There is a startling lack of global regulation of the marine ornamental trade. The only international legal framework that governs the trade of marine ornamentals is the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Requirements under Appendix II help prevent traded species from reaching the point where they need stricter protections, while Appendix III targets species that range countries want help controlling in international trade. Yet both of these appendices are poorly equipped to help regulate the marine aquarium trade.

State trust lands, covering more than 40 million acres across the West, were granted to states with the primary purpose of generating revenue for public schools and other designated beneficiaries. These lands were historically managed for extractive uses such as grazing, timber harvesting, and mineral development. This Article examines how recreation—ranging from hiking and hunting to wildlife viewing and camping—fits within this fiduciary framework.

An antitrust paradox lies at the heart of private-sector climate commitments. On the right, state attorneys general have warned that they may challenge these collaborations under antitrust laws. On the left, antitrust enforcers in the Biden Administration asserted that these actions will not receive preferential treatment even if they address societal ills that are not being addressed by governments. This Article asks what antitrust law is willing to consider: if prosocial goals are framed in terms of economic harms, should antitrust law view climate action as violating that standard?