Recent Articles in Volume 79 (2026)
By E. Jason Dennis and Carter S. Plotkin – The Guarantor’s Lifebuoy in the Bankruptcy Ocean is an article by a practicing litigation law firm partner and associate based on their recent real-world experience arguing in Texas state court and federal bankruptcy court and lessons learned. The article is designed to examine an evidently underutilized bankruptcy stay exception and give actionable how-to advice on invoking it to litigators defending guarantors in scenarios they commonly face: a bankrupt principal obligor defaulting on the guarantied debt. []
By Chris Babcock, David G. Cabrales, and Angel Torres – Amid declining legal certainty in Delaware driven by recent court decisions and an increasingly active plaintiffs’ bar, Texas’ 2025 corporate governance reform marks a deliberate bid to position Texas as a premier jurisdiction for corporate formation, governance, and dispute resolution. This article examines three central amendments to the Texas Business Organizations Code (§§ 21.419, 21.552, and 21.373) enacted by Texas’ 2025 corporate governance reform and seeks to demonstrate that, contrary to early criticism labeling such amendments as management friendly or anti-shareholder, these amendments are, in fact, beneficial to shareholders. As this article will demonstrate, these amendments introduce substantive changes to Texas corporate law designed to promote corporate governance practices and a corporate legal environment that provide greater value creation and returns for shareholders while deterring the exploitation of shareholder rights by third parties pursuing private gain. []
By Stephen J. Choi and Mitu Gulati – Curious about the merits of judges Donald Trump appointed in his first term as president, we previously looked at the performance of Trump-appointed judges as compared to those appointed by other presidents. On a set of three measures—productivity, influence, and independence—the Trump judges performed as well, if not better, than judges appointed by Presidents Obama and Bush. As for President Biden’s appointees, they did systemically worse than Trump’s. Biden judicial selections were, at the time we did our prior study, however, new judges. Maybe, we wondered, these judges would do better on our measures a year or two hence? What follows are our preliminary results on that question. Our short answer is that Trump judges continue to dominate the Biden judges. []
By Michael Showalter – In 1776, Thomas Jefferson argued that judges are “mere machines.” This statement captures founding generation’s conception of the judicial task. From Edward Coke to Montesquieu to William Blackstone to Alexander Hamilton to John Marshall, the founding era’s governing legal tradition taught that judges do no more than mechanically apply the law to reach a case’s correct answer. Judges find the law, the Founders consistently emphasized, they do not choose it. []
By Thomas Murray and R. Alexander Acosta – This Article examines two forces that have distorted the fiduciary obligations of American pension trustees: (1) ESG activism by the dominant index fund managers and (2) the fee-minimalism argument those same managers have deployed to discourage divestment. Part I establishes the legal architecture of fiduciary duty under ERISA and trust law, centering on the independent duties of loyalty and prudence. Part II traces the history of how ESG considerations migrated from the periphery of investment practice to institutional orthodoxy through the influence of investment consultants, global coalitions, and Department of Labor subregulatory guidance.[]