH POLITICAL IDEOLOGY TRUMPS THE OTHER?

Sabrina Stieler
Abstract: Immigration enforcement lies in a constitutionally complex area that intersects federal supremacy, state sovereignty, and individual rights. In recent years, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has had its powers expanded under the national security initiative of the Trump administration. The debate over the constitutional limits of federal immigration enforcement has intensified. Critics argue that these practices risk exceeding statutory and constitutional limits by infringing on individual rights and undermining foundational principles of federalism. Supporters frequently justify such operations conducted by ICE on grounds of nationalism, national security, and public safety. This Note examines such claims through the framework of constitutional federalism as established by the Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights. Drawing on the Bill of Rights in combination with Supreme Court precedent, statutory text, and contemporary scholarship, it argues that although immigration regulation is primarily federal, enforcement mechanisms must remain consistent with state and individual sovereign constraints.
WHEN COURTS CANNOT COMPEL: AN ANALYSIS ON FEDERAL OVERREACH, JUDICIAL WEAKNESS, AND THE LIMITS OF FEDERAL POWER

Nikki Majidi and Nicholas Nieto
Abstract: This Note explores the structural limitation of judicial authority within the American constitutional system. Specifically, the judiciary’s inability to independently enforce its decisions. While the Supreme Court has the power of constitutional interpretation through judicial review, it relies on the executive branch for enforcement. The dependence on the executive branch creates constitutional vulnerability when it resists compliance. Through historical analysis, including Marbury v. Madison and United States v. Nixon, this Note argues that executive resistance results in a structural weakness that threatens federalism, separation of powers, and the rule of law. It concludes by considering potential institutional responses to reinforce judicial authority in an era of increasing political polarization.

Read Now

Meet the Executive Board

Nicholas Nieto

Editor-in-Chief | Founder
Nicholas is a third-year Political Science major, and pursuing the Legal Studies certificate here at California State University, Long Beach. In the past he interned the Senator Lena Gonzalez’s office as a Legislative Aid Intern, then furthered his interest in public policy as it pertains to law through completing an internship in the Gang Unit of the Orange County District Attorney’s office. This past year, he served as President of Law Society, where he created the Beach Mock Trial team, and founded the Beach Undergraduate Law Review. He wishes to pursue a career in either prosecution, or entertainment/sports law, and plans on applying to law school after he completes his time at CSULB. He would like to thank all the editors, authors and faculty who were involved in making the inaugural publication come to fruition.
nicholasnieto13@gmail.com

LinkedIn
Nikki Majidi

Senior Editor | Founder

Nikki Majidi is a fourth year Political Science major, with a minor in Information Systems. Previous to joining the Beach Undergraduate Law Review, she served as the ASI student body President for CSULB, taking on groundbreaking initiatives unique to the CSU system. She is currently interning for Congressman Robert Garcia, and will be applying for law school in the upcoming cycle.
nikkimajidi@gmail.com

LinkedIn
Claire Castillo

Lead Editor
Claire Castillo is a fourth year Political Science major, and served as a Lead Editor this past year. She was recently part of the Beach Mock Trial team where she contributed her effort as the prosecution attorney. She also recently wrapped up an internship with the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office, and plans to attend law school after she graduates.
anaisc1010@icloud.com

LinkedIn
Thu Chung

Lead Editor

Thu Chung is a third-year undergraduate student at CSULB, majoring in Political Science and pursuing a legal studies certificate. She interned with the Los Angeles JusticeCorps program in Fall 2025-Spring 2026, where she provided legal education to community members in the self-help center of Governor George Deukmejian Courthouse. Prior to this, Thu was a records specialist at a personal injury law firm. In Fall 2026, Thu will be a judicial intern at Governor George Deukmejian Courthouse in which she will gain first-hand experiences in the courtroom. Upon graduation, Thu plans to attend law school and become an attorney. Outside of academics, Thu enjoys listening to music and visiting new cafes.
thuzhong05@gmail.com

Read Bio